Report Delegated

Part 1

Date: 14th May 2015

Subject Planning Decision Schedule

Purpose To notify Members of decisions made on Planning Applications

Author Head of Regeneration, Investment and Housing

Ward As indicated on the schedule

Summary The Head of Regeneration, Investment and Housing has delegated powers to determine planning applications in accordance with the Council’s Scheme of Delegation. The schedule attached details decisions made during the week up to 14th May 2015.

This report details planning decisions already taken and is provided for information purposes. The reports contained in this schedule assess the proposed development against relevant planning policy and other material planning considerations, and take into consideration all consultation responses received.

The decisions made are expected to benefit the City and its communities by allowing good quality development in the right locations and resisting inappropriate or poor quality development in the wrong locations.

Proposal To issue Decision Notices as shown on the attached schedule

Action by Head of Regeneration, Investment and Housing

Timetable Immediate

This report was prepared after consultation with:

. Local Residents . Members . Statutory Consultees

The decisions detailed in this report were made following consultation as set out in the Council’s approved policy on planning consultation and in accordance with legal requirements.

Signed Background

Applications can be granted subject to planning conditions. Conditions must meet all of the following criteria:  Necessary;  Relevant to planning legislation (i.e. a planning consideration);  Relevant to the proposed development in question;  Precise;  Enforceable; and  Reasonable in all other respects.

Applications can be granted subject to a legal agreement under Section 106 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 (as amended). This secures planning obligations to offset the impacts of the proposed development. However, in order for these planning obligations to be lawful, they must meet all of the following criteria:  Necessary to make the development acceptable in planning terms;  Directly related to the development; and  Fairly and reasonably related in scale and kind to the development.

The applicant has a statutory right of appeal against the refusal of permission in most cases. There is no third party right of appeal against a decision.

Work is carried out by existing staff and there are no staffing issues. It is sometimes necessary to employ a Barrister to act on the Council’s behalf in defending decisions at planning appeals. This cost is met by existing budgets.

Where applicable as planning considerations, specific issues relating to sustainability and environmental issues, equalities impact and crime prevention impact of each proposed development are addressed in the relevant report in the attached schedule.

Financial Summary

The cost of determining planning applications and defending decisions at any subsequent appeal is met by existing budgets and partially offset by statutory planning application fees. Costs can be awarded against the Council at an appeal if the Council has acted unreasonably and/or cannot defend its decisions. Similarly, costs can be awarded in the Council’s favour if an appellant has acted unreasonably and/or cannot substantiate their grounds of appeal

Risks

Three risks are identified in relating to the determination of planning applications by Planning Committee: decisions being overturned at appeal; appeals being lodged for failing to determine applications within the statutory time period; and judicial review.

An appeal can be lodged by the applicant if permission is refused or if conditions are imposed. Costs can be awarded against the Council if decisions cannot be defended as reasonable, or if it behaves unreasonably during the appeal process, for example by not submitting required documents within required timescales. Conversely, costs can be awarded in the Council’s favour if the appellant cannot defend their argument or behaves unreasonably.

An appeal can also be lodged by the applicant if the application is not determined within the statutory time period. However, with the type of major development being presented to the Planning Committee, which often requires a Section 106 agreement, it is unlikely that the application will be determined within the statutory time period. Appeals against non-determination are rare due to the further delay in receiving an appeal decision: it is generally quicker for applicants to wait for the Planning Authority to determine the application. Costs could only be awarded against the Council if it is found to have acted unreasonably. Determination of an application would only be delayed for good reason, such as resolving an objection or negotiating improvements or Section 106 contributions, and so the risk of a costs award is low.

A decision can be challenged in the Courts via a judicial review where an interested party is dissatisfied with the way the planning system has worked or how a Council has made a planning decision. A judicial review can be lodged if a decision has been made without taking into account a relevant planning consideration, if a decision is made taking into account an irrelevant consideration, or if the decision is irrational or perverse. If the Council loses the judicial review, it is at risk of having to pay the claimant’s full costs in bringing the challenge, in addition to the Council’s own costs in defending its decision. In the event of a successful challenge, the planning permission would normally be quashed and remitted back to the Council for reconsideration. If the Council wins, its costs would normally be met by the claimant who brought the unsuccessful challenge. Defending judicial reviews involves considerable officer time, legal advice, and instructing a barrister, and is a very expensive process. In addition to the financial implications, the Council’s reputation may be harmed.

Mitigation measures to reduce risk are detailed in the table below. The probability of these risks occurring is considered to be low due to the mitigation measures, however the costs associated with a public inquiry and judicial review can be high.

Risk Impact of Probability What is the Council doing or Who is risk if it of risk what has it done to avoid the responsible occurs* occurring risk or reduce its effect? for dealing (H/M/L) (H/M/L) with the risk? Decisions M L Ensure reasons for refusal can Development challenged at be defended at appeal. Services appeal and Manager costs awarded against the Ensure planning conditions Development Council. imposed meet the tests set out Services in Circular 016/2014. Manager

Provide guidance to Planning Development Committee regarding relevant Services material planning Manager and considerations, conditions and Senior Legal reasons for refusal. Officer

Ensure appeal timetables are Development adhered to. Services Manager

Appeal lodged M L Avoid delaying the Development against non- determination of applications Services determination, unreasonably. Manager with costs awarded against the Council

Judicial review H L Ensure sound and rational Development successful decisions are made. Services with costs Manager Risk Impact of Probability What is the Council doing or Who is risk if it of risk what has it done to avoid the responsible occurs* occurring risk or reduce its effect? for dealing (H/M/L) (H/M/L) with the risk? awarded against the Council

* Taking account of proposed mitigation measures

Links to Council Policies and Priorities

The Council’s Corporate Plan 2012-2017 identifies five corporate aims: being a Caring City; a Fairer City; A Learning and Working City; A Greener and Healthier City; and a Safer City. Key priority outcomes include ensuring people live in sustainable communities; enabling people to lead independent lives; ensuring decisions are fair; improving the life-chances of children and young people; creating a strong and confident local economy; improving the attractiveness of the City; promoting environmental sustainability; ensuring people live in safe and inclusive communities; and making Newport a vibrant and welcoming place to visit and enjoy.

Through development management decisions, good quality development is encouraged and the wrong development in the wrong places is resisted. Planning decisions can therefore contribute directly and indirectly to these priority outcomes by helping to deliver sustainable communities and affordable housing; allowing adaptations to allow people to remain in their homes; improving energy efficiency standards; securing appropriate Planning Contributions to offset the demands of new development to enable the expansion and improvement of our schools and leisure facilities; enabling economic recovery, tourism and job creation; tackling dangerous structures and unsightly land and buildings; bringing empty properties back into use; and ensuring high quality ‘place- making’.

The Corporate Plan links to other strategies and plans, the main ones being:  Single Integrated Plan;  Newport Local Development Plan 2011-2026 (Adopted January 2015)

The Newport Single Integrated Plan (SIP) is the defining statement of strategic planning intent for the next 3 years. It identifies key priorities for improving the City. Its vision is: “Working together to create a proud and prosperous City with opportunities for all”

The Single Integrated Plan has six priority themes, which are: • Skills and Work • Economic Opportunity • Health and Wellbeing • Safe and Cohesive Communities • City Centre • Alcohol and Substance Misuse

Under Section 38(6) of the Planning and Compulsory Purchase Act 2004 all planning applications must be determined in accordance with the Newport Unitary Development Plan (Adopted May 2006) unless material considerations indicate otherwise. Planning decisions are therefore based primarily on this core Council policy.

Options Available Not applicable. This report details decisions already made under delegated powers.

Preferred Option and Why Not applicable. This report details decisions already made under delegated powers.

Comments of Chief Financial Officer In the normal course of events, there should be no specific financial implications arising from the determination of planning applications. There is a risk of decisions being challenged at appeal. The costs of defending decisions and any award of costs must be met by existing budgets.

Comments of Monitoring Officer There are no legal implications as the Reports are for information only and the decisions have already been taken in accordance with the officer scheme of delegation.

Staffing Implications: Comments of Head of People and Business Change Development Management work is undertaken by an in-house team and therefore there are no staffing implications arising from this report. Officer recommendations have been based on adopted planning policy which aligns with the Single Integrated Plan and the Council’s Corporate Plan objectives.

Local issues Ward Members were notified of planning applications in accordance with the Council’s adopted policy on planning consultation. Any comments made regarding a specific planning application are recorded in the report in the attached schedule

Equalities Impact Assessment The Equality Act 2010 contains a Public Sector Equality Duty which came into force on 06 April 2011. The Act identifies a number of ‘protected characteristics’, namely age; disability; gender reassignment; pregnancy and maternity; race; religion or belief; sex; sexual orientation; marriage and civil partnership. The new single duty aims to integrate consideration of equality and good relations into the regular business of public authorities. Compliance with the duty is a legal obligation and is intended to result in better informed decision-making and policy development and services that are more effective for users. In exercising its functions, the Council must have due regard to the need to: eliminate unlawful discrimination, harassment, victimisation and other conduct that is prohibited by the Act; advance equality of opportunity between persons who share a protected characteristic and those who do not; and foster good relations between persons who share a protected characteristic and those who do not. The Act is not overly prescriptive about the approach a public authority should take to ensure due regard, although it does set out that due regard to advancing equality involves: removing or minimising disadvantages suffered by people due to their protected characteristics; taking steps to meet the needs of people from protected groups where these differ from the need of other people; and encouraging people from protected groups to participate in public life or in other activities where their participation is disproportionately low.

An Equality Impact Assessment for delivery of the Development Management service has been completed and can be viewed on the Council’s website.

Children and Families (Wales) Measure Although no targeted consultation takes place specifically aimed at children and young people, consultation on planning applications and appeals is open to all of our citizens regardless of their age. Depending on the scale of the proposed development, applications are publicised via letters to neighbouring occupiers, site notices, press notices and/or social media. People replying to consultations are not required to provide their age or any other personal data, and therefore this data is not held or recorded in any way, and responses are not separated out by age.

Consultation Comments received from wider consultation, including comments from elected members, are detailed in each application report in the attached schedule.

Background Papers NATIONAL POLICY Planning Policy Wales (PPW) Edition 7 (July 2014) Minerals Planning Policy Wales (December 2000)

PPW Technical Advice Notes (TAN): TAN 1: Joint Housing Land Availability Studies (2006) TAN 2: Planning and Affordable Housing (2006) TAN 3: Simplified Planning Zones (1996) TAN 4: Retailing and Town Centres (1996) TAN 5: Nature Conservation and Planning (2009) TAN 6: Planning for Sustainable Rural Communities (2010) TAN 7: Outdoor Advertisement Control (1996) TAN 8: Renewable Energy (2005) TAN 9: Enforcement of Planning Control (1997) TAN 10: Tree Preservation Orders (1997) TAN 11: Noise (1997) TAN 12: Design (2014) TAN 13: Tourism (1997) TAN 14: Coastal Planning (1998) TAN 15: Development and Flood Risk (2004) TAN 16: Sport, Recreation and Open Space (2009) TAN 18: Transport (2007) TAN 19: Telecommunications (2002) TAN 20: The Welsh Language: Unitary Development Plans and Planning Control (2013) TAN 21: Waste (2014) TAN 23: Economic Development (2014)

Minerals Technical Advice Note (MTAN) Wales 1: Aggregates (30 March 2004) Minerals Technical Advice Note (MTAN) Wales 2: Coal (20 January 2009)

Welsh Government Circular 016/2014 on planning conditions

LOCAL POLICY Newport Local Development Plan (LDP) 2011-2026 (Adopted January 2015)

OTHER The Colliers International Retail Study (July 2010) is not adopted policy but is a material consideration in making planning decisions.

The Economic Development Strategy is a material planning consideration.

Section 17(1) of the Crime and Disorder Act 1998 imposes a duty on the Local Authority to exercise its various functions with due regard to the likely effect of the exercise of those functions on, and the need to do all that it reasonably can to prevent, crime and disorder in its area.

The Town and Country Planning (Environmental Impact Assessment) (England and Wales) Regulations 1999 as amended by the Town and Country Planning (Environmental Impact Assessment) (Amendment) (Wales) Regulations 2008 are relevant to the recommendations made.

Other documents and plans relevant to specific planning applications are detailed at the end of each application report in the attached schedule

Dated: 14th May 2015 APPLICATION DETAILS

No: 1 12/0839 Ward: ALLT-YR-YN

Type: Full

Expiry Date: 09-May-2013

Applicant: IGLESIA NI CRISTO (CHURCH OF CHRIST)

Site: BURLEIGH HALL, LLANTHEWY ROAD, NEWPORT NP20 4LD

Proposal: PART RETENTION OF GATES, BOUNDARY WALL PIER CAPS, RAILINGS AND REDUCTION IN GROUND LEVEL AND THE INSTALLATION OF REAR BOUNDARY RAILINGS AND PROVISION OF HARDSTANDING

DECISION: GRANTED WITH CONDITIONS

1. CONSULTATIONS 1.1 NEWPORT ACCESS GROUP: No response.

2. INTERNAL COUNCIL ADVICE 2.1 HEAD OF STREETSCENE: No objection.

2.2 HISTORIC BUILDINGS CONSERVATION OFFICER: (First response) the building, previously known as Llanthewy Road Baptist Church was built in 1912 and is listed at grade II as a chapel building of imposing design by a well known regional architectural partnership (Habershon and Fawkner).

It is unfortunate that the original gates to the rear of the building have previously been lost, and proposals to reinstate them are in principle to be welcomed. I have no objection to the increased width of the new gates, but the level of detail provided leaves some ambiguity. The elevational drawing does suggest that the overall appearance will be appropriate, but there are no sectional details of the individual elements and no specifications. It would be difficult for them to “match existing” when there are actually no existing gates present and it is not clear, for example, what sort of metal would be used and how it would be finished, how hinges would be constructed, or what automatic opening systems would be installed. The recent amendment to the plans also raises a question over exactly how the new gates would relate to the railings along the site boundary. I have no objection to the replacement of these railings (which are clearly beyond repair), but again details could be clearer.

The excavation work is intended only to remove modern fill and restore original ground levels and as such causes no concern, but I would like to know what “permeable hardsurfacing” is proposed and a little more information about the proposed illuminated bollards. These details might safely be secured by condition.

The pier caps to the front of the building appear to be beyond reasonable repair, but detailed drawings should be provided; the comment that they are to be “as close a replica as possible” is insufficient. A sample of the proposed stone to be used can be required by condition.

2.2.1 (Second response following amended plans) I consider the proposed hard-surfacing to be acceptable. A site visit reveals that whilst a set of gates have been installed, they do not match those on the drawings, and are in combination with a close boarded fence rather than a set of railings. The gates have been crudely constructed in powder-coated steel and despite some attempts to add decorative detail they have something of an industrial appearance. If these were considered as a new installation, they might well be acceptable, but we must consider them as replacement to the previous gates which were unlawfully removed. In this context, I do not consider the detailing to be appropriate. Though no further details of the stone pier caps have been submitted, these have been installed and appear to be acceptable.

3. REPRESENTATIONS 3.1 All properties with a common boundary were consulted (five addresses), a site notice posted and a press notice published in the South Wales Argus. No responses were received.

4. RELEVANT SITE HISTORY

01/0920 CERTIFICATE OF LAWFULNESS FOR PROPOSED Issued USE OF CHURCH AS PERFORMING ARTS CENTRE, COMMUNITY HALL AND PLACE OF WORSHIP

02/0032 LISTED BUILDING CONSENT APPLICATION FOR Granted with REMOVAL OF BAPTISMAL POOL, CHOIR PEWS conditions AND STORE

02/0748 LISTED BUILDING CONSENT FOR ERECTION OF Granted with WROUGHT IRON ENTRANCE SIGN conditions

11/0644 LISTED BUILDING CONSENT FOR THE Granted with RENOVATION OF THE TOWER AND FIXING OF conditions PERSPEX SHEETS TO THE INTERNAL FACE OF THE WINDOWS

11/0645 RENOVATION WORKS TO THE TOWER Granted

12/0399 INSTALLATION OF 2NO. CHURCH SEALS Invalid MOUNTED TO THE GABLES AND 2NO. INDIVIDUAL (determined) LETTERS (IGLESIA NI CRISTO CHURCH OF CHRIST) TO TWO ELEVATIONS OF THE TOWER

12/0414 LISTED BUILDING CONSENT FOR PROPOSED Pending LAYOUT ALTERATIONS TO INCLUDE FORMATION OF MINISTER'S OFFICE AND LOBBY, AS WELL AS TOILETS TO UPPER AND LOWER GROUND FLOORS, REINSTATEMENT OF ORGAN CASING AND PIPES, REPLACEMENT STAIRCASE, REPLACEMENT STAGE AND INSTALLATION OF FREE STANDING PEWS

5. ASSESSMENT 5.1 This application seeks planning permission for the part retention of gates, boundary wall piers caps, railings and reduction in ground levels and the installation of rear boundary railings and the provision of a hardstanding at Burleigh Hall, Llanthewy Road. The building is grade II listed and is listed for its imposing design by a well known regional architectural partnership.

5.2 The following works have already been undertaken by the applicant:

Ground level reduction: A strip of land to the rear (north) of the church has been built up over time, causing damage to the railings, which have had to assume the role of a retaining feature. The applicant has reduced the ground levels which graduate from an existing access off Burleigh Road up towards the rearmost part of the church.

Gates/Railings: The previous boundary railings around the front and side of the building have been replaced and new railings erected atop the stone retaining wall which match the original ones as closely as possible. Gates have been erected at the Burleigh Road access which open inwards. They are constructed in black powder coated steel with decorative detail.

Pier Caps: As the pier caps to the front boundary wall along Llanthewy Road and extending around to Burleigh Road were damaged beyond repair they have been replaced. The replacements are as close a replica as possible in stone from the Forest of Dean.

5.3 The following works are proposed:

Rear boundary railings and hardstanding: It is proposed to erect 1.1m high metal railings atop an existing stone wall. The railings have been designed to match the existing railings around the front and side of the building. It is proposed to hard surface the area to the rear of the building where the levels have been reduced. In accordance with the Head of Streetscene and City Services request, a soakway would be installed at the end of the hard surfaced area adjacent to the public highway.

5.4 Policies SP9 (Conservation of the Natural, Historic and Built Environment), GP6 (Quality of Design) and CE5 (Locally Listed Buildings and Sites) of the Newport Local Development Plan 2011-2026 (Adopted January 2015) are relevant to the determination of the application.

5.5 Policy SP9 states that conservation, enhancement and management of recognised sites within the natural, historic and built environment will be sought in all proposals.

5.6 Policy GP6 states that good quality design will be sought in all forms of development.

5.7 Policy CE5 states that buildings and sites of local significance for their architectural or historic interest will be included on a local list and should be protected from demolition or inappropriate development.

5.8 The reduction in ground levels to the rear of the building is considered to be acceptable and does not harm the architectural and historic interests of the building. The reduction in levels removes modern fill material and returns the site to its original levels. There is no objection to the hardsurfacing of this area which has not been undertaken yet. The Head of Streetscene and City Services has no objection to the proposed hardstanding following confirmation that a soakaway would be installed at the end of the area adjacent to the public highway.

5.9 The boundary railings and stone cap piers around the front and side of the building have now been installed and they are considered to be acceptable.

5.10 Additional boundary railings are also proposed along the rear boundary. A timber fence has been constructed along this boundary, although it does not form part of this application. The proposed railings would match the existing railings around the front and side of the building. These are considered to be acceptable.

5.11 The Historic Buildings and Conservation Officer has concern that the gates installed at the Burleigh Road access have been crudely constructed in powder-coated steel and despite some attempts to add decorative detail they have an industrial appearance. The Officer states that if the railings were considered as a new installation, they might be acceptable, however they need to be considered as a replacement to the previous gates which were unlawfully removed.

5.12 The gates have been in place since October 2012 and since this date attempts have been made to negotiate an alternative design with the applicants’ agent. Despite gestures of intent amended designs have not been received and the gates remain in place. This application now needs to determine the acceptability of the gates as they currently stand. The concerns of the Historic Buildings and Conservation Officer are duly noted however, at the rear of the building and recessed into the access, they are not considered to be so prominent to adversely affect the architectural and historic interests of the building. Attempts have been made to provide decorative detail which is not dissimilar to the detail seen on other original gates at the front and side of the building. On balance the gates are not considered to be so inappropriate as to warrant a refusal of this application.

6. OTHER CONSIDERATIONS 6.1 Crime and Disorder Act 1998 Section 17(1) of the Crime and Disorder Act 1998 imposes a duty on the Local Authority to exercise its various functions with due regard to the likely effect of the exercise of those functions on, and the need to do all that it reasonably can to prevent, crime and disorder in its area. This duty has been considered in the evaluation of this application. It is considered that there would be no significant or unacceptable increase in crime and disorder as a result of the proposed decision.

6.2 Equality Act 2010 The Equality Act 2010 identifies a number of ‘protected characteristics’, namely age; disability; gender reassignment; pregnancy and maternity; race; religion or belief; sex; sexual orientation; marriage and civil partnership.

6.3 Having due regard to advancing equality involves:

 removing or minimising disadvantages suffered by people due to their protected characteristics;  taking steps to meet the needs of people from protected groups where these differ from the need of other people; and  encouraging people from protected groups to participate in public life or in other activities where their participation is disproportionately low.

6.4 The above duty has been given due consideration in the determination of this application. It is considered that the proposed development does not have any significant implications for, or effect on, persons who share a protected characteristic, over and above any other person.

8. DECISION

GRANTED WITH CONDITIONS

01 The development shall be implemented in accordance with the following plans: Design, Access and Heritage Statement (August 2012); 236 001 Rev. B; 236 023 Rev. B; 236 024 Rev. E; 236 025 Rev. D; 236 026 Rev. A; 236 027 Rev. A; photographs of replacement pier caps; details of Charcon Infilta Block Paving System (Construction Method — Attenuation Systems); details of Charcon Infilta Block Paving System (Construction Method — Infiltration Systems). Reason: In the interests of clarity and to ensure the development complies with the submitted plans and documents on which this decision was based.

NOTE TO APPLICANT

01 The development plan for Newport is the Newport Local Development Plan 2011-2026 (Adopted January 2015). Policies SP9, GP6 and CE5 were relevant to the determination of this application.

02 Due to the minor nature of the proposed development (including any demolition) and the location of the proposed development, it is considered that the proposals did not need to be screened under the Environmental Impact Assessment Regulations.

APPLICATION DETAILS

No: 2 12/0861 Ward: ALLT-YR-YN

Type: Listed Building

Expiry Date: 9 May 2013

Applicant: IGLESIA NI CRISTO (CHURCH OF CHRIST)

Site: BURLEIGH HALL, LLANTHEWY ROAD, NEWPORT, NP20 4LD

Proposal: LISTED BUILDING CONSENT FOR PART RETENTION OF GATES, BOUNDARY WALL PIER CAPS, RAILINGS AND REDUCTION IN GROUND LEVEL AND THE INSTALLATION OF REAR BOUNDARY RAILINGS AND PROVISION OF HARDSTANDING

DECISION: GRANTED WITH CONDITIONS SUBJECT TO CADW

1. CONSULTATIONS 1.1 ANCIENT MONUMENTS SOCIETY: Favours the repair and retention of the existing railings because their replacement could introduce a discordant modern feel to the building.

1.2 COUNCIL FOR BRITISH ARCHAEOLOGY: No response was received.

1.3 GEORGIAN GROUP: No response was received.

1.4 ROYAL COMMISSION ON THE ANCIENT AND HISTORICAL MONUMENTS OF WALES: No objection, but advises that the proposed replacement of gates and railings require careful consideration.

1.5 SOCIETY FOR THE PROTECTION OF ANCIENT BUILDINGS: No response was received.

1.6 TWENTIETH CENTURY SOCIETY: No response was received.

1.7 VICTORIAN SOCIETY: No response was received.

2. INTERNAL COUNCIL ADVICE 2.1 HISTORIC BUILDINGS CONSERVATION OFFICER: (First response) the building, previously known as Llanthewy Road Baptist Church was built in 1912 and is listed at grade II as a chapel building of imposing design by a well known regional architectural partnership (Habershon and Fawkner).

3. REPRESENTATIONS 3.1 PRESS NOTICE (published 06 October 2012): No responses were received.

3.2 SITE NOTICE (displayed 05 October 2012): No responses were received.

4. RELEVANT SITE HISTORY 01/0920 CERTIFICATE OF LAWFULNESS FOR PROPOSED Issued USE OF CHURCH AS PERFORMING ARTS CENTRE, COMMUNITY HALL AND PLACE OF WORSHIP

02/0032 LISTED BUILDING CONSENT APPLICATION FOR Granted with REMOVAL OF BAPTISMAL POOL, CHOIR PEWS conditions AND STORE

02/0748 LISTED BUILDING CONSENT FOR ERECTION OF Granted with WROUGHT IRON ENTRANCE SIGN conditions

11/0644 LISTED BUILDING CONSENT FOR THE Granted with RENOVATION OF THE TOWER AND FIXING OF conditions PERSPEX SHEETS TO THE INTERNAL FACE OF THE WINDOWS

11/0645 RENOVATION WORKS TO THE TOWER Granted

12/0399 INSTALLATION OF 2NO. CHURCH SEALS Invalid MOUNTED TO THE GABLES AND 2NO. INDIVIDUAL (determined) LETTERS (IGLESIA NI CRISTO CHURCH OF CHRIST) TO TWO ELEVATIONS OF THE TOWER

5. ASSESSMENT 5.1 This application seeks listed building consent for the part retention of gates, boundary wall piers caps, railings and reduction in ground levels and the installation of rear boundary railings and the provision of a hardstanding at Burleigh Hall, Llanthewy Road. The building is grade II listed and is listed for its imposing design by a well known regional architectural partnership.

5.2 The following works have already been undertaken by the applicant:

5.3 The following works are proposed:

5.5 Policy SP9 states that conservation, enhancement and management of recognised sites within the natural, historic and built environment will be sought in all proposals.

5.6 Policy GP6 states that good quality design will be sought in all forms of development.

5.8 Planning Policy Wales (Edition 7, July 2014), Welsh Office Circular 61/96 and Sections 16(2) and 66(1) of the Planning (Listed Buildings and Conservation Areas) Act 1990 are also relevant to the determination of this application.

5.9 Planning Policy Wales (Edition 7, July 2014) Chapter 6.5.9 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.

5.10 Welsh Office Circular 61/96 Annex D provides guidelines that are intended to assist local planning authorities and others in deciding on the suitability of proposed alterations to listed buildings. They are concerned only with works which affect the special interest and character of a building and which require listed building consent.

5.11 Town and Country Planning (Listed Buildings and Conservation Areas) Act 1990 Section 16(2) states that, in considering whether to grant listed building consent for any works, the local planning authority shall 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.

5.12 Section 66(1) states that, in considering whether to grant planning permission for development which affects a listed building or its setting, the local planning authority shall 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.

5.13 The reduction in ground levels to the rear of the building is considered to be acceptable and does not harm the architectural and historic interests of the building. The reduction in levels removes modern fill material and returns the site to its original levels. There is no objection to the hardsurfacing of this area which has not been undertaken yet. The boundary railings and stone cap piers around the front and side of the building have now been installed and they are considered to be acceptable.

5.14 Additional boundary railings are also proposed along the rear boundary. A timber fence has been constructed along this boundary, although it does not form part of this application. The proposed railings would match the existing railings around the front and side of the building. These are considered to be acceptable.

5.15 The Historic Buildings and Conservation Officer has concern that the gates installed at the Burleigh Road access have been crudely constructed in powder-coated steel and despite some attempts to add decorative detail they have an industrial appearance. The Officer states that if the railings were considered as a new installation, they might be acceptable, however they need to be considered as a replacement to the previous gates which were unlawfully removed.

5.16 The gates have been in place since October 2012 and since this date attempts have been made to negotiate an alternative design with the applicants’ agent. Despite gestures of intent amended designs have not been received and the gates remain in place. This application now needs to determine the acceptability of the gates as they currently stand. The concerns of the Historic Buildings and Conservation Officer are duly noted however, at the rear of the building and recessed into the access, they are not considered to be so prominent to adversely affect the architectural and historic interests of the building. Attempts have been made to provide decorative detail which is not dissimilar to the detail seen on other original gates at the front and side of the building. On balance the gates are not considered to be so inappropriate as to warrant a refusal of this application.

6.3 Having due regard to advancing equality involves:

7. CONCLUSION 7.1 The proposal is considered to be acceptable and in accordance with Policies SP9, GP6 and CE5 of the Newport Local Development Plan 2011-2026 (Adopted January 2015), Planning Policy Wales (Edition 7, July 2014), Welsh Office Circular 61/96 and Town and Country Planning (Listed Buildings and Conservation Areas) Act 1990. It is therefore recommended that listed building consent be granted with conditions.

8. DECISION

GRANTED WITH CONDITIONS AND SUBJECT TO CADW

NOTE TO APPLICANT

01 The development plan for Newport is the Newport Local Development Plan 2011-2026 (Adopted January 2015). Policies SP9, GP6 and CE5 were relevant to the determination of this application.

02 Section 16(2) of the Town and Country Planning (Listed Building and Conservation Areas) Act 1990 was relevant to the determination of this application.

APPLICATION DETAILS

No: 3 15/0209 Ward: ALLT-YR-YN

Type: FULL

Expiry Date: 12-MAY-2015

Applicant: R TAPSELL

Site: 1, EDWARD VII AVENUE, NEWPORT, NP20 4TL

Proposal: DEMOLITION OF EXISTING GARAGE AND OUTBUILDINGS, CONSTRUCTION OF DETACHED GARAGE, ALTERATIONS AND EXTENSION OF DRIVEWAY AND RETAINING WALL

DECISION GRANTED WITH CONDITIONS

1. CONSULTATIONS 1.1 DWR CYMRU WELSH WATER: Some public sewers and lateral drains may not be recorded on or maps of public sewers because they were originally privately owned and were transferred into public ownership by nature of the Water Industry (Schemes for Adoption of Private Sewers) Regulations 2011. The presence of such assets may affect the proposal. In order to assist us in dealing with proposal we request the applicant contacts our Operations Contact Centre to establish the location and status of the sewer. Under the Water Industry Act 1991 Dwr Cymru Welsh Water has rights of access to its apparatus at all times.

2. INTERNAL COUNCIL ADVICE 2.1 HEAD OF STREETSCENE AND CITY SERVICES (HIGHWAYS): No objection.

2.2 HISTORIC BUILDING AND CONSERVATION OFFICER: No objection.

3. REPRESENTATIONS 3.1 NEIGHBOURS: All properties with a common boundary were consulted (5 addresses). One letter of objection was received, objecting on the following grounds:  Proximity of the proposed garage to the boundary wall of no. 6 Westfield Road which forms the boundary of the Shrubbery conservation area and is believed to have been constructed as part of the original house c. 1875.  The visual impact of the garage will be significant as the garden level of the application property is significantly higher than the garden level at no. 6 Westfield Road.  Whilst not impacting on privacy as no windows are proposed to face no 6. Westfield Road, the garage would be overbearing.  The size of the garage is excessive and a flat roof would have a lesser visual and overbearing impact.  Queries section 8 of the application form which states there are no trees within falling distance of the boundary when there are a number of trees within the curtilage of no.6 Westfield Road. Further comments were received raising concerns of the effect of the demolition of the existing buildings on the boundary wall.

4. RELEVANT SITE HISTORY None.

5. ASSESSMENT 5.1 This application seeks permission for the demolition of the existing garage and outbuildings and construction of detached garage together with alteration and extension of the driveway and construction of a retaining wall at the semi-detached property in the Allt-Yr-Yn ward. The property is adjacent to the Shrubbery Conservation area.

5.2 The existing garage and outbuilding are located adjacent to the boundary with no. 2 Edward VII Crescent. It is proposed to demolish these buildings and make good the boundary wall. The existing 950mm high masonry retaining wall which runs between the application property and the existing outbuildings would be altered and extended to create a 4.2 metre wide driveway. The retaining wall would be a maximum of 0.95 metres in height, reducing to 0.45 metres in heath towards the rear.

5.3 The proposed garage would be located to the rear of the property in the south east corner of the site. It would be set back by 1.0 metre from the eastern boundary, a minimum of 1.0 metre from the southern boundary of the site and a maximum of 3.8 metres. It would measure 9.4 metres in width, 6.2 metres in depth and measure 5.4 metres in height to the ridge of the pitched roof, 2.5 metres to the eaves.

5.4 It is proposed to insert 3no. up and over doors in the front elevation of the proposed garage with a circular window over the central door. It is proposed to insert a pedestrian door in the western elevation. The garage would be constructed from materials to match those of the existing dwelling.

5.5 A letter of objection has been received relating to the impact of the extension on the property to the rear, no. 6 Westfield Road, particularly as the ground level at this property is lower than at the application property. It is considered that whilst the proposed garage would be visible from the property and the main amenity area at the property, the garage would not result in an unacceptable loss of light or privacy to the amenity space on the neighbouring property.

5.6 It was also brought to officer’s attention that the rear boundary wall of the application site forms the boundary of The Shrubbery Conservation Area. The Council’s Historic Building and Conservation Officer has considered the proposals and has no objection to the application.

6.3 Having due regard to advancing equality involves:  removing or minimising disadvantages suffered by people due to their protected characteristics;  taking steps to meet the needs of people from protected groups where these differ from the need of other people; and  encouraging people from protected groups to participate in public life or in other activities where their participation is disproportionately low.

7. CONCLUSION 7.1 It is considered that the proposed garage would not result in an unacceptable loss of light, privacy or overbearing impact to the neighbouring properties and therefore is acceptable when assessed in accordance with policies GP2, GP6 and GP7 of the Newport Local Development Plan.

8. DECISION

GRANTED WITH CONDITIONS 01 The development shall be implemented in accordance with the following plans and documents: Site Location Plan Existing and Proposed Layouts and Elevations and Sections and Wall Elevations. Reason: In the interests of clarity and to ensure the development complies with the submitted plans and documents on which this decision was based.

02 Prior to the demolition of the garage and outbuilding, full details of the changes to the boundary wall between the application property and no. 2 Edward VII Crescent shall be submitted to the Local Planning Authority. Details shall include details of the driveway level changes. The scheme shall then be implemented in accordance with the approved details. Reason: To ensure the development is completed in a manner compatible with its surroundings and in the interests of the amenity of neighbouring occupiers.

General conditions

03 The external surfaces of the garage hereby permitted shall only be of materials to match those of the existing building. Reason: To ensure the development is completed in a manner compatible with its surroundings.

NOTE TO APPLICANT

01 The development plan for Newport is the Newport Local Development Plan 2011 – 2026 (Adopted January 2015). Policies GP2, GP6 and GP7 were relevant to the determination of this application.

APPLICATION DETAILS

No: 4 15/0289 Ward: ALLT-YR-YN

Type: TREE PRESERVATION ORDERS

Expiry Date: 10-MAY-2015

Applicant: P NICHOLSON

Site: 1, WESTFIELD ROAD, NEWPORT, NP20 4ND

Proposal: WORKS TO TRIM BRANCHES OF TREES T5 (HORSE CHESTNUT), T6 (YEW), T9 (SYCAMORE), T10 (YEW) AND T11 (CYPRESS) COVERED BY TREE PRESERVATION ORDER NO.2/85

DECISION: GRANTED WITH CONDITIONS

1. CONSULTATIONS 1.1 None.

2. INTERNAL COUNCIL ADVICE 2.1 HEAD OF STREETSCENE (TREE OFFICER: TPOs AND PRIVATE LAND): No objection.

3. REPRESENTATIONS 3.1 NEIGHBOURS: All neighbours with a common boundary were consulted (17no. properties) and a site notice was displayed. No response received.

3.2 WILDLIFE IN NEWPORT GROUP: No response received.

3.3 SHRUBBERY CONSERVATION SOCIETY: No response.

3.4 HISTORIC BUILDINGS AND CONSERVATION OFFICER: No objection.

4. RELEVANT SITE HISTORY None.

5. ASSESSMENT 5.1 The proposal is to carry out the following work: horse chestnut (T5), yew (T6), Sycamore (T9), yew (T10) and cypress (T11) minor trimming to the side branches only.

5.2 The proposed work is in line with general routine maintenance that is required by many trees and the trees’ overall visual character will not be compromised.

5.3 The trees should respond well to the trimming work and they can be expected to have a good life expectancy.

5.4 Therefore the Councils Tree Officer (TPOS and Private land)has no objection the proposals

6. OTHER CONSIDERATIONS

6.1. Crime and Disorder Act 1988 Section 17(1) of the Crime and Disorder Act 1998 imposes a duty on the Local Authority to exercise its various functions with due regard to the likely effect of the exercise of those functions on, and the need to do all that it reasonably can to prevent, crime and disorder in its area. This duty has been considered in the evaluation of this application. It is considered that there would be no significant or unacceptable increase in crime and disorder as a result of the proposed decision.

6.2. Equality Act 2010 The Equality Act 2010 identifies a number of ‘protected characteristics’, namely age; disability; gender reassignment; pregnancy and maternity; race; religion or belief; sex; sexual orientation; marriage and civil partnership.

6.3. Having due regard to advancing equality involves:  Removing or minimising disadvantages suffered by people due to their protected characteristics;  Taking steps to meet the needs of people from protected groups where these differ from the need of other people; and  Encouraging people from protected groups to participate in public life or in other activities where their participation is disproportionately low.

6.4. The above duty has been given due consideration in the determination of this application. It is considered that the proposed development does not have any significant implications for, or effect on, persons who share a protected characteristic, over and above any other person.

7.0 CONCLUSION 7.1. The application is granted subject to the following conditions.

8.0 DECISION

GRANTED WITH CONDITIONS

01 The extent of the work hereby approved shall be agreed on site by the Council's Woodland Officer prior to any works to the trees commencing. Reason: In the interests of the health and longevity of the trees and preserving their amenity value.

NOTE TO APPLICANT

01 This decision relates to the Plan received on 16 March 2015.

APPLICATION DETAILS

No: 5 15/0398 Ward: ALLT-YR-YN

Type: DISCHARGE CONDITIONS

Expiry Date: 26-MAY-2015

Applicant: S AMBLER, STEVE AMBLER & SONS TREE SPECIALISTS LTD

Site: 62, FIELDS PARK ROAD, NEWPORT, NP20 5BH

Proposal: PARTIAL DISCHARGE OF CONDITION 06 (ARBORICULTURALIST APPOINTMENT) OF PLANNING PERMISSION 14/0032 FOR THE DEVELOPMENT OF 4NO. DETACHED DWELLINGS AND ASSOCIATED WORKS

DECISION APPROVED

1. CONSULTATIONS 1.1 None

2. INTERNAL COUNCIL ADVICE 2.1 HEAD OF STREETSCENE AND CITY SERVICES (TREE OFFICER): No objection

3. REPRESENTATIONS 3.1 No representations

4. RELEVANT SITE HISTORY

97/0600 Listed building consent for internal alterations to Stair Granted with Cupola conditions

05/0655 Refurbishment and conversion of buildings into 10No. flats, Refused demolition of outbuildings and erection of 9No. houses

05/0649 Listed building consent for the refurbishment and Refused conversion of buildings to 10No. flats, demolition of outbuildings and erection of 9No. houses

08/1290 Erection of four detached dwellings (to include three two Refused four bed houses and one two bed bungalow)

09/1153 Erection of 4No. detached dwellings (to include 3No. 2 Granted with storey houses and 1No. bungalow) (resubmission following conditions and refusal of 08/1290) subject to S106 agreement

12/0088 Listed building consent for full repair and refurbishment Granted with works to the fabric of the building, part demolition and conditions erection of two storey extension, bay window and reconfiguration of window to door all on western elevation

14/0032 Development of 4 No. detached dwellings and associated Granted with works conditions and subject to S106 agreement

5. ASSESSMENT 5.1 This application seeks to partially discharge condition 6 (Arboriculturalist appointment) of planning permission 14/0032.

5.2 Condition 6 states that:

“No development, to include demolition, shall commence until an Arboriculturalist has been appointed, as first agreed in writing by the Local Planning Authority, to oversee the project (to perform a Watching Brief) for the duration of the development and who shall be responsible for - (a) Supervision and monitoring of the approved Tree Protection Plan; (b) Supervision and monitoring of the approved tree felling and pruning works; (c) Supervision of the alteration or temporary removal of any Barrier Fencing; (d) Oversee working within any Root Protection Area; (e) Reporting to the Local Planning Authority; (f) The Arboricultural Consultant will provide site progress reports to the Council's Tree Officer at intervals to be agreed by the Councils Tree Officer. Reason: To protect important landscape features within the site.”

5.3 Steve Ambler of Steve Ambler and Sons Tree Specialists Ltd has been appointed as the Arboriculturalist. The Council’s Tree Officer has no objection to this.

7. CONCLUSION 7.1 Condition 6 can be partially discharged.

8. DECISION

APPROVED

NOTE TO APPLICANT

01 This decision relates to plan Nos: Email from Steve Ambler dated 31st March 2015.

02 The development plan for Newport is the Newport Local Development Plan 2011 – 2026 (Adopted January 2015). No policies were relevant to the determination of this application.

03 As consideration of this request did not raise significant additional environmental matters over and above those previously considered as part of the original application, it is considered that the proposals did not need to be screened under the Environmental Impact Assessment Regulations.

APPLICATION DETAILS

No: 6 15/0394 Ward: ALLT-YR-YN

Type: CERTIFICATE OF LAWFUL USE(PROPOSED)

Expiry Date: 03-JUN-2015

Applicant: R MCAREE

Site: 4, MANLEY ROAD, NEWPORT

Proposal: LAWFUL DEVELOPMENT CERTIFICATE FOR PROPOSED CONVERSION OF 3NO. FLATS TO A SINGLE DWELLING

DECISION GRANTED

1. CONSULTATIONS 1.1 No external consultation was undertaken.

2. INTERNAL COUNCIL ADVICE 2.1 HEAD OF LAW AND STANDARDS: The conversion of flats back to a dwellinghouse is a change of use. However, the question is whether it is a material change which needs planning consent. This is for the planning officer to judge on the facts. An important consideration would be whether the conversion of the flats would mean the loss of valuable accommodation in the area. If this would apply, or if there were other planning considerations which should be taken into account, then the change would be material.

3. REPRESENTATIONS 3.1 NEIGHBOURS: None

4. RELEVANT SITE HISTORY 4.1 None

5. ASSESSMENT 5.1 This application seeks confirmation, through the granting of a Lawful Development Certificate, that planning permission is not required for the conversion of 3No flats to a single dwelling at the semi-detached property known as 4 Manley Road, Newport.

5.2 The property was historically a single dwelling house, but is currently used as 3No flats, one utilising the ground floor and basement, with the remaining two flats occupying on the first and second floor respectively. The current layout is as follows;  Lower ground floor (Flat 1) - kitchen, dining room, bathroom and toilet,  Ground floor (Flat 1) - porch, bedroom and lounge,  First floor (Flat 2) - bedroom, lounge, mini kitchen and bathroom  Second floor (Flat 3) - bathroom, bedroom/lounge and mini kitchen.

5.3 The applicant proposes to convert the property to a single dwellinghouse with the following layout:  Lower ground floor – kitchen, breakfast room, bathroom and toilet,  Ground floor – porch, lounge and dining room,  First floor – 2No bedrooms and bathroom,  Second floor – bedroom and bathroom.

5.4 It is stated that no structural works are required to facilitate the conversion, only the removal of mini kitchens and utilising certain rooms for different purposes to their current use. The Town and Country Planning (Use Classes) Order 1987 defines flats as a C3 use. A traditional dwellinghouse is also a C3 use, although it is considered that the alteration from flats to a dwellinghouse is a technical change of use, despite being within the same use class.

5.5 As stated by the Council’s Planning Solicitor, whether or not the change of use is a material one depends on the specific facts of each case. It is also suggested, from examples of relevant case law, that a change of use of flats to a dwellinghouse could have material planning implications, such as the loss of a certain type of housing in an area, thereby requiring formal planning permission. However, it should be noted that these are primarily within London Boroughs where the provision of affordable housing is a significant issue and thereby more of a consideration.

5.6 The area around the application site, along Manley Road, Risca Road and Ombersley Road, consists of a high number of flats and HMOs interspersed between dwelling houses, as well as blocks of flats along Bryngwyn Road. As such, it is not considered that the conversion of the 3No flats back to a dwellinghouse would have an adverse impact on the availability of affordable housing units in the area. The loss of the flats would also accord with the thrust of Policy H8 (Self-contained accommodation and Houses in Multiple Occupation) of the Newport Local Development Plan 2011-2026 (Adopted January 2015), which seeks to avoid an over concentration of such uses within one area of the city.

5.7 Overall, the parking demand for the property remains the same as a dwellinghouse as with 3 flats, albeit that there is no off-street parking available. Therefore there should be no impact in terms of parking demand.

5.8 The use of the property as a dwellinghouse would remain in character with the surrounding residential properties and may improve neighbouring amenity by generating less ‘comings and goings’ from the property than the 3No flats do at present.

7. CONCLUSION 7.1 Considering the facts of this case and material planning considerations, it is concluded that the change of use of the 3No flats to a single dwellinghouse would not represent a material change of use which would require planning permission. As such, the Lawful Development Certificate is granted.

8. DECISION

GRANTED

Reason: It is concluded that the proposed development does not represent a material change of use which would require planning permission.

NOTE TO APPLICANT

01 This decision relates to plan Nos: Existing floor plans, proposed floor plans, Site Location Plan and Covering letter dated 8th April 2015.

02 The development plan for Newport is the Newport Local Development Plan 2011 – 2026 (Adopted January 2015). No policies were relevant to the determination of this application.

03 Due to the minor nature of the proposed development (including any demolition) and the location of the proposed development, it is considered that the proposals did not need to be screened under the Environmental Impact Assessment Regulations.

APPLICATION DETAILS

No: 7 15/0325 Ward: ALLT-YR-YN

Type: RENEWALS AND VARIATION OF CONDITIONS

Expiry Date: 17-MAY-2015

Applicant: C ROGERS

Site: NORTHERN HEY STABLES, BRICKYARD LANE, NEWPORT

Proposal: VARIATION OF CONDITIONS 1, 2 AND 4 OF PLANNING PERMISSION 12/0047 (FOR THE RETENTION OF THE MIXED USE OF THE LAND FOR THE SITING OF A MOBILE HOME, SITING OF 5NO. TOURING CARAVANS AND THE KEEPING OF HORSES TOGETHER WITH THE RETENTION OF HARDSTANDINGS, EXTENSION TO STABLE BLOCK TO CREATE A UTILITY / AMENITY ROOM AND THE REBUILDING OF AN ANCILLARY BUILDING TO CREATE AN AMENITY BLOCK) TO ALLOW FOR THE SITING OF 9 NO. ADDITIONAL TOURING CARAVANS

DECISION REFUSAL

1. CONSULTATIONS 1.1 HEDDLU GWENT POLICE (TRAFFIC MANAGEMENT): I have viewed the variation planning request of planning permission 12/0047 at Newport Planning referring to reference 15/0325 in relation to any traffic management issues. The junction of Brickyard Lane with B4591 Risca Road is on a sharp left hand bend some 25mtrs from the very heavily trafficked roundabout at junction 26 of the M4 Motorway. Vehicles exiting the roundabout towards Newport have to negotiate a sharp left hand bend with very little visibility, the visibility to the junction of Brickyard Lane would be 15 metres. The speed limit for this road is thirty miles per hour. Drivers would have more notice of the Western Avenue junction which to the offside of the B4591 and is a staggered junction with Brickyard Lane. Drivers would therefore not be aware of any vehicle exiting Brickyard Lane. The visibility of Brickyard Lane to other drivers and for drivers exiting the junction is further restricted by the tall wooden fencing at both private properties each side of the junction.

1.1.1 Currently this junction does have some minor vehicle movements from developments on the lane, the rough surface of the lane does currently ensure that drivers approach the junction with the B4591 at a slow speed.

1.1.2 I have examined the personal injury collision record for High Cross intersection junction 26, for the last five years the record shows a total of 6 slight injury collisions and 1 serious. The one collision at 0830hrs on Sunday 20/11/2011 involves a vehicle exiting Western Avenue onto the B4591 and being in collision with a cyclist on the B4591 resulting in slight injuries.

1.1.3 When exiting Brickyard Lane onto the B4591 the visibility would only be some 15metres towards High Cross intersection, this would be a danger for vehicles exiting the High Cross Roundabout, while the speed limit is 30 mph some vehicles have just left the westbound slip road of the M4 which is subject to the Motorway speed limit. The only sign for drivers exiting the roundabout to suggest that there is a junction to their left which would be out of their direct line of sight is a staggered junction warning triangle sign Traffic Signs and General Direction diagram 507.1.

1.1.4 There is a prohibition of right turning in this area although I am aware that there have been complaints of drivers contravening these restrictions in particular from Western Avenue.

1.1.5 I note that the application is to increase the numbers of touring caravans to Brickyard Lane site and also an extension to the stable block and rebuilding of an ancillary building. This would seem to suggest the movement of additional slow moving vehicles and long vehicles at the junction of Brickyard Lane and B4591.

1.1.6 It must be remembered that the B4591 Risca Road is a primary route for drivers wishing to visit Newport City Centre, with the current developments of the City Centre proposed this route will increase in vehicle numbers.

1.1.7 To accommodate the additional movements safely for any proposed developments on Brickyard Lane there would need to be an assessment of current vehicle movements, how these additional vehicles can be accommodated safely through this junction and what safety measures can be put in place to ensure drivers on the B4591 can be made aware of these additional vehicle movements.

1.1.8 There is a need for Newport City Highways to carry out a safety audit in this area in relation to this application or any other proposed developments to ensure that Road Safety is not compromised, I would be willing to assist with this audit as a representative of Gwent Police.

1.2 NEWPORT ACCESS GROUP: No response.

1.3 REGIONAL AMBULANCE OFFICER: No response.

1.4 SOUTH WALES FIRE AND RESCUE: No response.

1.5 WALES AND WEST UTILITIES: No response.

1.6 WELSH WATER: We advise that there are no public sewers in this area. It appears the application does not propose to connect to the public sewer, and therefore Dwr Cymru Welsh Water has no further comments. However, should circumstances change and a connection to the public sewerage system/public sewage treatment works is preferred we must be re-consulted on this application.

1.6.1 No problems are envisaged with the provision of water supply for this development.

1.7 WELSH GOVERNMENT TRANSPORT DIRECTORATE: The Welsh Government (Transport) as highway authority for the M4 does not object to the proposal but directs that the following notes are applied to any planning consent: -No works shall be undertaken which could in any way effect the stability of the M4 Motorway embankments. - No connection shall be permitted into the motorway drainage system.

2. INTERNAL COUNCIL ADVICE

2.1 HEAD OF STREETSCENE AND CITY SERVICES (DRAINAGE): No response

2.2 HEAD OF STREETSCENE AND CITY SERVICES (HIGHWAYS): The main concern regarding the proposal is the resultant increased traffic movements at the junction of Brickyard Lane and Glasllwch Crescent. Visibility at the junction is limited and substandard, with approximately 24m being available to the east and 18m to the west. These equate to vehicle speeds in the region of 20mph however vehicles clearly exceed these speeds.

2.2.1 Glasllwch Crescent is a heavily trafficked road as it provides an arterial route to and from the city centre and also as an access to the M4. Increased vehicle movements at the junction will increase the likelihood of conflict between vehicles at a junction where visibility is limited.

2.2.2 I note that the applicant argues that car ownership is likely to be low and therefore there will be no further traffic implications. I must disagree with this as it cannot be assumed that this will be the case and also we have no control of whether the occupier of a caravan owns a vehicle.

2.2.3 Given that the applicant will not be able to improve visibility at the junction it’s considered that no further development should be permitted along Brickyard Lane in the interest of highway safety. I must therefore oppose the application and recommend refusal.

2.3 HEAD OF STREETSCENE AND CITY SERVICES (LANDSCAPE OFFICER): In the LDP this site is designated as ‘Countryside’ and is adjacent to ‘Environmental Space’ on the eastern boundary, which is also designated as a ‘Local Nature Reserve’. Therefore, all existing trees in this area should be protected from damage. Although the current caravans can be glimpsed through a gap in vegetation from the motorway, they are generally well screened.

2.3.1 All existing trees around the site need protecting from canopy damage, root disturbance and compaction, (should any further surface treatment be proposed), and, in particular, protection from branch damage due to parking caravans against them.

2.3.2 Proposed fencing, posts, or other means of restricting caravan damage to trees, should be marked onto a detailed tree survey plan which accurately shows tree canopy spreads.

2.3.3 This plan should then be submitted to satisfy the landscape element of the application.

2.4 HEAD OF LEGAL AND REGULATION (ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION – LICENCING): With regards to this application, if the planning application was granted for the siting of Caravans occupied by persons other than the applicants family then the site would require a site licence under the Mobile (Homes) Wales Act 2013.

2.4.1 There is a fee for such an application and the site would need to operate in accordance with the licence conditions set by the 2008 Model Standards – which I attach. Please note they relate to the siting and spacing of caravans so I would need to see amended scale plans showing how the operator intends to meet these.

2.4.2 The site would be subject to regular inspections and necessary paperwork such as electrical safety certificates, fire risk assessments etc are required as part of the application process.

2.4.3 Operating a site without a licence is an offence under the Mobile Homes (Wales) Act 2013.

2.5 HEAD OF LEGAL AND REGULATION (ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION): Environmental Health maintain that this site is unsuitable for permanent residential accommodation due to the traffic noise impact from the M4 and the inability of caravans to insulate against the noise. If the permission is conditioned to ensure that the additional accommodation is for temporary occupation only, then I would not object.

2.6 HEAD OF REGENERATION, INVESTMENT AND HOUSING (HOUSING DEVELOPMENT MANAGER): With regard to this application, if the authority was minded to recommend approval then this would most definitely be a commercial caravan site and would need to be licenced by our colleagues in Environmental Health. We know that the existing residents of the tourers are not relatives of the applicants and the design and access statement confirms that. It is probably prudent to ask Environmental Health for their opinion on the layout etc. If planning permission is granted they would then be in a position to licence in a fairly straightforward manner if all the details had been ironed out at the planning stage, all joined up so to speak.

2.6.1 My only other comment would be that the plan does not appear to be to scale, and the number of tourers on site currently appears to exceed the application. The number of caravans that have been on site over the years is a matter of public record as they have formed part of the biannual caravan count, this information is available from Welsh Government.

2.7 HEAD OF REGENERATION, INVESTMENT AND HOUSING (PLANNING POLICY MANAGER):No response

3. REPRESENTATIONS 3.1 NEIGHBOURS: All properties within 100m of the application site were consulted and a site notice displayed. Five letters of objection have been received and are summarised as follows:

 Inferior visibility towards Highcross roundabout.  Increase in traffic to detriment of highway safety.  Cost to develop site.  Use of septic tanks increases vehicular traffic to site and environmental risk.  Safety issues relating to an unlit road  Increase in noise and light pollution.  Countryside location in close proximity to Monmouthshire and Brecon Canal and Nature Reserve.  Impact upon existing public right of way.  Highly visible site affecting amenity of nearby residents.  Previous proposal to expand existing traveller site off Brickyard Lane rejected.  Number of caravans increased over last 2 years.  Increase in rubbish being dumped.  Loss of trees along lane.  Assume would no objection to our future proposals.  Council should not grant planning permission retrospectively and enforce planning rules. 3.1.1 COUNCILLOR MATTHEW EVANS: I wish to strongly object to this application. It would appear the applicant has disregarded previous concerns and wants to further extend the site. My main issue is in regard the highway safety implications with the only access on to the busy main road, Risca Road. The Council has previously admitted the egress is dangerous and unsatisfactory, and I can see no evidence that this has changed.

4. RELEVANT SITE HISTORY

08/1427 Retention of the mixed use of the land for the siting of a mobile Granted home, siting of 5 (No) touring caravans and the keeping of horses with together with the retention of hardstandings, extension to the stable conditions block to create a utility/amenity room and the rebuilding of an ancillary building to create an amenity block.

10/0100 Removal of condition 01 (temporary period of use) relating Refused to planning permission 08/1427 for the retention of the mixed use of the land for the siting of a mobile home, siting of 5no touring caravans and the keeping of horses, together with the retention of hardstanding, extension to the stable block to create a utility amenity room and the rebuilding of an ancillary building to create an amenity block.

12/0047 Removal of condition 01 (temporary period of use) relating to Granted planning permission 08/1427 for the retention of the mixed used of with the land for the siting of a mobile home, siting of 5No. touring conditions caravans and the keeping of horses together with the retention of hardstandings.

5. ASSESSMENT

5.1 This is an application to vary conditions 1, 2 and 4 of planning permission 12/0047 (for the retention of the mixed use of the land for the siting of a mobile home, siting of 5No. touring caravans and the keeping of horses together with the retention of hardstandings, extension to stable block to create a utility/amenity room and the rebuilding of an ancillary building to create an amenity block) to allow for the siting of 9 No. additional touring caravans.

5.2 Condition 1 of planning permission 12/0047 relates to the use of the land for siting of a mobile home and 5 No, touring caravans. Condition 2 names the persons who should occupy the site, while condition 4 refers to a block plan and specifies that no caravan other than those shown should stationed on the land.

5.3 This variation of condition application therefore seeks to provide an additional 9 touring caravans at the site, which would increase the overall number of touring caravans at the site to 14 and 1 mobile home.

5.4 Site Description The application site comprises a triangular shaped parcel of land having an area of approximately 0.35 hectares and a frontage of 115m on to Brickyard Lane. The site lies adjacent to the M4 and to the east are fields that rise steeply upwards to an existing riding school. At the time of the officer site visit it was apparent that a building was being constructed on site, which does not benefit from planning permission and does not form part of this application. A total of 14 touring caravans and 1 mobile home are sited on the application site.

5.5 Access to the site is off Glasllwch Crescent, a main route connecting junction 27 of the M4 to Newport City Centre. Brickyard Lane runs for a length of 450m off Glasllwch Crescent to the access point into the site. Brickyard Lane is a public right of way that connects Glasllwch Crescent to the Monmouthshire and Brecon Canal that is sited 200m to the north of the application site.

5.6 Main Issues The main issues in this case are considered to be: 1. Do the occupants meet the definition of a gypsy/traveller and do exceptional circumstances exist to warrant an increase in the number of touring caravans at the site; 2. The impact on the character and appearance of the area; and 3. The impact on the highway safety 5.7 Gypsy/traveller Status and Exceptional Circumstances Policy SP5 of the LDP relates to development in the countryside and that it will only be permitted where the use is appropriate in the countryside, respects the landscape character and biodiversity of the immediate and surrounding area and is appropriate in scale and design. Housing development, rural diversification and rural enterprise uses, beyond settlement boundaries, will only be appropriate where they comply with national planning policy.

5.7.1 Policy H17 of the LDP refers specifically to gypsy/travellers sites and identifies that proposals for gypsy and traveller caravan sites, including on land outside defined settlement boundaries will be permitted where: i) The site is well related to suitable community facilities and services for the prospective occupants; ii) The site is capable of being served by utilities including sustainable waste disposal and recovery and emergency services; iii) The site is not within areas at high risk of flooding given, the particular vulnerability of caravans; and iv) There is an identified and genuine, local need for accommodation for the occupiers. 5.7.2 The application site falls outside the settlement boundary as defined in the Local Development Plan and is therefore regarded as a countryside location. It should be noted that in the determination of previous applications at this site it has been accepted that the site occupies a semi-rural setting. This remains the case in the consideration of this application.

5.7.3 The first issue to consider in this case is whether the future occupants meet the definition of a gypsy/traveller. The agent confirms within his supporting letter dated 19th March 2015 that all occupants fall within the gypsy/traveller criteria and a number are authorised occupiers. It should be noted that due to the letter containing personal information this is held confidentially.

5.7.4 The 2008 planning permission (08/01427) stipulates that the site should be occupied by 10 named persons and this increased to 12 named persons in the 2012 planning permission (12/0047). This current application seeks to increase the overall number of persons at the site to 13 adults and the respective children of 2 adults on the site.

5.7.5 The local planning authority has previously accepted that apart from three new occupants at the site, the persons named on the previous planning permission meet the following definition of gypsies and travellers, as set out in paragraph 3 of WAG Circular 30/2007 ‘Planning for Gypsy and Traveller Caravan Sites’:

“persons of normadic habit of life whatever their race or origin including such persons who on grounds only of their own or their family’s or dependants’ education or health needs or old age have ceased to travel temporarily or permanently, but excluding members of an organised group of travelling show people or circus people travelling together as such.”

5.7.6 As identified above there are three new occupants at the site that have not previously been named on any planning permission. The supporting letter provided by the agent dated 19th March 2015 (held confidentially) sets out briefly the personal circumstances of the individuals involved, but in relation to one individual it is not clarified whether the person is a gypsy/traveller. Notwithstanding this no documentary evidence has been provided to corroborate that the three individuals are gypsy/travellers and thus meet the definition provided in paragraph 3 of the Welsh Assembly Government Circular 30/2007. It would be expected that such information might include family background, history of and reason for travelling in the past, and current or intended pattern of work and travelling, if any. In the absence of this evidence, it is considered that the additional occupants do not qualify for gypsy/traveller status, and the proposed increase in the number of touring caravans at this site would represent an unjustified form of development within the countryside.

5.7.7 Additionally, the agent has confirmed that there have been changes in circumstances of named and previously named individuals at the site, which include the following:

 The return of a previously named person to the site who requires two caravans;  A change in the personal circumstances of an existing resident who requires a touring caravan;  Due to health reasons one person now requires two caravans. 5.7.8 Although it has been identified that there has been a change in circumstances at the site, no documentary evidence has been provided to substantiate the precise changes in circumstances. In the absence of documentary evidence relating to the exceptional circumstances of these individuals it is again considered that the increase in the number of touring caravans at this site would represent an unjustified form of development within the countryside.

5.7.9 In relation to the need for gypsy sites, the Welsh Government Gypsy and Traveller count dated January 2015 found that there are five authorised sites accommodating 31 caravans. It should be noted that Brickyard Lane is an authorised site, but 15 caravans were counted at the site in January 2015. There are 5 unauthorised sites accommodating 36 caravans. Paragraph 5.33 of the LDP identifies that there the Council has an immediate unmet need for permanent residential pitches in Newport and that these families have already been identified by the Council. The immediate need will be accommodated at Hartridge Farm Road by the end of 2016.

5.7.10 In summary, it is considered that insufficient documentary evidence has been provided to demonstrate that the additional occupants qualify for gypsy/traveller status and that there are exceptional circumstances that warrant an increase in the number of touring caravans for residential occupation at the site. As such, the proposal is contrary to the Welsh Assembly Government Circular 30/2007 on Planning for Gypsy and Traveller Caravan Sites and policies SP5 and H17 of the LDP.

5.8 Visual Amenity Policy GP6 of the LDP expects that development proposals should address the context of the site and be sensitive to the unique qualities of the site and respond positively to the character of the area. In addition, policy SP6 requires proposals in the countryside to respect the landscape character.

5.8.1 As identified above, the application site is considered to constitute a semi-rural setting. The site fronts a public right of way and the site is readily visible from this public vantage point. The public right of way is used by those visiting the Monmouthshire and Brecon Canal as well as connecting into the Sirhowy Valley walk that forms part of a long distance walk. The site is also visible from the adjacent M4.

5.8.2 The previous planning permission (12/0047) restricted the number of touring caravans to the immediate area to the north of the access into the site, which had the effect of creating a central courtyard area and was well related to the existing built form. The current application and the situation on site have resulted in the proliferation of touring caravans to the northern section of the site. Given the semi-rural setting of the application site and the fact that the site is readily visible from public vantage points, it is considered that the significant increase in the number of touring caravans at the site fails to respond positively to the semi-rural character of the area. The proposal is therefore contrary to policies GP6 and SP5 of the LDP.

5.9 Highways Policy GP4 of the LDP refers specifically to highways and accessibility and seeks to ensure that development would not be detrimental to highway or pedestrian safety.

5.9.1 Local residents have raised concerns regarding the visibility splay at the access on to Glasllwch Crescent. The Head of Streetscene and City Services (Highways) objects to the application and the principal concern relates to the resultant increased traffic movements at the junction of Brickyard Lane and Glasllwch Crescent, whereby visibility at the junction is limited and substandard, with approximately 24m being available to the east and 18m to the west. These equate to vehicle speeds in the region of 20mph, however, vehicles clearly exceed these speeds. Local residents have raised similar concerns.

5.9.2 The agent refers to the WAG Circular 30/2007 which states that proposals should not be rejected if they would give rise to only modest daily vehicle movements and/or the impact on minor roads would not be significant. As confirmed by the Head of Streetscene and City Services (Highways) Glasllwch Crescent is heavily trafficked and the main arterial route from the M4 into the city centre. In the deliberation of the 2012 application, the numbers residing at the site was important due to the poor visibility of the junction of Brickyard Lane and Glasllwch Crescent.

5.9.3 The numbers of person’s resident at the site has increased over time with 13 persons in addition to the children of 2 persons now resident on site. The local planning authority has previously accepted that the siting of 5 touring caravans and 1 mobile home is acceptable on highway grounds for 12 residents at the site. However, this proposal results in an increase in the number of people residing at the site and associated additional daily vehicle movements at the junction that will increase the likelihood of conflict between vehicles where visibility is extremely limited. This is not just an issue for residents at the site, but also other road users. It is considered that the highway situation is insurmountable and a significant material planning consideration in this case. Accordingly, the proposal is therefore contrary to policy GP4 of the LDP.

5.10 Human Rights The rights of the occupiers of the site under the Human Rights Act 1998 have been considered. Article 8 identifies that everyone has the right to respect for his private and family life, his home and his correspondence. It goes on to say that there shall be no interference by a public authority with the exercise of this right except such as in accordance with the law and is necessary in a democratic society in the interests of national security, public safety or the economic wellbeing of the country, for the prevention of disorder or crime, for the protection of health or morals, or for the protections of the rights and freedoms of others.

5.10.1 In terms of Human Rights, the agent alludes to the fact that if the occupiers of this site have to leave they will be made homeless. In this case it is not considered that the matters in support of the application amount to exceptional circumstances to overcome the significant concerns relating to highway and pedestrian safety. Given the substandard nature of the visibility at the junction of Brickyard Lane and Glasllwch Crescent it is not considered that a temporary planning permission would be an appropriate way forward. Consequently, the refusal of this application is therefore necessary, proportionate and in the overall interest of public safety, and this outweighs the fact that potential occupants could be made homeless.

5.11 Other matters In relation to the amenity for future occupants of the caravans, the traffic noise impact has been comprehensively addressed in previous applications at this site. The Council’s Head of Legal and Regulation (Environmental Protection) maintains an objection on the basis that the site is unsuitable for permanent residential accommodation due to the traffic noise impact from the M4 and the inability of caravans to insulate against the noise. In this case, it has previously been accepted that the applicants have resided at this site since 2008 and they do not consider the noise levels to be harmful or a source of annoyance. In light of this situation it is considered that the noise levels are acceptable for future occupants, if the proposal was considered to be acceptable.

5.11.1 In relation to the impact on neighbour amenity, the nearest residential property is Cwrt-y- Mwnws Farm sited 230m to the east that is sited at an elevated level. Given the distances involved it is considered that the proposal will not have any detrimental impact on the amenity of this property through loss of privacy or any increase in noise and disturbance.

5.11.2 A number of the concerns raised by local residents have been addressed in the main body of the report. In relation to noise and light pollution, given the sites location adjacent to the M4 it is considered that the proposal will not generate any significant increase in noise and light that would warrant the refusal of the application. In relation to dumping of rubbish this is a matter for our Enforcement Section. It should also be noted that every planning application is determined on their individual merits.

7. CONCLUSION 7.1 The application is considered to be unacceptable as it fails to demonstrate that the occupants qualify for gypsy and traveller status and that there are any exceptional circumstances to justify this form of development outside the defined settlement boundary. The proposal would ultimately be an inappropriate form of development that would have a detrimental impact on the character and appearance of the area. Due to the substandard visiblity at the junction of Brickyard Lane and Glasllwch Crescent, the proposal would have a detrimental impact on highway and pedestrian safety, which is considered to be a significant material consideration. The proposal is contrary to Welsh Assembly Government Circular 30/2007 ‘Planning for Gypsy and Traveller Caravan Sites’ December 2007, and policies SP5, GP4, GP6 and H17 of the Newport Local Development Plan 2011-2026 (adopted January 2015).

8. DECISION

REFUSED

01 The application has failed to demonstrate that all the occupants qualify for gypsy and traveller status and that there are any exceptional circumstances that would justify the provision of the siting of an additional 9 touring caravans for residential use outside the defined settlement boundary. The proposal represents an unjustified form of development that would have a detrimental impact on the character and appearance of this semi-rural area. This is contrary to Welsh Assembly Government Circular 30/2007 ‘Planning for Gypsy and Traveller Caravan Sites’ December 2007, and policies SP5, GP6 and H17 of the Newport Local Development Plan 2011-2026 (adopted January 2015).

02 The proposal results in an intensification of the use of an access with inadequate visibility at the junction of Glasllwch Crescent and Brickyard Lane to the detriment of highway and pedestrian safety, contrary to policy GP4 of the Newport Local Development Plan 2011- 2026 (adopted January 2015).

NOTE TO APPLICANT

01 The development plan for Newport is the Newport Local Development Plan 2011 – 2026 (Adopted January 2015). Policies were relevant to the determination of this application. Policies SP1, SP5, GP2, GP3, GP4, GP5, GP6, GP7, H14, H16, H17, and CF5 were relevant to the determination of this application.

02 WAG Circular 30/2007 – Planning for Gypsy and Traveller Caravan Sites was relevant to the determination of this application.

03 The proposed development (including any demolition) has been screened under the Environmental Impact Assessment Regulations and it is considered that an Environmental Statement is not required.

APPLICATION DETAILS

No: 8 15/0302 Ward: BEECHWOOD

Type: FULL

Expiry Date: 11-MAY-2015

Applicant: S. COOK

Site: 42, HOGARTH CLOSE, NEWPORT, NP19 7RE

Proposal: ERECTION OF TWO STOREY SIDE EXTENSION, BALCONY, NEW ACCESS AND DRIVEWAY

DECISION: REFUSED

1. CONSULTATIONS 1.1 None.

2. INTERNAL COUNCIL ADVICE 2.1 HEAD OF STREETSCENE AND CITY SERVICES (HIGHWAYS): No objection subject to the hedgerow being removed for a distance of 1.5m towards the adjacent footpath and the driveway being level or near level for the first 5m in the interest of maximising visibility.

2.2 HEAD OF STREETSCENE AND CITY SERVICES (TREE OFFICER): Advises that there is a large mature oak tree protected by TPO no 2/2015 on the boundary of 42 Hogarth Close, which is now owned by Newport City Homes. The proposed development would have severe consequences on the tree as its roots would be severed to lay the foundations and the canopy would also need to be cut back. This would impact on the tree’s health and spoil the shape of the canopy. Therefore objects to the positive determination of the application.

2.3 NEWPORT NORSE: No response.

3. REPRESENTATIONS 3.1 NEIGHBOURS: All properties sharing a common boundary were consulted (4 addresses). No responses were received.

4. RELEVANT SITE HISTORY 06/1036 ERECTION OF SIDE EXTENSION COMPRISING Granted with DOUBLE BEDROOMS AND BATHROOM Conditions

5. ASSESSMENT 5.1 This application seeks consent for the erection of a two storey side extension at an end of terrace property located at the end of a cul-de-sac known as Hogarth Close in the Beechwood ward. The property is a flat-roofed dwelling which is positioned forward of the other dwellings in the row of terraced properties. It is bordered by parkland to the east and has a large rear garden which abuts an access lane to the rear of the properties on the street. The proposals are very similar to what was granted in 2006 under permission 06/1036 which included an extension of exactly the same size, and a balcony and driveway in the same location. The consent was not implemented within the five year time period stipulated in the decision.

5.2 The extension would be constructed to the east side elevation of the dwelling and would measure 5.3m (width) x 7.1m (depth) x 5.6m (height). The extension would have a flat roof which not be set down from the main roof of the dwelling and it would be flush with the main dwelling at both the front and rear. The extension would provide a double garage at ground floor level and two additional bedrooms at first floor level. Three additional windows would be provided in the front elevation whilst two windows and a garage door would be installed in the rear elevation. A set of double patio doors and a balcony would be provided at first floor level in the eastern side elevation. The balcony would measure 1m (depth) x 2.6m (width) x 0.8m (height). It is finally proposed that a new access is created onto the rear access lane and a new driveway would stretch from the new garage to the access.

5.3 The materials on the external surfaces of the extension are proposed to match those on the host building. This would be achieved through the use of matching render, a matching flat Bitumin roof, and matching UPVC doors and windows.

5.4 It was determined in the assessment of the previous application that the extension is acceptable in design terms. Although the current Local Development Plan (LDP) supersedes the Unitary Development Plan that was in force at the time, the Council’s policies regarding the design of householder extension do not materially differ. The main issue identified by the case officer was that the extension would be flush with the main dwelling at the front whereas a setback of 1 metre is usually expected. The officer however reached the conclusion that the lack of a setback is acceptable as the property is part of a uniform row of terraced properties which has a continuous building line for substantial sections of the street. This assessment is agreed with as the proposals do not conflict with the main aim of the policy which is to prevent the appearance of terracing and a cramped form of development between two separate buildings. As the property is end-of-terrace and the appearance of the extension would match that of the host dwelling the proposals are not considered to have an adverse impact on the appearance of the dwelling or the row of properties. The proposals are, as such, considered to comply with Policy GP6 (Quality of Design) of the LDP.

5.5 The impact on the extension on neighbouring amenity, in terms of light, privacy and overbearing feel is also considered acceptable. As there are no properties bordering the side of the property where the extension would be sited and the extension would not protrude beyond the existing rear building line of the dwelling, the extension would not overshadow or provide any overlooking into neighbouring properties. Although a balcony is proposed to be constructed to the side elevation it would only provide views into the adjacent parkland and not any residential gardens. The proposals are therefore considered to comply with Policy GP2 (General Amenity) of the LDP.

5.6 The Head of Streetscene and City Services (Highways) is satisfied that the new access onto the rear lane would not result in any highway safety issues as visibility would be acceptable subject to a section of hedgerow being removed and the end section of the driveway being level. The proposals are therefore considered to comply with Policy GP4 (Highways and Accessibility) of the LDP.

5.7 There is a large mature oak tree located on the boundary of the property with the adjoining parkland which, since the previous application, has been made the subject of a Tree Preservation Order (TPO). The Head of Streetscene and City Services (Tree Officer) has stated that the proposed development would have severe consequences on the tree as its roots would be severed to lay the foundations and the canopy would also need to be cut back. This would impact on the tree’s health and have a detrimental impact on the shape of the canopy. Policy GP5 (Natural Environment) of the LDP states that proposals will only be acceptable where they do not result in an unacceptable loss of or harm to trees that have wildlife and/or amenity value. The proposals clearly conflict with this policy as they would result in harm to a tree which has been identified as worthy of retention owing to its aesthetic value and this renders the proposal unacceptable. Although the proposals were considered acceptable in terms of quality of design, neighbouring amenity and highway safety, this does not outweigh the harm that would be caused to the protected tree and the fact that the proposals clearly conflict with the policy.

7. CONCLUSION 7.1 Whilst the proposals are considered acceptable in design, neighbouring amenity and highway safety terms, this is outweighed by the fact that they would contravene policy GP5 of the LDP for reasons that they would have a detrimental impact on a tree which is considered worthy of retention.

8. DECISION:

REFUSED

01 The proposal would have a severe and detrimental impact on a tree protected by Tree Preservation Order 2/2015 and would therefore be contrary to Policy GP5 of the adopted Newport Local Development Plan.

NOTE TO APPLICANT

01 This decision relates to plan Nos: SC 01/01, SC 02/01,

02 The development plan for Newport is the Newport Local Development Plan 2011 – 2026 (Adopted January 2015). Policies GP2, GP4, GP5 and GP6 were relevant to the determination of this application.

APPLICATION DETAILS

No: 9 15/0161 Ward: CAERLEON

Type: FULL

Expiry Date: 05-APR-2015

Applicant: ANDY BROWN, NATURAL RESOURCES WALES

Site: LAND TO SOUTH OF TOLLGATE HOUSE, CAERLEON ROAD, NEWPORT

Proposal: FLOOD DEFENCE IMPROVEMENTS INCLUDING VEGETATION REMOVAL, REPOINTING THE BRIDGE APPROACH WALL, REPLACEMENT OF EXISTING WALL WITH A NEW CONCRETE STRUCTURE AND CONSTRUCTION OF A NEW CONCRETE LAY-BY

DECISION – GRANTED WITH CONDITIONS

1. CONSULTATIONS 1.1 WILDLIFE IN NEWPORT GROUP: No response.

1.2 NEWPORT ACCESS GROUP: No response.

1.3 GWENT WILDLIFE TRUST: No response.

1.4 NATURAL RESOURCES WALES: The works are proposed to improve flood defences in the area. The plans illustrate that existing defences, including the flood wall and earth embankment will be slightly raised and new demountables will be built to a level of 8m AOD. NRW have no objection to the application as submitted. However, the following advice is offered: European Protected Species - as per the recommendations of the Phase 1 Ecological Constraints Survey, a Bat Emergence/Re-entry Survey (October 2014) has been undertaken. This report concluded that no bats were using the trees at the time of survey. We advise that a further visual survey should be carried out prior to construction of the proposed works. Prior to felling or removing timber/trees with bat potential, a visual inspection for signs of bats must be undertaken. River Usk Designated site - the development is adjacent to the River Usk SAC and is therefore relevant to the Habitats Regulations. The Local Authority as a 'competent authority' under section 61 of the Habitats Regulations should therefore undertake an assessment of the likely significant effect of the work on the interests of the site. NRW has concluded that there will be no significant effect on the River Usk SAC as a result of these proposed works. In order to avoid adverse disruption to shad migration upstream along the River Usk, no piling likely to cause noise/vibration disturbance will be allowed close to the river during the April to June (inclusive) period. Otters are likely to be using the River Usk. We recommend that work is limited to daylight hours to minimise potential disturbance to otters. NRW encourage the retention of mature trees and hedgerow for their conservation and aesthetic value. Tree/hedgerow removal should not be undertaken during the months of March to June (inclusive) in order to protect breeding birds unless surveys indicate that breeding birds are not present.

Second round of comments following consultation on the Appropriate Assessment: NRW are of the opinion that subject to the attachment of the conditions as set out in the Appropriate Assessment, there will be no adverse impacts on the River Usk SAC.

1.5 GLAMORGAN GWENT ARCHAEOLOGICAL TRUST: Recommend that an archaeologist is present during any ground breaking operations to ensure that should any archaeological resource be discovered during the work, it can be recorded and any artefactual remains dealt with appropriately. Therefore recommend that a condition be attached to any permission granted requiring the applicant to conduct a watching brief during any ground breaking operations related to this application.

2. INTERNAL COUNCIL ADVICE 2.1 HEAD OF STREETSCENE AND CITY SERVICES (HIGHWAYS): The applicant proposes to provide flood defence improvements to Caerleon Road which will include the erection of demountable barrier system during a time of flood. Caerleon Road is an adopted highway and therefore the public have the right to pass and re-pass however the erection of the barriers would prevent this. The applicant has submitted a demountable defence proposal report which states that the defences will not be put in place until Caerleon Road is already flooded to a depth of 300mm. When flood waters are at this level it’s determined that the road would already be impassable and would have been closed by Newport City Council (as undertaken in previous flooding events). For the purposes of the planning application I am satisfied with the description of how the barrier system will be operated however the applicant must liaise with Streetscene within Newport City Council in regards to determining and agreeing an emergency closure procedure. The applicant has confirmed that the barriers are held in place by the weight of the water and therefore will not require any sub structure to be located within the carriageway. Most of the layby will be located outside of the adopted highway and therefore the extent of the adopted highway should be demarcated, I would suggest with an edging kerb, in order to determine the extent of liability. Conditions relating to construction management, submission of drawings of all the structural elements in the scheme and submission of all engineering construction details for all works within the adopted highway will be required should planning approval be granted. Subject to the above no objection is offered to the application.

2.2 HEAD OF STREETSCENE AND CITY SERVICES (ECOLOGY OFFICER): Offers no objection to the proposals.

2.3 HEAD OF STREETSCENE AND CITY SERVICES (DRAINAGE MANAGER): Offers no objection to the proposals. 2.4 HISTORIC BUILDINGS AND CONSERVATION OFFICER: The site lies within the Caerleon Conservation Area and in close proximity to two Grade II listed buildings: Caerleon Bridge and the Old Toll House. Whilst the character of the conservation area and the setting of the listed buildings will be affected by the proposed works, in my view this impact would be appropriately mitigated by the proposal to clad the new concrete wall in pennant stone to harmonise with the listed bridge and other nearby traditional boundary structures. It should be noted that the section of stone wall proposed for demolition is quite separate from the bridge itself and is of no particular historic interest. Any approval should be subject to a condition requiring the approval of a sample panel of the proposed stone cladding. 3. REPRESENTATIONS 3.1 NEIGHBOURS: All properties within 50m were consulted (9no dwellings) and a site notice was displayed. No response received.

3.2 COUNCILLOR GILES AND SULLER: Have shown an interest in the application and have expressed concerns about disruption to roads serving Caerleon. They have been advised of the recommendation and offer no objection.

4. RELEVANT SITE HISTORY

03/0986 CONSTRUCTION OF A NEW FLOOD DEFENCE Granted with BUND WITH ASSOCIATED RE-ROUTING OF Conditions DRAINAGE DITCHES AND CULVERTING PLUS CONTRACTOR`S SITE COMPOUND AND TEMPORARY REPLACEMENT PARKING FOR THE SHIP INN (AFFECTING PUBLIC RIGHT OF WAY 389/34)

5. ASSESSMENT 5.1 Natural Resources Wales have submitted an application for flood defence improvements including vegetation removal, repointing of bridge wall, replacement of existing wall with a new concrete structure and construction of a new concrete lay-by at land to south of Tollgate House, Caerleon Road. The site has an area of approximately 0.46 hectares.

5.2 The works are described as follows:

 Clear vegetation from 10m length of existing wall and re-point;  Clear vegetation and demolish 8m of existing masonry wall;  Construction of new reinforced concrete upstand wall and stone clad;  Remove 5.6m of hedgerow;  Remove barbed wire fence;  Re-profile grass verge;  New concrete slab along the western side of the B4596 Caerleon Road for the delivery of demountable barrier materials;  New layby area and kerb line along the eastern side of the B4596 Caerleon Road;  New reinforced concrete wall set into existing bank along the eastern side of the B4596 Caerleon Road;  New hard-standing for on-site temporary storage of demountable in advance of high tides;  New timber post and rail fence with pedestrian access gate;  The construction compound area will be located east of the proposed layby area, within the red-lined construction limits.

5.3 The site is located within the Caerleon Conservation Area and is ecologically and archaeologically sensitive. Policies SP3 Flood Risk, SP5 Countryside, GP1 General Development Principles, CE7 Conservation Areas and CE6 Archaeologically Sensitive Areas, of the Newport Local Development Plan are relevant to the determination of the application.

Policy SP3 states:

Newport’s coastal and riverside location necessitates that development be directed away from areas where flood risk is identified as a constraint and ensure that the risk of flooding is not increased elsewhere. Development will only be permitted in flood risk areas in accordance with national guidance. Where appropriate a detailed technical assessment will be required to ensure that the development is designed to cope with the threat and consequences of flooding over its lifetime. Sustainable solutions to manage flood risk should be prioritised.

5.4 Due to its proximity to the River Usk this part of Caerleon is prone to flooding. The proposed works are part of a series of flood defence improvements to protect Caerleon against recurring tidal impacts of the River Usk. Some of the overall flood defence improvements, such as a new flood defence bund and associated drainage along New Road were approved by the Council in 2003 and have been implemented.

5.5 The works proposed as part of this application would enable the installation of a temporary demountable barrier across the B4596 Caerleon Road to protect Caerleon from tides predicted to be around 8m high. The demountable barriers would be installed by Natural Resources Wales in the event of a flood warning and would take approximately 30 minutes to install and would remain in place for up to three hours. While the B4596 Caerleon Road is temporarily blocked during flood conditions, traffic would be diverted to New Road, leading to B4596, which in turn connects to the surrounding road network. A preliminary traffic analysis has been conducted and the effect of travel time to and from the key community providers such as the Royal Gwent Hospital, Malpas Road Fire Station and the Newport Police Station, would be minimal.

5.6 Historic Interests As well as being within the Caerleon Conservation Area, the site is in close proximity to two Grade II listed buildings: Caerleon Bridge and the Old Toll House. Policy CE5 of the Development Plan states: Buildings and sites of local significance for their architectural or historic interest will be included on a local list and should be protected from demolition or inappropriate development. 5.7 The Conservation Officer has been consulted with regard to the proposals and states: Whilst the character of the conservation area and the setting of the listed buildings will be affected by the proposed works, in my view this impact would be appropriately mitigated by the proposal to clad the new concrete wall in pennant stone to harmonise with the listed bridge and other nearby traditional boundary structures. It should be noted that the section of stone wall proposed for demolition is quite separate from the bridge itself and is of no particular historic interest. Any approval should be subject to a condition requiring the approval of a sample panel of the proposed stone cladding. 5.8 It is therefore not considered that the character of the Conservation Area or the setting of the Listed Buildings would be adversely affected by the proposals. 5.9 Archaeological Interests

Glamorgan Gwent Archaeological Trust has confirmed that they offer no objection to the proposals but they recommend that an archaeologist is present during any ground breaking operations to ensure that should any archaeological resource be discovered during the work, it can be recorded and any artefactual remains dealt with appropriately. This can be dealt with by way of a condition.

5.9.1 Highways

The proposals include works within the highway and would have traffic implications when the road is closed. However, the demountable barriers would only be deployed and the road closed during times of flooding. The road would have been closed by the Council at these times anyway.

5.9.2 In response to the proposals the Head of Streetscene (Highways) initially requested some further information regarding the operation of the demountable barrier system and traffic management at such time that Caerleon Road is closed. Further information including a road traffic management plan has been provided. The Head of Streetscene has reviewed the information and confirms no objection is offered and offers the following comments:

The applicant proposes to provide flood defence improvements to Caerleon Road which will include the erection of demountable barrier system during a time of flood. Caerleon Road is an adopted highway and therefore the public have the right to pass and re-pass however the erection of the barriers would prevent this. The applicant has submitted demountable defence proposal report which states that the defences will not be put in place until Caerleon Road is already flooded to a depth of 300mm. When flood waters are at this level it’s determined that the road would already be impassable and would have been closed by Newport City Council (as undertaken in previous flooding events).

For the purposes of the planning application I am satisfied with the description of how the barrier system will be operated. However, the applicant must liaise with Streetscene with regards to determining and agreeing an emergency closer procedure.

The applicant has confirmed that the barriers are held in place by the weight of the water and therefore will not require any sub structure to be located within the carriageway.

Part of the proposed works will take place within the adopted highway which will require the applicant to enter into a section 111 agreement with Newport City Council should planning approval be granted.

Most of the layby will be located outside of the adopted highway and therefore the extent of the adopted highway should be demarcated, in order to determine the extent of liability.

Conditions relating to construction management, submission of drawings of all the structural elements in the scheme and submission of all engineering construction details for all works within the adopted highway will be required should planning approval be granted

It is considered that subject to suitable conditions relating to construction management as requested by the Head of Streetscene the proposals would not result in detrimental impacts to the highway safety. Whilst the Head of Streetscene has requested a condition requiring the submission of drawings of all the structural elements in the scheme and submission of all engineering construction details for all works within the adopted highway, works within the adopted highway will have to be to adoptable standards and such details are required by Highways own legislation. As such it is not considered that this should be duplicated by Planning.

5.9.3 Ecology

The application site is within close proximity to the River Usk Special Area of Conservation (SAC). The Council’s Ecology Officer has been consulted with regard to the proposals and confirms no objection is offered.

5.9.4 Appropriate Assessment

As the competent Authority an Appropriate Assessment has been undertaken to fully assess the ecological implications of the proposals. The River Usk is considered to be one of the best examples of a near natural river system in England and Wales. The River Usk is designated as a SAC as it supports the species of Allis Shad, Twaite Shad, Bullhead, River Lamprey, Sea Lamprey, Atlantic Salmon and Otter. The range of plants and animals reflects a transition from nutrient poor to naturally rich. It was notified to protect a wide range of habitats and features. It also acts as an important wildlife corridor, an essential migration route and a key breeding area for nationally and internationally important species, including otter. The conservation objectives of the River Usk are set out in Appendix A.

The site has an area of approximately 0.46 hectares. At its closest point the site is approximately 15m away from the river bank with most of the proposed works much further from the river than this.

There is therefore potential for the works to create disturbance to otters using the River Usk SAC during the construction phase. As such it will be necessary to limit work to during daylight hours only so as to minimise disruption.

There is also potential for the disruption to shad migration upstream along the River Usk, during the construction phase. In order to minimise this no piling likely to cause noise/vibration disturbance will be allowed close to the river during the April to June (inclusive) period.

Due to the proximity of the site to the River Usk the proposed works and access may cause pollutants to enter the river. In order to prevent this it will be necessary to impose pollution control measures to minimise the likelihood of pollutants entering the water.

It is therefore recommended that should planning permission be granted conditions are imposed to provide suitable protection (Conditions 1-3).

Combination Effects The Habitats Regulations requires an Appropriate Assessment to include an in- combination assessment. There are no other developments in the surrounding area with an extant consent or that are under construction that would be likely to have an in-combination affect.

Conclusion of Appropriate Assessment With the inclusion of appropriate conditions it is considered that any adverse effects on the River Usk SAC associated with the development can be satisfactorily avoided.

Appropriate Assessment Conditions

01 No works other than the creation of the layby shall take place outside of daylight hours. Reasons: In the interests of safeguarding the special features of the River Usk SAC.

02 No piling or any other foundation designs using penetrative methods shall be permitted from April to June (inclusive). Reasons: In the interests of safeguarding the special features of the River Usk SAC.

03 Prior to the commencement of the works hereby approved, full details of proposed pollution control measures to minimise the likelihood of pollutants entering the water of the River Usk shall be submitted to the Local Planning Authority and written approval received. The development shall be carried out fully in accordance with the approved details. Reasons: In the interests of safeguarding the special features of the River Usk SAC.

Please note: the order of these conditions may appear differently on the final decision notice.

4. CONSERVATION OBJECTIVES OF THE RIVER USK SAC

Background to Conservation Objectives:

(a) Outline of the legal context and purpose of conservation objectives.

Conservation objectives are required by the 1992 ‘Habitats’ Directive (92/43/EEC). The aim of the Habitats Directives is the maintenance, or where appropriate the restoration of the ‘favourable conservation status’ of habitats and species features for which SACs and SPAs are designated (see Box 1).

In the broadest terms, 'favourable conservation status' means a feature is in satisfactory condition and all the things needed to keep it that way are in place for the foreseeable future. CCW considers that the concept of favourable conservation status provides a practical and legally robust basis for conservation objectives for Natura 2000 and Ramsar sites.

Achieving these objectives requires appropriate management and the control of factors that may cause deterioration of habitats or significant disturbance to species.

As well as the overall function of communication, Conservation objectives have a number of specific roles:

Conservation planning and management.

The conservation objectives guide management of sites, to maintain or restore the habitats and species in favourable condition.

Assessing plans and projects.

Article 6(3) of the ‘Habitats’ Directive requires appropriate assessment of proposed plans and projects against a site's conservation objectives. Subject to certain exceptions, plans or projects may not proceed unless it is established that they will not adversely affect the integrity of sites. This role for testing plans and projects also applies to the review of existing decisions and consents.

Monitoring and reporting.

The conservation objectives provide the basis for assessing the condition of a feature and the status of factors that affect it. CCW uses ‘performance indicators’ within the conservation objectives, as the basis for monitoring and reporting. Performance indicators are selected to provide useful information about the condition of a feature and the factors that affect it.

The conservation objectives in this document reflect CCW’s current information and understanding of the site and its features and their importance in an international context. The conservation objectives are subject to review by CCW in light of new knowledge.

(b) Format of the conservation objectives

There is one conservation objective for each feature listed in part 3. Each conservation objective is a composite statement representing a site-specific description of what is considered to be the favourable conservation status of the feature. These statements apply to a whole feature as it occurs within the whole plan area, although Section 3.2 sets out their relevance to individual management units.

Each conservation objective consists of the following two elements:

1 Vision for the feature

2 Performance indicators

As a result of the general practice developed and agreed within the UK Conservation Agencies, conservation objectives include performance indicators, the selection of which should be informed by JNCC guidance on Common Standards Monitoring1.

There is a critical need for clarity over the role of performance indicators within the conservation objectives. A conservation objective, because it includes the vision for the feature, has meaning and substance independently of the performance indicators, and is more than the sum of the performance indicators. The performance indicators are simply what make the conservation objectives measurable, and are thus part of, not a substitute for, the conservation objectives. Any feature attribute identified in the performance indicators should be represented in the vision for the feature, but not all elements of the vision for the feature will necessarily have corresponding performance indicators.

As well as describing the aspirations for the condition of the feature, the Vision section of each conservation objective contains a statement that the factors necessary to maintain those desired conditions are under control. Subject to technical, practical and resource constraints, factors which have an important influence on the condition of the feature are identified in the performance indicators.

The ecological status of the water course is a major determinant of FCS for all features. The required conservation objective for the water course is defined below.

4.1 Conservation Objective for the water course

The capacity of the habitats in the SAC to support each feature at near-natural population levels, as determined by predominantly unmodified ecological and hydromorphological processes and characteristics, should be maintained as far as possible, or restored where necessary.

The ecological status of the water environment should be sufficient to maintain a stable or increasing population of each feature. This will include elements of water quantity and quality, physical habitat and community composition and structure. It is anticipated that these limits will concur with the relevant standards used by the Review of Consents process given in Annexes 1-3.

Flow regime, water quality and physical habitat should be maintained in, or restored as far as possible to, a near-natural state, in order to support the coherence of ecosystem structure and function across the whole area of the SAC.

All known breeding, spawning and nursery sites of species features should be maintained as suitable habitat as far as possible, except where natural processes cause them to change.

Flows, water quality, substrate quality and quantity at fish spawning sites and nursery areas will not be depleted by abstraction, discharges, engineering or gravel extraction activities or other impacts to the extent that these sites are damaged or destroyed.

The river planform and profile should be predominantly unmodified. Physical modifications having an adverse effect on the integrity of the SAC, including, but not limited to, revetments on active alluvial river banks using stone, concrete or waste materials, unsustainable extraction of gravel, addition or release of excessive quantities of fine sediment, will be avoided.

River habitat SSSI features should be in favourable condition. In the case of the Usk Tributaries SSSI, the SAC habitat is not underpinned by a river habitat SSSI feature. In this case, the target is to maintain the characteristic physical features of the river channel, banks and riparian zone.

1 Web link: http://www.jncc.gov.uk/page-2199

Artificial factors impacting on the capability of each species feature to occupy the full extent of its natural range should be modified where necessary to allow passage, eg weirs, bridge sills, acoustic barriers.

Natural factors such as waterfalls, which may limit the natural range of a species feature or dispersal between naturally isolated populations, should not be modified.

Flows during the normal migration periods of each migratory fish species feature will not be depleted by abstraction to the extent that passage upstream to spawning sites is hindered.

Flow objectives for assessment points in the Usk Catchment Abstraction Management Strategy will be agreed between EA and CCW as necessary. It is anticipated that these limits will concur with the standards used by the Review of Consents process given in Annex 1 of this document.

Levels of nutrients, in particular phosphate, will be agreed between EA and CCW for each Water Framework Directive water body in the Usk SAC, and measures taken to maintain nutrients below these levels. It is anticipated that these limits will concur with the standards used by the Review of Consents process given in Annex 2 of this document.

Levels of water quality parameters that are known to affect the distribution and abundance of SAC features will be agreed between EA and CCW for each Water Framework Directive water body in the Usk SAC, and measures taken to maintain pollution below these levels. It is anticipated that these limits will concur with the standards used by the Review of Consents process given in Annex 3 of this document.

Potential sources of pollution not addressed in the Review of Consents, such as contaminated land, will be considered in assessing plans and projects.

Levels of suspended solids will be agreed between EA and CCW for each Water Framework Directive water body in the Usk SAC. Measures including, but not limited to, the control of suspended sediment generated by agriculture, forestry and engineering works, will be taken to maintain suspended solids below these levels.

4.2 Conservation Objective for Features 1-5: - Sea lamprey Petromyzon marinus (EU Species Code: 1095); - Brook lamprey Lampetra planeri (EU Species Code: 1096); - River lamprey Lampetra fluviatilis (EU Species Code: 1099); - Twaite shad Alosa fallax (EU Species Code: 1103); - Allis shad Alosa alosa (EU Species Code: 1102); - Atlantic salmon Salmo salar (EU Species Code: 1106); - Bullhead Cottus gobio (EU Species Code: 1163)

Vision for features 1-5

The vision for this feature is for it to be in a favourable conservation status, where all of the following conditions are satisfied:

FCS component Supporting information/current knowledge The conservation objective for the water course as defined in 4.1 above must be met The population of the feature in the SAC is stable Refer to Sections 5.1 to 5.5 for current assessments or increasing over the long term. of feature populations

Entrainment in water abstractions directly impacts on population dynamics through reduced recruitment and survival rates.

Fish stocking can adversely affect population dynamics through competition, predation, and alteration of population genetics and introduction of disease. The natural range of the feature in the SAC is Some reaches of the Usk SAC are more suitable for neither being reduced nor is likely to be reduced some features than others eg the Senni has for the foreseeable future. The natural range is important populations of brook/river lamprey and taken to mean those reaches where salmon but is not used by shad due to its small size predominantly suitable habitat for each life stage and distance from the estuary. These differences FCS component Supporting information/current knowledge exists over the long term. Suitable habitat is influence the management priorities for individual defined in terms of near-natural hydrological and reaches and are used to define the site units geomorphological processes and forms eg. described in Section 3.2. Further details of feature suitable flows to allow upstream migration, depth habitat suitability are given in Section 5. In general, of water and substrate type at spawning sites, management for one feature is likely to be and ecosystem structure and functions eg. food sympathetic for the other features present in the supply (as described in Sections 2.2 and 5). river, provided that the components of favourable Suitable habitat need not be present throughout conservation status for the water course given in the SAC but where present must be secured for Section 4.1 are secured. the foreseeable future. Natural factors such as waterfalls may limit the natural range of The characteristic channel morphology provides the individual species. Existing artificial influences diversity of water depths, current velocities and on natural range that cause an adverse effect on substrate types necessary to fulfil the habitat site integrity, such as physical barriers to requirements of the features. The close proximity of migration, will be assessed in view of 4.2.4 different habitats facilitates movement of fish to new preferred habitats with age. The presence of hard bank revetments in a number of active alluvial reaches eg through Brecon and upstream of Abergavenny, adversely affects the processes that maintain suitable habitat for the SAC features.

Hydrological processes in the Usk are currently affected by large abstractions, especially at Prioress Mill and Brecon Weir. However, there are many smaller abstractions not considered to cause a problem at present.

Shad and salmon migration can be affected by acoustic barriers and by high sediment loads, which can originate from a number of sources including construction works. There is, and will probably continue to be, a Allis and Twaite shad are affected by range sufficiently large habitat to maintain the feature’s contraction due to artificial barriers to migration in the population in the SAC on a long-term basis. Usk. It is likely that this loss of habitat affects their maintenance in the SAC on a long-term basis.

Performance indicators for features 1-5

The performance indicators are part of the conservation objective, not a substitute for it. Assessment of plans and projects must be based on the entire conservation objective, not just the performance indicators.

Attribute Specified Limits Comments Relevant Unit[s] Sea lamprey Petromyzon marinus : Performance indicators for feature condition (a) Distribution Suitable habitat This attribute provides evidence of successful 1 - 5 within catchment adjacent to or spawning and distribution trends. Spawning downstream of known sites known to have been used within the spawning sites should previous 10 years and historical sites contain Petromyzon considered still to have suitable habitat, are ammocoetes. shown in Annex 4. Spawning locations may move within and between sites due to natural processes or new sites may be discovered over time. Silt beds downstream of all sites identified in Annex 4 will be sampled for presence or absence of ammocoetes. Where apparently suitable habitat at any site is unoccupied feature condition will be considered unfavourable. (b) Ammocoete Ammocoetes should be This standard CSM attribute establishes a 2 - 5 density present in at least four minimum occupied spawning range, within any sampling sites each not sampling period, of 15km. In the Usk, spawning less than 5km apart. sites within units 2 to 5 will be assessed against this attribute. Overall catchment Although this attribute is not used in CSM for mean >0.1m-2 sea lamprey, baseline monitoring in the Usk gave an overall catchment mean of 2.27 (Harvey & Cowx 2003)1 ammocoetes m-2 in suitable habitat2, therefore Attribute Specified Limits Comments Relevant Unit[s] 0.1 m-2 is a conservative threshold value for unfavourable condition. Brook lamprey Lampetra planeri and River lamprey Lampetra fluviatilis : Performance indicators for feature condition (a) Age/size Samples < 50 This gives an indication of recruitment to the 2 - 10 structure of ammocoetes ~ 2 size population over the several years preceding the ammocoete classes survey. Failure of one or more years recruitment population Samples > 50 may be due to either short or long term impacts ammocoetes ~ at least or natural factors such as natural flow variability 3 size classes therefore would trigger further investigation of the cause rather than leading automatically to an unfavourable condition assessment. (b) Distribution of Present at not less that The combined natural range of these two 2 -10 ammocoetes 2/3 of sites surveyed species in terms of ammocoete distribution within catchment within natural range includes all units above the tidal limit ie all except unit 1.

Presence at less than 2/3 of sample sites will lead to an unfavourable condition assessment. No reduction in Reduction in distribution will be defined as distribution of absence of ammocoetes from all samples within ammocoetes a single unit or sub-unit/tributary, and will lead to an unfavourable condition assessment. (c) Ammocoete Optimal habitat: Optimal habitat comprises beds of stable fine 2 - 10 density >10m-2 sediment or sand >15cm deep, low water Overall catchment velocity and the presence of organic detritus, as well as, in the Usk, shallower sediment, often mean: >5m-2 patchy and interspersed among coarser substrate. Twaite shad Alosa fallax and Allis shad Alosa alosa : Performance indicators for feature condition (a) Spawning No decline in spawning Spawning distribution is assessed by kick 1 - 5 distribution distribution sampling for eggs and/or observations of spawning adults. A representative sample of sites within units 2 to 5 will be monitored at 3 yearly intervals. Absence from any site in 2 consecutive surveys will result in an unfavourable condition assessment. Performance indicators for factors affecting the feature (a) Flow Targets are set in Targets equate to those levels agreed and used 1 - 5 relation to river/reach in the Review of Consents (see Annex 1). Shad type(s) are particularly sensitive to flow. The ideal regime is one of relatively high flows in March- May, to stimulate migration and allow maximum penetration of adults upstream, followed by rather low flows in June-September, which ensures that the juveniles are not washed prematurely into saline waters and grow rapidly under warmer conditions. The release of freshets to encourage salmonid migration should therefore be discouraged on shad rivers during this period. Atlantic salmon Salmo salar: Performance indicators for feature condition (a) Adult run size Conservation Limit CSM guidance states: Total run size at least All complied with at least matching an agreed reference level, including a four years in five (see seasonal pattern of migration characteristic of 5.4) the river and maintenance of the multi-sea- winter component.

As there is no fish counter in the Usk, adult run size is calculated using rod catch data. Further details can be found in the EA Usk Salmon Action Plan. (b) Juvenile Expected densities for CSM guidance states: These should not differ 6 – 10 Attribute Specified Limits Comments Relevant Unit[s] densities each sample site using significantly from those expected for the river HABSCORE type/reach under conditions of high physical and chemical quality.

Assessed using electro fishing data. Performance indicators for factors affecting the feature Water quality (a) Biological Biological GQA class A This is the class required in the CSM guidance 6 - 10 quality for Atlantic salmon, the most sensitive feature. (b) Chemical RE1 It has been agreed through the Review of All quality Consents process that RE1 will be used throughout the SAC [see Annex 3]. Hydromorphology (a) Flow Targets are set in Targets equate to those levels agreed and used All relation to river/reach in the Review of Consents [see Annex 1]. type(s) Bullhead Cottus gobio : Performance indicators for feature condition (a) Adult densities No less than 0.2 m-2 in CSM guidance states that densities should be 2 – 10 sampled reaches no less than 0.2 m -2 in upland rivers (source altitude >100m) and 0.5 m-2 in lowland rivers (source altitude ÿm). A significant reduction in densities may also lead to an unfavourable condition assessment. (b) Distribution Bullheads should be Suitable reaches will be mapped using fluvial 2 - 10 present in all suitable audit information validated using the results of reaches. As a population monitoring. Absence of bullheads minimum, no decline in from any of these reaches, or from any distribution from current previously occupied reach, revealed by on- going monitoring will result in an unfavourable condition assessment. (c) Young-of-year fish This gives an indication of successful 2 - 10 Reproduction/age should occur at recruitment and a healthy population structure. structure densities at least equal Failure of this attribute on its own would not lead to adults to an unfavourable condition assessment.

4.3 Conservation Objective for Feature 6: - European otter Lutra lutra (EU Species Code: 1355)

Vision for feature 6 The vision for this feature is for it to be in a favourable conservation status, where all of the following conditions are satisfied:

FCS component Supporting information/current knowledge The population of otters in the SAC is stable or Refer to Section 5.9 for current assessment of increasing over the long term and reflects the feature population natural carrying capacity of the habitat within the SAC, as determined by natural levels of prey abundance and associated territorial behaviour. The natural range of otters in the SAC is neither Survey information shows that otters are widely being reduced nor is likely to be reduced for the distributed in the Usk catchment. While the breeding foreseeable future. The natural range is taken to population in the Usk is not currently considered to mean those reaches that are potentially suitable limited by the availability of suitable breeding sites, to form part of a breeding territory and/or provide there is some uncertainty over the number of routes between breeding territories. The whole breeding territories which the SAC is capable of area of the Usk SAC is considered to form supporting given near-natural levels of prey potentially suitable breeding habitat for otters. abundance. The size of breeding territories may vary depending on prey abundance. The population The decline in eel populations may be having an size should not be limited by the availability of adverse effect on the population of otters in the Usk. suitable undisturbed breeding sites. Where these are insufficient they should be created through habitat enhancement and where necessary the provision of artificial holts. No otter breeding site FCS component Supporting information/current knowledge should be subject to a level of disturbance that could have an adverse effect on breeding success. Where necessary, potentially harmful levels of disturbance must be managed. The safe movement and dispersal of individuals Restrictions on the movement of otters around the around the SAC is facilitated by the provision, SAC, and between adjoining sites are currently a where necessary, of suitable riparian habitat, and particular concern in the reach through Newport as a underpasses, ledges, fencing etc at road bridges result of a continued decrease in undisturbed and other artificial barriers. suitable riparian habitat.

Performance indicators for feature 6

Specified Limits Comments Relevant Unit[s] Performance indicators for feature condition (a) Distribution Otter signs present at Ref: CCW Environmental Monitoring Report No All 90% of Otter Survey of 19 (2005)3 Wales sites (b) Breeding 2 reports of cub/family Ref: CCW Environmental Monitoring Report No All activity sightings at least 1 year 19 (2005)3 in 6 (c) Actual and No decline in number Ref: CCW Environmental Monitoring Report No All potential breeding and quality of mapped 19 (2005)3 sites breeding sites in sub- In the Usk catchment, 77 actual or potential catchments (see Ref) breeding sites have been identified, distributed throughout the catchment on the main river and tributaries.

7. CONCLUSION 7.1 The proposals would provide flood alleviation measures. It is not considered that the proposals would result in adverse highways, ecological or conservation impacts. The application is granted subject to the following conditions.

8. DECISION

GRANTED WITH CONDITIONS

01 The development shall be implemented in accordance with the following plans and documents: 5131888-ATK-XX-ZZ-DR-C-0103 Revision P1, 5131888—ATK-XX-ZZ-DR-C- 0101 Revision P1, 5131888-ATK-XX-ZZ-DR-C-0102 Revision P1, Environmental Survey and Assessment Survey, Archaeological Report, Traffic Management Plan, Demountable barrier information. Reason: In the interests of clarity and to ensure the development complies with the submitted plans and documents on which this decision was based.

Pre- commencement conditions

02 Prior to the commencement of development hereby approved a construction management plan shall be submitted to the Local Planning Authority and written approval received. The plan shall include such details as contractor compound/parking, wheel wash facilities and dust suppression. The development shall be undertaken in accordance with the approved details. Reason: In the interests of highway safety and residential amenity.

03 The developer shall ensure that a suitably qualified archaeologist is present during the undertaking of any ground disturbing works in the development area, so that an archaeological watching brief can be conducted. The archaeological watching brief shall be undertaken to the standards of the Institute for Archaeologists. The Local Planning Authority shall be informed, in writing, at least two weeks prior to the commencement of the development of the name of the said archaeologist and no work shall begin until the Local Planning Authority has confirmed, in writing, that the proposed archaeologist is suitable. A copy of the watching brief report shall be submitted to the Local Planning Authority within two months of the fieldwork being completed by the archaeologist. Reason: To identify and record any features of archaeological interest discovered during the works, in order to mitigate the impact of the works on the archaeological resource.

04 Prior to the commencement of the works hereby approved, full details of proposed pollution control measures to minimise the likelihood of pollutants entering the water of the River Usk shall be submitted to the Local Planning Authority and written approval received. The development shall be carried out fully in accordance with the approved details. Reasons: In the interests of safeguarding the special features of the River Usk SAC.

Pre-Construction Conditions

05 Prior to the construction of the wall, a sample panel (1m x1m size) of the stone cladding to be used to front the approved walling shall be submitted to the Local Planning Authority and written approval received. The development shall be carried out in accordance with the approved details. Reason: To preserve the character of the conservation area and the setting of the listed buildings.

General conditions

06 No works other than the creation of the layby shall take place outside of daylight hours. Reasons: In the interests of safeguarding the special features of the River Usk SAC.

07 No piling or any other foundation designs using penetrative methods shall be permitted from April to June (inclusive). Reasons: In the interests of safeguarding the special features of the River Usk SAC.

NOTE TO APPLICANT

01 The development plan for Newport is the Newport Local Development Plan 2011 – 2026 (Adopted January 2015). Policies SP3, SP5, GP1, GP4, CE5, CE6 and CE7 were relevant to the determination of this application.

02 The proposed development (including any demolition) has been screened under the Environmental Impact Assessment Regulations and it is considered that an Environmental Statement is not required.

03 The applicant is advised that this site may contain Japanese Knotweed, an invasive plant, the spread of which is prohibited under the Wildlife and Countryside Act 1981. Care should be taken to prevent its spread during any operations relating to this proposal. It is important that any soil or hardcore that is imported onto the site is free of the seeds/roots/stem of the invasive plant Japanese Knotweed, the spread of which is prohibited under the Wildlife and Countryside Act 1981.

03 Section 16(2) of the Town and Country Planning (Listed Building and Conservation Areas) Act 1990 was relevant to the determination of this application.

04 The applicant is advised to contact the Streetscene department within Newport City Council on 01633 656656 with regards to determining and agreeing an emergency closer procedure and with regards to entering into a section 111 agreement for works in the highway demarcating the extent of the adopted highway.

05 The applicant is advised that confirmation in writing of the post construction ownership and maintenance responsibilities must be provided in writing to the Head of Streetscene (Highways).

06 On behalf of Natural Resources Wales the applicant is advised that a further visual bat survey should be carried out prior to felling or removing timber/trees with bat potential. Bats are a European Protected Species and it is a criminal offence to disturb them. Natural Resources Wales should be contacted immediately if bats are present or evidence there is evidence of bats.

07 Tree/hedgerow removal should not be undertaken during the months of March to June (inclusive) in order to protect breeding birds unless surveys indicate that breeding birds are not present.

APPLICATION DETAILS

No: 10 15/0306 Ward: CAERLEON

Type: FULL

Expiry Date: 20-MAY-2015

Applicant: J. WALMSLEY

Site: 3, TAN HOUSE DRIVE, CARLEON, NEWPORT, NP18 1BS

Proposal: FIRST FLOOR EXTENSION OVER EXISTING FRONT ENTRANCE

DECISION: REFUSED

1. CONSULTATIONS 1.1 None.

2. INTERNAL COUNCIL ADVICE 2.1 HEAD OF REGENERATION, INVESTMENT AND HOUSING (CONSERVATION OFFICER): No objection – does not consider that the proposals would have a material impact on the historic character of the nearby Caerleon Conservation Area or the setting of any nearby heritage assets due their relatively modest nature and the modernity of the host building.

3. REPRESENTATIONS 3.1 NEIGHBOURS: All properties sharing a common boundary and opposite were consulted (5 addresses). Three responses were received making the following comments: - The proposal would upset the symmetry of the street scene and cause architectural discord to the frontage of the semi-detached properties. - The style and architecture of the row of houses are of a typical 1960s design, possibly the last distinct style built before the onset of the 70s, 80s and 90s when it became fashionable to build neo-Georgian, neo-Edwardian, neo-Victorian etc. - The window that is at 90 degrees to the bedroom at 1 Tan House Drive would provide overlooking that would result in a serious loss of privacy. Obscuring the glass will only be effective if the windows cannot open. - The window would channel vented air into the bedroom. - The loss of existing views from the bedroom window would adversely affect residential amenity at 1 Tan House Drive. The extension would put the bedroom window in a ‘corridor’ and reduce the light available considerably. - Structural and water damage concerns. - The intended structure would be completely out of character with other properties in the area.

3.2 CAERLEON CIVIC SOCIETY: No response.

4. RELEVANT SITE HISTORY 4.1 None

5. ASSESSMENT 5.1 This application seeks consent for the construction of a first floor front extension to a semi- detached dwelling at the entrance to Tan House Drive, a cul-de-sac located just outside of the Caerleon Conservation area.

5.2 Properties 1-11 Tan House Drive form a row of three pairs of semi-detached dwellings which have a uniform appearance and are of a fairly modern design. The properties are all white rendered and front elevations of each pair of semis comprises two wings on either side of a central section with wood cladding on the upper storey and a stone cladded lower storey with a canopy roof above. The applicant proposes to erect a bathroom extension above the canopy which separates the two storeys. The structure would adjoin both the wood cladded section of the façade and the side of the wing and would have a flat roof, measuring 2m (depth) x 1.5m (width) x 3m (height). The structure would project further from the front elevation than the existing canopy and would be flush with the wing. It is proposed that it would be supported by a pillar. The external materials would consist of wood cladding to match the existing dwelling and a powder coated aluminium window in the side elevation. As the extension would partly be forward of an existing window in the front elevation, which measures 1.2m x 1m, the applicant proposes to install a smaller window next to the side of the extension which would measure 0.7m x 1m.

5.3 The Council considers front extensions, in principle, to be unacceptable unless it can be demonstrated that the design would not have a harmful impact on the character and appearance of the building and the street scene. In this case this cannot be demonstrated. Although the property does not face oncoming traffic using the Caerleon one way system, it is clearly visible to traffic entering Tan House Drive, the residents of properties on the opposite side of the road, and pedestrians using Castle Street, a main thoroughfare through the village. It is therefore considered that the property occupies a prominent location within the street scene. The frontages of the properties in the row meanwhile have been largely unaltered with the exception of single storey side extensions to the properties on either end of the row, and therefore the properties form a rhythmic street scene. Owing to its box shaped design it is considered that the extension would represent an alien and discordant feature that would not relate well to the host dwelling. Its presence would also result in an unfortunate asymmetry between the two adjoining semis, particularly as the window in the upper storey would have to be replaced by a smaller window which would not match the size and location of the corresponding window on the adjoining property. The structure would also appear dominant in nature as it would extend beyond the existing canopy roof and would be flush with the front wing. Therefore as a result of the prominent location of the property and the design of the extension, it is considered that the development would have a significantly adverse impact on the character and appearance of the property and the row of dwellings which would be detrimental to visual amenity. The development could also set a precedent by sanctioning future front extensions to other properties in the row. This would be undesirable as none of the existing properties have been extended to the front and the appearance of the facades contributes positively to the character of the buildings. In light of the above, the proposal is considered to be contrary to Policy GP6 (Quality of Design) of the Newport Local Development Plan (LDP).

5.4 Whilst neighbours have raised concerns that the development would impact upon their amenity, Officers are not convinced that this impact would be unacceptable enough to warrant refusal. The established test in determining whether a proposal would unacceptably deprive light from a neighbouring property is whether the structure would encroach beyond both a vertical and horizontal 45 degree line drawn from the centre-point of the neighbour’s protected window. In this case the extension encroaches beyond the horizontal line but not the vertical line and therefore the loss of light would not be to such an extent to render the proposals unacceptable. Turning to privacy, whilst the window in the side elevation of the extension would face No. 1 Tan House Drive it would face the side wall of the wing, in which there are no windows, and not provide direct views into any protected windows at this dwelling. As the extension would serve a bathroom it would anyway be expected that the glazing would be obscured. Although the extension would be positioned very close to No. 1, its presence would not result in an overbearing outlook for the neighbour as it would not be positioned in front of any of their windows. The proposal is therefore considered to comply with Policy GP2 (General Amenity) of the LDP.

5.5 Whilst the proposal is considered to have an acceptable impact on neighbouring amenity, this does not outweigh the earlier conclusion reached with regards to the design of the extension which renders the proposal unacceptable.

7. CONCLUSION 7.1 The extension would fail to relate well to the host dwelling and would unbalance the symmetrical appearance of the pair of semi-detached dwellings. This would be detrimental to the character and appearance of the dwelling and the row of semi-detached properties in which it is located. Planning permission is therefore refused.

9. DECISION: 10. REFUSED

01 The extension would fail to relate well to the host dwelling and would unbalance the symmetrical appearance of the pair of semi-detached dwellings to the detriment of the character and appearance of the dwelling and the row of semi-detached properties in which it is located. This is contrary to Policy GP6 of the Newport Local Development Plan 2011- 2026.

NOTE TO APPLICANT

01 This decision relates to plan Nos: P02, P03, P04, P05, P06, P07.

02 The development plan for Newport is the Newport Local Development Plan 2011-26 (Adopted January 2015). Policies GP2 and GP6 were relevant to the determination of this application.

APPLICATION DETAILS

No: 11 15/0235 Ward: GAER

Type: FULL

Expiry Date: 06-MAY-2015

Applicant: J MURRAY

Site: 34, STELVIO PARK DRIVE, NEWPORT, NP20 3EJ

Proposal: SINGLE STOREY SIDE AND REAR EXTENSION.

DECISION GRANTED WITH CONDITIONS

1. CONSULTATIONS 1.1 DWR CYMRU WELSH WATER: Advises that the applicant contacts Dwr Cymru Welsh Water to establish

2. INTERNAL COUNCIL ADVICE 2.1 HEAD OF STREETSCENE AND CITY SERVICES (HIGHWAYS): No objection.

3. REPRESENTATIONS 3.1 NEIGHBOURS: All properties with a common boundary (four addresses) have been consulted. No responses have been received.

4. RELEVANT SITE HISTORY None.

5. ASSESSMENT 5.1 This application seeks permission for the erection of a single storey side and rear extension at the semi-detached property in the Gaer Ward.

5.2 The side element of the proposed extension would measure 2.3 metres in width and 3.7 metres in length. The rear extension would measure 3.8 metres in width and 6.3 metres in length. The site is slightly sloping resulting in the maximum height of the ridge of the pitched roof being 5.95 metres in height, 4.5 metres to the eaves at the rear and 4.4 metres to the ridge and 3.2 metres to the eaves when viewed from the front.

5.3 No windows are proposed in the south-east side elevation of the proposed extension with a single window and roof light in the front elevation and roof slope and two small windows and a roof light in the rear elevation. Patio doors are proposed to be inserted in the north- west side elevation of the extension.

5.4 Policies GP2 (General Amenity) and GP6 (Quality of Design) of the Newport Local Development Plan 2011-2026 (Adopted January 2015) are relevant to the determination of this application.

5.5 The side extension is set back from the front elevation of the property by 5.4 metres. As such it is considered that the proposed extension would appear subservient to the main dwelling which is desirable. The set-back contributes to the overall appearance of the extension as it ensures the pitched roof of the extension does not appear to be incongruous within the street scene and is therefore considered to be acceptable despite not being found within the mix of roof types already at the property.

5.6 The proposed extension has a maximum length of 10.0 metres which is substantial. However, due to the positioning of the garage at no. 36 Stelvio Park Avenue, blocking views to the extension, the proposed extension would not have an unacceptable impact in terms of overbearing or loss of light. The extension is located approximately 5.6 metres from the boundary with no. 32 Stelvio Park Avenue and therefore would not have an unacceptable impact in terms of overbearing or loss on light to this property.

5.7 The rear elevation of the extension wold be approximately 13metres from the rear boundary of the property, however the property to the south is at a lower level than the application property. It is therefore considered appropriate to secure the installation of obscure glazing in the rear elevation windows of the proposed extension to ensure privacy is retained.

7. CONCLUSION 7.1 It is considered that the proposed extension is acceptable as it would not have an adverse impact on the character or appearance of the property or street scene nor would it have an unacceptable impact on the amenity of neighbouring occupiers. As such the proposal complies with policies GP2 and GP6 of the Newport Local Development Plan.

8. DECISION

GRANTED WITH CONDITIONS

01 The development shall be implemented in accordance with the following plans and documents: 26215. Reason: In the interests of clarity and to ensure the development complies with the submitted plans and documents on which this decision was based.

02 Prior to the first use of the extension hereby approved, obscure glazing shall be installed to the windows in the rear elevation of the extension and shall be retained as such in perpetuity. Reason: To ensure the privacy of surrounding occupiers is maintained.

03 The external surfaces of the extension hereby permitted shall only be of materials to match those of the existing building. Reason: To ensure the development is completed in a manner compatible with its surroundings.

NOTE TO APPLICANT

01 The development plan for Newport is the Newport Local Development Plan 2011 – 2026 (Adopted January 2015). Policies GP2 and GP6 were relevant to the determination of this application.

APPLICATION DETAILS

No: 12 15/0322 Ward: GRAIG

Type: FULL

Expiry Date: 16-MAY-2015

Applicant: A PRICE

Site: RHIWDERIN HOUSE, 10, SPRINGFIELD ROAD, RHIWDERIN, NEWPORT, NP10 8RN

Proposal: PROPOSED SINGLE STOREY REAR KITCHEN EXTENSION

DECISION GRANTED WITH CONDITIONS

1. CONSULTATIONS 1.1 None.

2. INTERNAL COUNCIL ADVICE 2.1 None.

3. REPRESENTATIONS 3.1 NEIGHBOURS: All properties with a common boundary were consulted (17 addresses). No responses were received.

3.2 GRAIG COMMUNITY COUNCIL: No representations received.

4. RELEVANT SITE HISTORY None.

5. ASSESSMENT 5.1 This application seeks permission for a single storey extension at the detached property in the Graig Ward. The property is located within a large plot to the rear of properties on Pentre-Tai Road and Springfield Road and is accessed along a private drive.

5.2 The proposed extension would be located on the east side elevation of the property. It would project a maximum of 2.4 metres from the property and be 8.7 metres in length. It would measure 3.4 metres in height to the ridge of the pitched roof, 2.5 metres to the eaves. The extension would be constructed from materials to match those of the existing dwelling.

5.3 It is proposed to insert a full height window in the north elevation, a narrow full length window in the south elevation and a run of full length windows and patio doors in the east elevation. Two roof lights are proposed to be inserted into the roof slope.

5.4 Policies GP2 (General Amenity) and GP6 (Quality of Design) of the Newport Local Development Plan 2011-2026 (Adopted January 2015) are relevant to the determination of this application.

5.5 The proposed extension by virtue of its scale and location would not have an adverse impact on the residential amenity of adjacent residents in terms of loss of light or overbearing impact The proposed extension faces towards the rear of properties on Pentre- Tai Road however as the proposed extension is single storey, adequate screening is provided by existing boundary treatments.

5.6 It is also noted that an extant planning permission exists to the north of the site for the erection of a detached dwelling. Provision is made within the application for the house for a 2.2 metre fence separating the garden of the new dwelling and Rhiwderin House. This is considered to provide adequate screening.

7. CONCLUSION 7.1 It is considered that the proposed extension, by virtue of its scale and location, would not have an adverse impact on the amenity of adjacent occupiers or the character and appearance of the area. As such, the proposal complies with the adopted policies of the Newport Local Development Plan.

8. DECISION

GRANTED WITH CONDITIONS

01 The development shall be implemented in accordance with the following plans and documents: 935/02 and 935/03. Reason: In the interests of clarity and to ensure the development complies with the submitted plans and documents on which this decision was based.

02 The external surfaces of the extension hereby permitted shall only be of materials to match those of the existing building. Reason: To ensure the development is completed in a manner compatible with its surroundings.

NOTE TO APPLICANT

01 The development plan for Newport is the Newport Local Development Plan 2011 – 2026 (Adopted January 2015). Policies GP2 and GP6 were relevant to the determination of this application.

APPLICATION DETAILS

No: 13 15/0327 Ward: GRAIG

Type: TREE PRESERVATION ORDERS

Expiry Date: 17-MAY-2015

Applicant: J JONES

Site: 5, BADGERS WOOD CLOSE, BASSALEG, NEWPORT, NP10 8SG

Proposal: WORKS (INCLUDING CROWN REDUCTION AND LIFTING) TO TREES T34, T32 AND W1 PROTECTED BY TPO 8/97

DECISION GRANTED WITH CONDITIONS

1. CONSULTATIONS 1.1 WILDLIFE IN NEWPORT: No response.

2. INTERNAL COUNCIL ADVICE 2.1 HEAD OF STREETSCENE AND CITY SERVICES (TREE OFFICER): No objection.

3. REPRESENTATIONS 3.1 NEIGHBOURS: All neighbours with a common boundary were consulted (3No. properties), a site notice posted and a press notice published. No response was received.

3.2 GRAIG COMMUNITY COUNCIL: No response.

4. RELEVANT SITE HISTORY 12/0813 LIFTING OF THE CROWN OF 3 ALDER TREES (W1 - MIXED Refused WOODLAND INCLUDING ALDERS) TPO 8/1997, TO PROVIDE MORE LIGHT TO OTHER AREAS 12/0412 PRUNING OF ACACIA TREE T34 PROTECTED BY TPO 11 Granted with OF 87 Conditions 97/0920 FELL 3 OAKS 1 ASH CROWN CLEAN AND CROWN LIFT 2 Granted with BEECH PROTECTED BY TPO 8/1997; FELL 1 CHERRY Conditions CROWN CLEAN AND CROWN LIFT 1 CHERRY AND 1 CUT- LEAFED BEECH PROTECTED BY TPO 11/1987

5. ASSESSMENT 5.5 The proposal is to carry out the following work to trees protected by TPO 8/97 at 5 Badgers Wood Close, Bassaleg, Newport. Crown reduction by 3-4 metres of acacia (T34), crown lift to 4m by target pruning only together with crown reduction not exceeding 3m to beech (T32), crown reduction by 4metres of alder (W1 and indicated as trees no 5&6 in tree report) and reduce crown by 2m of oak (W1 and referred to as tree no 7 in the tree report).

5.6 The tree recommendations were submitted by a Tree Consultant and were contained within a tree inspection report (11 March 2015) which assessed the trees’ health and safety and the proposed work results from this.

5.7 The tree work is in line with proactive maintenance and it is accepted that all trees require remedial work. Therefore the Councils Tree Officer (TPOS and Private land) has no objection the proposals.

7. CONCLUSION 7.1. There are no objections to the application.

8. DECISION

GRANTED WITH CONDITIONS

NOTE TO APPLICANT

01 This decision relates to plan Nos: Plan received on 23 March 2015 and Tree Inspection Report (11 March 2015).

02 The development plan for Newport is the Newport Local Development Plan 2011 – 2026 (Adopted January 2015). No policies were relevant to the determination of this application.

APPLICATION DETAILS

No: 14 15/0346 Ward: GRAIG

Type: FULL

Expiry Date: 18-MAY-2015

Applicant: HIGHFIELD COURT MANAGEMENT CO

Site: HIGHFIELD COURT, FOXWOOD CLOSE, BASSALEG, NEWPORT

Proposal: REPLACEMENT OF 24 EXISTING RAILINGS OF METAL CONSTRUCTION, WITH GLASS AND STAINLESS STEEL BALUSTRADES

DECISION GRANTED WITH CONDITIONS

1. CONSULTATIONS 1.1 NEWPORT ACCESS GROUP: No comments received.

2. INTERNAL COUNCIL ADVICE 2.1 None.

3. REPRESENTATIONS 3.1 NEIGHBOURS: All properties with a common boundary and opposite were consulted (34 addresses). No representations were received.

3.2 GRAIG COMMUNITY COUNCIL: No representations received.

4. RELEVANT SITE HISTORY None.

5. ASSESSMENT 5.1 This application seeks permission for the replacement of 24no. existing metal railings with glass and stainless steel balustrades at the flats within the Bassaleg Area of the Graig Ward.

5.2 The existing metal railings have fallen in to disrepair and it is proposed to replace them with glass panels, topped with a stainless steel rail. Each panel would measure 1.1 metres in height and be located in the same position as the existing railings which enclose existing balconies and walkway areas. All railings are to be replaced, with 12no. railings to the front of the premises and 12no. to the rear.

5.3 Policies GP2 (General Amenity) and GP6 (Quality of Design) of the Newport Local Development Plan 2011-2026 (Adopted January 2015) are relevant to the determination of this application.

5.4 It is considered that the proposed replacement railings represent an improvement on the existing railings which have fallen into disrepair and would detract from the appearance of the building. The proposed glass panels, by virtue of their transparency, would be unobtrusive and would not detract from the character or appearance of the building or wider area.

7. CONCLUSION 7.1 It is considered that the proposed replacement balustrades would form a positive contribution to the character and appearance of the property and would therefore comply with the adopted policies of the Newport Local Development Plan.

8. DECISION

GRANTED WITH CONDITIONS

01 The development shall be implemented in accordance with the following plans and documents: Front Elevation, Rear Elevation and Section – Balcony 2 System. Reason: In the interests of clarity and to ensure the development complies with the submitted plans and documents on which this decision was based.

NOTE TO APPLICANT

01 The development plan for Newport is the Newport Local Development Plan 2011 – 2026 (Adopted January 2015). Policies GP2 and GP6 were relevant to the determination of this application.

APPLICATION DETAILS

No: 15 15/0420 Ward: GRAIG

Type: DISCHARGE CONDITIONS

Expiry Date: 08-JUN-2015

Applicant: DAVID JONES

Site: RHIWDERIN HOUSE, 10, SPRINGFIELD ROAD, RHIWDERIN, NEWPORT, NP10 8RN

Proposal: PARTIAL DISCHARGE OF CONDITION 03 (CMP) OF PLANNING PERMISSION 15/0011 FOR THE DEMOLITION OF EXISTING OUTBUILDING AND ERECTION OF PROPOSED NEW DETACHED DWELLING AND SHARED DRIVEWAY

DECISION APPROVED

1. CONSULTATIONS 1.1 No external consultation was undertaken.

2. INTERNAL COUNCIL ADVICE 2.1 HEAD OF STREETSCENE AND CITY SERVICES (HIGHWAYS): No objection.

2.2 PUBLIC PROTECTION MANAGER: No objection.

3. REPRESENTATIONS 3.1 None

4. RELEVANT SITE HISTORY 15/0011 DEMOLITION OF EXISTING OUTBUILDING AND ERECTION Granted with OF NEW DETACHED DWELLING AND SHARED DRIVEWAY Conditions

5. ASSESSMENT 5.1 This application seeks to partially discharge condition 03 of planning permission 15/0011, as referenced above.

5.2 Condition 03 relates to the Construction Management Plan and states; “No development, to include demolition, shall commence until a Construction Management Plan (CMP) has been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The CMP shall include details of the following during development: - dust suppression measures, having regard to BRE guide ‘Control of Dust from Construction and Demolition Activities’; - wheel wash facilities; - contractor parking and compound; Development works shall be implemented in accordance with the approved CMP. Reason: To protect the amenities of nearby residents”.

5.3 Details have been provided to show the contractor parking and compound layout, as well as details of dust suppression measures and wheel washing facilities. The information contained within the Construction Management Plan and supporting plan is considered to adequately detail with the measures to be employed during the development. No objection has been offered by the Council’s Public Protection Manager or Highways Officer.

7. CONCLUSION 7.1 The information submitted is concluded to be acceptable. This application is therefore approved.

8. DECISION

APPROVED

NOTE TO APPLICANT

01 This decision relates to plan Nos: 347-BR-06 rev.B and Construction Management Plan dated 14/04/2015.

02 The development plan for Newport is the Newport Local Development Plan 2011 – 2026 (Adopted January 2015). No policies were relevant to the determination of this application.

APPLICATION DETAILS

No: 16 15/0353 Ward: CAERLEON

Type: DISCHARGE CONDITIONS

Expiry Date: 20-MAY-2015

Applicant: MR & MRS THOMPSON

Site: THE BULMORE, BULMORE ROAD, CAERLEON, NEWPORT, NP18 1QR

Proposal: PARTIAL DISCHARGE OF CONDITION 7 (FIREPLACES) OF LISTED BUILDING CONSENT FOR ALTERATION AND REFURBISHMENT WORKS TO EXISTING DWELLING INCLUDING REPLACING FLAT ROOF WITH DUAL PITCH AND PROVISION OF TIMBER FRAMED CONSERVATORY DECISION APPROVED

1. CONSULTATIONS 1.1 None

2. INTERNAL COUNCIL ADVICE 2.1 None

3. REPRESENTATIONS 3.1 None

4. RELEVANT SITE HISTORY

14/0122 LISTED BUILDING CONSENT FOR Granted with conditions ALTERATION AND REFURBISHMENT WORKS TO EXISTING DWELLING INCLUDING REPLACING FLAT ROOF WITH DUAL PITCH AND PROVISION OF TIMBER FRAMED CONSERVATORY

5. ASSESSMENT 5.1 The proposal is to partially discharge condition 7 (fireplaces) of the Listed Building consent 14/0122 to alter and refurbish the dwelling. The condition is worded so that the condition is approved prior to the commencement of works to any serving fireplaces and that details of their replacement or alteration are submitted and approved.

5.2 The proposal affects three fireplaces within the property each will be dealt with separately.

5.3 Drawing Room Fireplace The proposal is to restore the fireplace by way of cleaning and redecorate but not moving the fireplace from its position. The retention of the fireplace which is noted in the List Description as a Gothick fireplace with 2 multi-cusped insets, and Batty Langley style triple colonette mantel supports. is supported. The on-going maintenance of such a feature is also welcomed. The proposed redecoration is to make good the existing decorations, i.e. white surround and gold & black fire grating and will result in the refurbishment/maintenance of the fireplace.

5.4 Lounge Fireplace The proposal is to reinstate a fireplace which is currently boarded up. It is located in the centre of the southern wall of the Lounge. It is proposed that the plasterboard covering the opening is removed and a fire basket and Aegean Limestone surround and hearth are installed. The proposed design of the replacement fireplace is between three designs, namely Bolection with shelf, 60” Blenheim and the Pembroke. Each design is slightly different ranging from a height of 47” to 50”, a width of 54” to 60” and depth of 8” to 9” depth. The three proposed designs are considered appropriate and whichever design is chosen it will result in a feature that does not have a detrimental impact on the character of the building.

5.5 Dining Room Fireplace The proposal is to remove the contemporary fire grate on the eastern wall of the Dining room and re-open the original opening. Then fit an Aegean stone mantle and hearth. The proposed design of the replacement fireplace is between threes designs, namely Bolection with shelf, 60” Blenheim and the Pembroke. Each design is slightly different ranging from a height of 47” to 50”, a width of 54” to 60” and depth of 8” to 9” depth. The three proposed designs are considered appropriate and whichever design is chosen it will result in a feature that does not have a detrimental impact on the character of the building.

7. CONCLUSION

7.1 The proposed fireplace designs are considered to be acceptable and will not have a detrimental impact on the character of this listed building. It is therefore considered appropriate to partially discharge this condition.

8. DECISION

APPROVED

NOTE TO APPLICANT

01 This decision relates to plan Nos: Sample of proposed fireplace submitted 8/4/15

02 The development plan for Newport is the Newport Local Development Plan 2011 – 2026 (Adopted January 2015). Policy SP9 was relevant to the determination of this application.

APPLICATION DETAILS

No: 17 15/0281 Ward: LLANWERN, LLISWERRY

Type: DISCHARGE CONDITIONS

Expiry Date: 05-MAY-2015

Applicant: MARSTON'S INNS AND TAVERNS PLC

Site: GLAN LLYN DEVELOPMENT SITE, QUEENSWAY, LLANWERN, NEWPORT

Proposal: PARTIAL DISCHARGE OF CONDITIONS 33 AND 34 (SURFACE AND FOUL DRAINAGE) OF PERMISSION 06/0471 FOR PHASE 1 (PUBLIC HOUSE) OF THE LOCAL CENTRE ON THE GLAN LLYN REGENERATION SITE

DECISION APPROVED

1. CONSULTATIONS 1.1 DWR CYMRU/WELSH WATER: Offers no objection on the basis that foul flows are directed into the public sewer system and surface water is directed into a private drainage system discharging into a watercourse.

1.2 NATURAL RESOURCES WALES: No objection.

2. INTERNAL COUNCIL ADVICE 2.1 HEAD OF STREETSCENE AND CITY SERVICES (HIGHWAYS): The proposal looks acceptable, but additional details of pipe sizes and gradients, constructions details for the gullies, linear drainage channels and manholes are required.

3. REPRESENTATIONS 3.1 None

4. RELEVANT SITE HISTORY

06/0471 REDEVELOPMENT OF SITE TO CREATE A MIXED USE GRANTED WITH URBAN EXTENSION COMPRISING: A RANGE OF NEW CONDITIONS HOMES (APARTMENTS, HOUSES AND SOME SHELTERED ACCOMMODATION FOR THE ELDERLY - USE CLASSES C2&C3); NEW OFFICES, WORKSHOPS, FACTORIES AND WAREHOUSES (USE CLASSES B1, B2&B8); COMMUNITY FACILITIES INCLUDING NEW SCHOOLS AND COMMUNITY CENTRES (USE CLASSES D1&D2); A LOCAL CENTRE INCORPORATING SHOPS, OFFICES AND COMMERCIAL LEISURE FACILITIES INCLUDING NEW BARS, CAFES AND LICENSED PREMISES (USE CLASSES A1, A2, A3&D2); A NETWORK OF OPEN SPACES INCLUDING PARKLAND, FOOTPATHS, SPORTS PITCHES AND AREAS FOR INFORMAL RECREATION; NEW ROADS, ACCESSES AND PATHS; HEALTHCARE AND FITNESS FACILITIES (USE CLASSES D1&D2); PROVISION FOR A NEW RAILWAY HALT/STATION; OTHER ANCILLARY USES AND ACTIVITIES; AND REQUIRING: SITE CLEARANCE, TREATMENT AND PREPARATION; THE INSTALLATION OF NEW SERVICES AND INFRASTRUCTURE; THE CREATION OF NEW WATER BODIES AND DRAINAGE CHANNELS; IMPROVEMENTS/WORKS TO THE HIGHWAYS NETWORK AND OTHER ANCILLARY WORKS AND ACTIVITIES 15/0275 SUBMISSION OF RESERVED MATTERS (TO SATISFY GRANTED WITH CONDITION 01 OF PLANNING PERMISSION 06/0471) CONDITIONS AND TO PARTIALLY DISCHARGE CONDITION 24 (SITE LEVELS) FOR PHASE 1 (PUBLIC HOUSE) OF THE LOCAL CENTRE ON THE GLAN LLYN REGENERATION SITE.

5. ASSESSMENT 5.1 This application seeks to partially discharge conditions 33 and 34 (foul and surface water drainage) of planning permission 06/0471 for the redevelopment of the site to create a mixed use urban extension comprising: a range of new homes (apartments, houses and some sheltered accommodation for the elderly - use classes C2 and C3); new offices, workshops, factories and warehouses (use classes B1, B2 and B8); community facilities including new schools and community centres (use classes D1 and D2); a local centre incorporating shops, offices and commercial leisure facilities including new bars, cafes and licensed premises (use classes A1, A2, A3 and D2); a network of open spaces including parkland, footpaths, sports pitches and areas for informal recreation; new roads, accesses and paths; healthcare and fitness facilities (use classes D1 and D2); provision for a new railway halt/station; other ancillary uses and activities; and requiring: site clearance, treatment and preparation; the installation of new services and infrastructure; the creation of new water bodies and drainage channels; improvements/works to the highways network and other ancillary works and activities at Glan Llyn, Development Site, Queensway in the Llanwern and Lliswerry Wards.

5.2 Condition 33 of planning permission 06/0471 states that:

“No development relating to each phase defined by condition 03 shall be commenced until a scheme for the disposal of surface waters for that phase has been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. Such scheme as approved shall then be implemented in accordance with the approved details and the Infrastructure Phasing Plan required by condition 5. Reason: To prevent pollution of the water environment.”

Condition 34 of planning permission 06/0471 states that:

“No development relating to each phase defined by condition 03 shall commence until details of the foul and surface water drainage and storage system for that phase including means of discharge into the drainage network, have been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The drainage works for each phase of development shall be completed in accordance with the approved details and the Infrastructure Phasing Plan required by condition 5. Reason: In the interests of, and to prevent pollution of, the water environment.”

5.3 Plans showing the proposed foul and surface water drainage systems have been proposed. The foul drainage is proposed to be connected into the main public sewer system within the surrounding site roads and surface water drainage will connect into the existing private drainage system that served Tata Steel before the redevelopment. No objection has been raised by Dwr Cymru/Welsh Water although they have stated that no Section 104 adoption agreement has yet been agreed so there is potential for the details to be changed. No objection has been raised by Natural Resources Wales.

5.4 The Head of Streetscene and City Services (Highways) has stated that the drainage scheme appears acceptable in principle, but has requested additional details relating to pipe sizes and gradients, constructions details for the gullies, linear drainage channels and manholes. The details requested would only relate to the short area of highway that would provide the access to the private car park as it is the only potentially adoptable section of highway within the application site. The majority of the site would be a private car park that would not be adopted by the Council in the future and so would be privately maintained. As the requested details are likely to be forthcoming when a more detailed road adoption (Section 38) agreement is negotiated outside of the planning permission it is not considered that they are required in this instance and there is no evidence to suggest that the drainage system cannot be adequately installed.

7. CONCLUSION 7.1 The details submitted are considered sufficient and conditions 33 and 34 of planning permission 06/0471 can be partially discharged.

8. DECISION

APPROVED

NOTE TO APPLICANT

01 This decision relates to plan Nos: Drawing No. 12795:SK04 – Drainage Strategy Plan; Drawing No. 601 Rev. C – Drainage Strategy; Drawing No. 3498/P100 Rev. A – Site Location Plan; 3498-P104 Rev. K - Site Layout.

02 The development plan for Newport is the Newport Local Development Plan 2011 – 2026 (Adopted January 2015). No policies were relevant to the determination of this application.

APPLICATION DETAILS

No: 18 15/0265 Ward: LLISWERRY

Type: FULL

Expiry Date: 05-MAY-2015

Applicant: C WHARTON

Site: 5, BLAKE ROAD, NEWPORT, NP19 0JH

Proposal: EXTENSION ABOVE AN EXISTING SINGLE STOREY EXTENSION TO THE REAR OF THE PROPERTY TO CREATE A NEW BEDROOM SPACE

DECISION GRANTED WITH CONDITIONS

1. CONSULTATIONS 1.1 None

2. INTERNAL COUNCIL ADVICE 2.1 HEAD OF STREETSCENE AND CITY SERVICES (HIGHWAYS): No objection.

3. REPRESENTATIONS 3.1 NEIGHBOURS: All properties sharing a common boundary were consulted (two addresses). No responses were received.

4. RELEVANT SITE HISTORY None

5. ASSESSMENT 5.1 This application seeks full planning permission for the erection of an extension above an existing single storey extension to the rear of the property to create a new bedroom space at 5 Blake Road in the Lliswerry Ward.

5.2 The property is a terraced dwelling located in a cul-de-sac characterised by similarly designed terraced properties. The property has been extended in the past to include a single storey rear kitchen extension. The proposal is to erect a first floor extension above the existing kitchen extension to provide an additional bedroom.

5.3 The extension would measure a width of 4.9 metres, a depth of 3.2 metres with an eaves height of 4.95 metres and an apex height of 7 metres. Fenestration would be comprised of a north-east facing patio doors with Juliet balcony at first floor level, no windows or doors are proposed to be installed into either side elevation. Two velux rooflights would be installed into both south-east and north-west facing roof planes. The extension would be constructed using a pebble dash finish, gray concrete roof tiles and white UPVC windows.

5.4 Policies GP2 (general amenity) and GP6 (quality of design) of the Newport Local Development Plan (NLDP) 2011-2026 (adopted January 2015) are relevant to the determination of this planning application.

5.5 The proposed first floor extension has the potential to impact on the amenities of neighbouring occupiers. Given its increased height there is the potential for daylight currently available to neighbouring properties to be reduced. The property at 6 Blake Road has an existing single storey extension of a depth matching the kitchen extension at no.5. The rear facing windows at 6 Blake Road are not expected to be significantly affected as no 45 degree splays taken from them would be encroached into by the proposed first floor extension. The property at 4 Blake Road has no existing extensions. It has patio doors serving a lounge that are located approximately 2.2 metres from the intervening boundary. A horizontal 45 degree splay taken from the patio doors is not encroached into by the proposed extension so it is not considered that any significant reduction in daylight would occur. 5.6 The first floor extension would be clearly visible to both neighbouring occupiers so could have the potential to be overbearing. It would appear as a blank wall of 3.2 metres depth by 5 metres in height from no.4 and would have an impact on an area of the rear garden adjacent to it. However, due to the size of the rear gardens it is not considered that this impact would be significantly overbearing and would not be harmful so would be acceptable. The occupiers of no.5 would have any overbearing impact reduced by the presence of the existing single storey extension.

5.7 Privacy to both neighbouring properties would be preserved as no windows or doors are proposed to be installed within either side elevation. The proposed roof lights would not provide views over the neighbouring properties due to their height within the roof of the extension. A planning condition can be used to restrict permitted development rights that may allow the creation of any additional windows or doors in the future.

5.8 The proposal will not alter or affect the parking demand at the property and no objection is offered from the Head of Streetscene and City Services (Highways).

5.9 Overall it is considered that the proposal would successfully provide additional living accommodation for the property without causing any harm to neighbouring amenities or the visual appearance of the property and street scene and is in accordance with policies GP2 and GP6 of the NLDP.

7. CONCLUSION 7.1 The proposed first floor rear extension by reasons of its scale, location and design would preserve neighbouring privacy, access to light and visual amenities.

7.2 The proposal is in accordance with policies GP2 (general amenities) and GP6 (quality of design) of the Newport Local Development Plan (NLDP) 2011-2026 (adopted January 2015).

7.3 Planning permission is granted subject to the following conditions.

8. DECISION

GRANTED WITH CONDITIONS

01 The development shall be implemented in accordance with the following plans and documents: 376_02 Rev. B – Existing Typical Floor Plans; 376_03 Rev. B – Existing Typical Elevations; 376_04 Rev. E - Proposed Typical Floor Plans; 376_05 Rev. E – Proposed Typical Elevations; OS Site Location Plan ref: 15/0265. Reason: In the interests of clarity and to ensure the development complies with the submitted plans and documents on which this decision was based.

General conditions

02 The first floor rear extension hereby approved shall be constructed using external finishes to match those of the existing house and shall be retained in that state thereafter. Reason: To ensure development that is compatible with its surroundings.

03 No windows or doors shall be installed into either north-west or south-east facing side elevations of the first floor rear extension hereby approved. Reason: To protect privacy to adjoining occupiers.

NOTE TO APPLICANT

01 The development plan for Newport is the Newport Local Development Plan 2011 – 2026 (Adopted January 2015). Policies GP2 and GP6 were relevant to the determination of this application.

APPLICATION DETAILS

No: 19 15/0278 Ward: LLANWERN, LLISWERRY

Type: DISCHARGE CONDITIONS

Expiry Date: 05-MAY-2015

Applicant: MARSTON'S INNS AND TAVERNS PLC

Site: GLAN LLYN DEVELOPMENT SITE, QUEENSWAY, LLANWERN, NEWPORT

Proposal: PARTIAL DISCHARGE OF CONDITIONS 12 (OFF STREET PARKING & CYCLE PARKING), CONDITION 15 (EMERGENCY ACCESS), CONDITION 16 (DETAILS OF ROADS, CYCLEWAYS AND FOOTWAYS), CONDITION 18 (DETAILS OF ESTATE ROADS) AND CONDITION 22 (STREET LIGHTING) OF PERMISSION 06/0471 FOR PHASE 1 (PUBLIC HOUSE) OF THE LOCAL CENTRE ON THE GLAN LLYN REGENERATION SITE

DECISION APPROVED

1. CONSULTATIONS 1.1 None

2. INTERNAL COUNCIL ADVICE 2.1 HEAD OF STREETSCENE AND CITY SERVICES (HIGHWAYS): Raised some concerns with regards to the widths of access roads between the parking bays, the width of the site access and the amount of cycle parking in relation to the proposed floor space. Following the submission of an amended site layout and clarification with regards to the cycle bays no further objections were made.

3. REPRESENTATIONS 3.1 None

4. RELEVANT SITE HISTORY

5. ASSESSMENT 5.1 This application seeks to discharge conditions 12 (off street parking & cycle parking), condition 15 (emergency access), condition 16 (details of roads, cycleways and footways), condition 18 (details of estate roads) and condition 22 (street lighting) of permission 06/0471 for Phase 1 (public house) of the local centre on the Glan Llyn regeneration site in the Llanwern and Lliswerry Wards.

5.2 Condition 12 of planning permission 06/0471 states that:

“The reserved matters referred to in Condition 1 shall include details of off-street parking and covered cycle parking. These facilities in relation to any development parcel as referred to in Condition 04 shall be provided in accordance with the approved details prior to first occupation of any development associated with the particular development parcel and thereafter maintained as such. Reason: In the interests of highway safety.”

Condition 15 states that:

“The reserved matters referred to in condition 1 shall, in relation to each phase of development (as defined by condition 3), include details of all emergency access proposals for that phase. The emergency accesses for each phase of development shall be completed in accordance with the approved details and the Infrastructure Phasing Plan required by condition 5 and maintained as such thereafter. Reason: In the interests of highway safety.”

Condition 16 states that:

“Roads/cycleways/footways on the site in relation to each parcel of development as referred to in Condition 04 shall be constructed in accordance with plans submitted to and approved in writing by the local planning authority prior to commencement of development of the relevant development parcel and completed in accordance with the approved details prior to first occupation of the particular development parcel unless an alternative timescale has been approved in writing with the local planning authority. Reason: In the interests of highway and pedestrian safety.”

Condition 18 states that:

“The development shall be served by estate roads laid out and constructed in accordance with details, including means of surface water disposal, previously submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. Reason: To ensure that the road works are completed to an adoptable standard.”

Condition 22 states that:

“The reserved matters referred to in condition 01 shall include details of all street lighting and lighting of any parking areas, including the trigger times for implementation, which shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The lighting shall be implemented in accordance with the approved details. Reason: In the interests of residential amenity, highway and pedestrian safety and the security of the site.”

5.3 Conditions 12, 15 and 22 relate to the reserved matters submission (ref: 15/0275) for the Phase 1 pub site. The reserved matters details have now been granted planning permission so it is considered that the requirements of conditions 12, 15 and 22 have been partially discharged by default.

5.4 The site contains very little in the way of estate roads/cycleways and footpaths as the majority of the site will be comprised from a privately managed car parking area and landscaped grounds. Initial concerns were raised by the Head of Streetscene and City Services (Highways) with regards to the widths of the site roads adjacent to the car parking areas. Amended details were submitted featuring wider site roads of six metres which are now considered acceptable. The amount of cycle parking to be provided was also queried. Six short term cycle parking bays are proposed to be provided within the site along with a covered and lockable cycle parking area for staff. The pub would provide 243 square metres of internal floor space which general parking standards state should be served by 6 cycle parking bays. The applicant has stated that outdoor seating areas should not be included within the floor space calculation which is agreed as general parking standards don’t state that floor space should include outdoor areas.

5.5 An objection was made by the Head of Streetscene and City Services (Highways) with regards to the width of the proposed vehicular access onto the adjacent estate road. Vehicle track tests had shown that HGVs and rigid body delivery lorries would have to cross over onto the opposite side of the carriageway of the estate road in order to be able to turn left out of the site back towards the main road at Queensway. The Head of Streetscene and City Services (Highways) considered that this would be unacceptable and the access should be made wider to allow HGVs and delivery lorries to be able to exit the site without crossing the central white line of the estate road.

5.6 The applicant has confirmed that one HGV would deliver beer to the site each week and another would remove waste. Three food deliveries using rigid body lorries would take place each week. It is not considered that the frequency of deliveries would be sufficient enough for it to be considered that there would be a detrimental impact on highway safety. The access itself would be visible to users of the highway and there is potential for future traffic restrictions to be employed to prevent vehicles parking in close proximity to the site access on the estate road. Widening the site access would also be likely to result in harm to pedestrian safety as they would be more exposed to vehicular traffic when crossing the widened access point and speeds of vehicles entering the site would be likely to be increased. As such it is considered on balance that the site access is acceptable in the current form and any potential harm to highway safety is likely to be infrequent and manageable. As such it is considered that the submitted details are considered acceptable and conditions 16 and 18 can be partially discharged.

7. CONCLUSION 7.1 The submitted details are considered sufficient and conditions 12, 15 and 22 of planning permission 06/0471 can be discharged and conditions 16 and 18 of planning permission 06/0471 can be partially discharged.

8. DECISION

APPROVED

NOTE TO APPLICANT

01 This decision relates to plan Nos: 3498 P100 Rev. A – Site Location Plan; 3498 P104 Rev. K – Site Layout; 3498 P115 – Cycle Stores and Yard Pergola; 12795:SK05 – Vehicle Swept Path Analysis; 12795:SK01 Rev. B – Vehicle Swept Path Analysis; D24624/JM/A – Exterior Lighting Details.

02 The development plan for Newport is the Newport Local Development Plan 2011 – 2026 (Adopted January 2015). No policies were relevant to the determination of this application.

APPLICATION DETAILS

No: 20 15/0441 Ward: LLISWERRY

Type: DISCHARGE CONDITIONS

Expiry Date: 21-MAY-2015

Applicant: LOVELL PARTNERSHIPS LTD

Site: LOFTUS GARDEN VILLAGE DEVELOPMENT SITE, TELFORD STREET, NEWPORT

Proposal: PARTIAL DISCHARGE OF CONDITION 17 (MANAGEMENT STRATEGY) OF PLANNING PERMISSION 14/0507 FOR THE REMOVAL OF CONDITIONS 13, 14 & 15 (CODE CONDITIONS) AND VARIATION OF CONDITION 23 (LIGHTING) TO ALLOW COMMENCEMENT PRIOR TO THE SUBMISSION OF LIGHTING DETAILS IN RELATION TO PLANNING PERMISSION 13/0713 FOR RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT OF UP TO 250 DWELLINGS

DECISION APPROVED

1. CONSULTATIONS 1.1 None

2. INTERNAL COUNCIL ADVICE 2.1 HEAD OF STREETSCENE AND CITY SERVICES (LANDSCAPE OFFICER): No objection.

3. REPRESENTATIONS 3.1 None

4. RELEVANT SITE HISTORY

13/0713 RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT OF UP TO 250 UNITS GRANTED WITH AND ASSOCIATED WORKS (OUTLINE) CONDITIONS

14/0507 REMOVAL OF CONDITIONS 13, 14 & 15 (CODE GRANTED WITH CONDITIONS) AND VARIATION OF CONDITION 23 CONDITIONS (LIGHTING) TO ALLOW COMMENCEMENT PRIOR TO THE SUBMISSION OF LIGHTING DETAILS IN RELATION TO PLANNING PERMISSION 13/0713 FOR RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT OF UP TO 250 DWELLINGS 14/0704 RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT COMPRISING GRANTED WITH 250NO. DWELLINGS AND ASSOCIATED WORKS CONDITIONS (RESERVED MATTERS PURSUANT TO OUTLINE PLANNING PERMISSION 13/0713) INCLUDING DETAILS TO PARTIALLY DISCHARGE CONDITION 13 (LANDSCAPE MANAGEMENT), CONDITION 14 (RECREATION AREAS), CONDITION 16 (BOUNDARY TREATMENTS) & CONDITION 22 (NOISE MITIGATION).

5. ASSESSMENT 5.1 This application seeks to partially discharge condition 17 (management strategy) of planning permission 14/0507 for the removal of conditions 13, 14 & 15 (code conditions) and variation of condition 23 (lighting) to allow commencement prior to the submission of lighting details in relation to planning permission 13/0713 for residential development of up to 250 dwellings at Loftus Garden Village, Corporation Road in the Lliswerry Ward.

5.2 Condition 17 of permission 14/0507 states that:

“No building shall be occupied in the approved scheme in relation to each phase as defined by Condition 12 until a management strategy for the maintenance of all areas of formal and informal open space for that phase, not subject to adoption by the local authority, has been submitted to and approved in writing by the local planning authority. The strategy shall include details of any management company proposed and its terms of reference. The management strategy for each phase shall be implemented in accordance with the approved details for that phase. Reason: to ensure that adequate safeguards are provided to ensure the future provision of recreation facilities.”

5.3 A Maintenance Specification Contract relating to the proposed maintenance of the planting and hard landscape areas of the site has been submitted. Once construction has been completed the site will be passed over to Seren Group who will assume responsibility for the on-going maintenance of planting and hard landscaped areas. Outside contractors will be used where necessary and regular inspections of the site will take place. There are no concerns with the content of the Maintenance Specification Contract and no objection has been made by the Head of Streetscene and City Services (Landscape Officer). As such it is considered that the requirements of condition 17 of planning permission 14/0507 have been met and the condition can be partially discharged.

7. CONCLUSION 7.1 The submitted details are considered acceptable and condition 17 of planning permission 14/0507 can be partially discharged.

8. DECISION

APPROVED

NOTE TO APPLICANT

01 This decision relates to plan Nos: Planting and Hard Landscaping Requirements – Maintenance Specification Contract.

02 The development plan for Newport is the Newport Local Development Plan 2011 – 2026 (Adopted January 2015). No policies were relevant to the determination of this application.

APPLICATION DETAILS

No: 21 15/0380 Ward: MALPAS

Type: DISCHARGE CONDITIONS

Expiry Date: 26-MAY-2015

Applicant: I WILLIAMS, AFA ARCHITECTS AND PLANNERS

Site: WOODLANDS HOUSE, WOODLANDS DRIVE, MALPAS, NEWPORT, NP20 6QX

Proposal: PARTIAL DISCHARGE OF CONDITION 01 (SCHEDULE OF WORKS) OF PLANNING PERMISSION 11/0022 FOR LISTED BUILDING CONSENT FOR PARTIAL DEMOLITION OF LISTED BUILDING AND REFURBISHMENT WORKS TO CONVERT EXISTING BUILDING TO 6NO. APARTMENTS

DECISION APPROVED

1. CONSULTATIONS 1.1 None

2. INTERNAL COUNCIL ADVICE 2.1 None

3. REPRESENTATIONS 3.1 None

4. RELEVANT SITE HISTORY

11/0022 LISTED BUILDING CONSENT FOR PARTIAL Granted with DEMOLITION OF LISTED BUILDING AND conditions REFURBISHMENT WORKS TO CONVERT EXISTING BUILDING TO 6NO. APARTMENTS.

10/1336 PARTIAL DEMOLITION OF LISTED BUILDING, Granted with REFURBISHMENT WORKS TO CONVERT conditions EXISTING BUILDING TO 6NO APARTMENTS, ERECTION OF 7NO DWELLINGS IN GROUND AND HIGHWAY IMPROVEMENTS/ LANDSCAPING/ANCILLARY WORKS

5. ASSESSMENT 5.1 This application seeks the partial discharge of condition 1 (Schedule of Works) of listed building consent 11/0022 for the partial demolition of listed building and refurbishment works to convert existing building to 6no. apartments.

5.2 The condition states “Prior to the commencement of any development (including demolition), a detailed schedule of works shall be submitted to and agreed in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The schedule shall provide additional detail on the scheme based upon the approved completion schedule dated 4 April 2014. The works shall be undertaken in accordance with the detailed schedule. Reason: To protect the integrity of the listed building.”

5.3 A schedule of works has been submitted and, following a meeting to discuss the content of this schedule, a revised version was submitted to address some minor concerns relating to wording therein. Following further correspondence, a second revision was submitted, principally to address some omissions from the previous drafts.

5.4 The revised schedule refers to considerable additional detail that will be supplied in order to discharge various other conditions of the listed building consent which relate to individual packages of work, and with this is mind it is considered to be sufficiently comprehensive to satisfy the requirements of this pre-commencement condition. The works generally accord with accepted good practice in historic building conservation and will result in considerable restoration work being completed to all internal and external elements of the listed building. As such, the Schedule of Works is considered to be acceptable.

7. CONCLUSION 7.1 The information provided is considered to be acceptable and the condition is partially discharged.

8. DECISION

APPROVED

NOTE TO APPLICANT

01 This decision relates to: Schedule of Works Issue 1 : Revision B 07-05-15

02 The development plan for Newport is the Newport Local Development Plan 2011 – 2026 (Adopted January 2015). Policy SP9 was relevant to the determination of this application.

03 Section 16(2) of the Town and Country Planning (Listed Building and Conservation Areas) Act 1990 was relevant to the determination of this application.

APPLICATION DETAILS

No: 22 15/0467 Ward: MALPAS

Type: NON-MATERIAL AMENDMENT

Expiry Date: 20-MAY-2015

Applicant: P. BOOTH, NEWPORT NORSE

Site: MALPAS PARK JUNIOR AND INFANT SCHOOL, WAVELL DRIVE, NEWPORT, NP20 6LE

Proposal: NON MATERIAL AMENDMENT TO WINDOWS ON FRONT ELEVATION OF INFILL EXTENSION APPROVED UNDER PLANNING PERMISSION 14/0990

DECISION APPROVED WITH CONDITIONS

1. CONSULTATIONS 1.1 None

2. INTERNAL COUNCIL ADVICE 2.1 None

3. REPRESENTATIONS 3.1 None

4. RELEVANT SITE HISTORY 96/0963 ERECTION OF STORE ROOM FOR PLAY EQUIPMENT Granted with Conditions 99/0828 ERECTION OF SINGLE STOREY EXTENSION TO PROVIDE Granted I.T. SUITE with Conditions 10/1323 EXTERNAL CANOPY FOR OUTDOOR PLAY Granted

14/0990 ERECTION OF INFILL EXTENSION TO FRONT ELEVATION Granted with Conditions

5. ASSESSMENT 5.1 This application seeks a non-material amendment to planning permission 14/0990 for the erection of an infill extension to the front elevation of Malpas Park Junior and Infant School.

5.2 The approved fenestration on the extension is a full height glazed screen with an aluminium frame which matches that used on the existing building. However, due to issues with satisfying Building Regulations requirements the applicant alternatively proposes to install smaller aluminium-framed windows surrounded by facing brickwork.

5.3 Section 96A of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 allows a non-material amendment to be made to an existing planning permission. Whilst there is no statutory definition of a ‘non-material amendment’, the Authority must consider: 1) the scale of the proposed changes and whether they are great enough to cause an impact different to that caused by the original approved development, and would that change have a detrimental impact either visually or in terms of local amenity; 2) whether any third party or body would be disadvantaged in planning terms; 3) if the proposed change conflicts with national or development plans policies.

5.4 It is not considered that the change of window type would cause the development to materially differ from what was originally approved. This is firstly because the proposed facing brickwork and aluminium window materials would match that used on the existing building and therefore the departure would not cause the extension to appear any more discordant with the main building than what was originally proposed. Secondly, there is a separation distance of approximately 65m between the extension and the nearest highway from which it can be viewed and therefore the change to the window arrangement would be very discreet in nature. As such it is considered that the departure can be accepted as a non-material amendment.

7. CONCLUSION 7.1 The proposed amendment to the window arrangement approved under planning permission 14/0990 can be accepted as a non-material amendment and no planning permission is required.

8. DECISION

APPROVED WITH CONDITIONS

01 The development shall be carried out in accordance with the following approved plans and documents:

The development shall be carried out in accordance with the following approved plans and documents:

NPS-00-00-DR-A-001, NPS-00-00-DR-A-003, NPS-00-00-DR-A-006 C, Design and Access Statement.

Reason: To ensure that the approved development is carried out in complete accordance with the approved plans.

NOTE TO APPLICANT

02 This decision relates to the following plans and documents: NPS-00-00-DR-A-002 P1, NPS-00-00-DR-A-006 C.

02 The decision notice to this application should be read in conjunction with planning permission 14/0990.

03 The development plan for Newport is the Newport Local Development Plan 2011 – 2026 (Adopted January 2015). No policies were relevant to the determination of this application.

APPLICATION DETAILS

No: 23 13/1145 Ward: MARSHFIELD

Type: FULL

Expiry Date: 16-JAN-2014

Applicant: M. JONES

Site: NEW PARK FARM, PENYLAN ROAD, BASSALEG, NEWPORT, CF3 2UR

Proposal: ERECTION OF A WIND TURBINE

DECISION REFUSED

1. CONSULTATIONS 1.1 WELSH GOVERNMENT – TRANSPORT DIRECTORATE: Although all components would be delivered on standard HGV’s the applicant should provide a traffic management plan including details of the route taken as part of the design and access statement.

1.2 SOUTH WALES TRUNK ROAD AGENCY: No response.

1.3 GWENT ORNITHOLOGICAL SOCIETY: No response.

1.4 GWENT WILDLIFE TRUST: No response.

1.5 NATURAL RESOURCES WALES: No objection.

Protected Sites: We can confirm that there are no Sites of Special Scientific Interest (SSSI) Special Areas of Conservation (SAC), Special Protection Areas (SPA) and Ramsar sites within the proposed development site that are likely to be affected by the proposals.

Protected Species: We do not hold any records for protected species on the site. However, we are aware that bat species have been recorded within the surrounding landscape. It is therefore possible that bats may be using the habitat within the development area for flight lines and general foraging. No activity surveys were carried out to determine use of adjacent land by bats however we note that the wind turbine is to be sited over 50m from any areas likely to be used as foraging habitat and flightlines and as such bats are unlikely to be adversely effected.

General landscape: The proposed turbine is within the ‘Open Countryside’ as defined within the emerging Local Development Plan. The LANDMAP assessment for Newport, “Landscapes Working for Newport”, is available and should be consulted. We recommend that the impacts of any development proposals on the landscape character of the area and its visual effects are assessed against this study.

Cumulative Impacts: In assessing the potential impacts of the proposed development Newport must consider the potential cumulative impacts of this wind energy development along with: • Other wind energy developments in the area that already exist or have planning permission; and • Proposals for other wind energy developments in the area that are in the public domain (i.e. those that are presently under consideration)

1.6 NEWPORT ACCESS GROUP: No response.

1.7 ROYAL SOCIETY FOR PROTECTION OF BIRDS: No response.

1.8 BRISTOL INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT: No objection.

1.9 CARDIFF INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT: No objection.

1.10 CIVIL AVAITION AUTHORITY (WIND TURBINES): Provides advice on procedures for consulting the authority.

1.11 NATIONAL AIR TRAFFIC SERVICES: The proposed development has been examined from a technical safeguarding aspect and does not conflict with our safeguarding criteria. Accordingly, NATS (En Route) Public Limited Company ("NERL") has no safeguarding objection to the proposal.

1.12 DEFENCE ESTATES – SAFEGUARDING OPERATIONS: No response.

2. INTERNAL COUNCIL ADVICE 2.1 HEAD OF STREETSCENE AND CITY SERVICES (ECOLOGY): Due to the existing ecology of the site and the positioning of the proposed turbine a significant distance from any hedgerows, it is not believed that the proposed wind turbine is likely to impact significantly on any protected or priority species or habitats.

There will be some risk of injury or death to some species of birds and bats during the operation of the turbine, which may be magnified in combination with the turbine in the neighbouring field. But as the distance between the turbines would be in excess of 200m, it is not considered that this increased risk would be significant.

If any hedgerow is to be removed during construction, it should be undertaken outside of the bird breeding season, i.e. between September and March inclusive, and replanted with native hedgerow species.

And as an enhancement measure, it is recommended that the defunct hedgerow between the two fields is replanted, also with native hedgerow species.

2.2 HEAD OF STREETSCENE AND CITY SERVICES (HIGHWAYS): It is understood that the wind turbine will be delivered on standard HGV’s and will not be deemed as an abnormal load. Whilst this may the case full details of the delivery route must be submitted including any potential issues which may arise.

There is concern about the space available for manoeuvres for a HGV to access and egress the site. Track tests must be submitted which demonstrates that the required manoeuvres are achievable and to highlight any alterations which may be required.

The access must be hard paved for a minimum of the 12m from the edge of the carriageway. Also what does the applicant propose in terms of providing an internal access track to the site?

A construction management plan is required which includes details of contractor parking/compound, storage facilities, wheel wash facilities and dust suppression. Details of how vehicles will be accommodated within the site must be submitted including turning facilities. Please note that all loading/unloading and turning manoeuvres must be accommodated within the site and not carried out on the highway as this would be deemed detrimental to highway safety.

A traffic management plan must be submitted which includes details such as warning signage and any requirements needed to accommodate vehicle movements.

2.3 HEAD OF STREETSCENE AND CITY SERVICES (LANDSCAPE): No objection.

2.4 HEAD OF LAW AND REGULATION (NOISE): The information submitted indicates that the simplified noise limit described in ETSU-R-97 will be met at any property greater than 250m from the site. The nearest property (Penylan Farm) is understood to be 240m away. Therefore, from the information supplied, it would appear that the limit will be just met. However this does not take into account the noise emitted from the existing turbine at New Park Farm. A desk top noise assessment should be requested prior to permission being granted. The assessment should include details of both turbines, their location in relation to noise sensitive properties and their combined noise impact on the nearest residential properties. Depending on the outcome, further assessment/monitoring may be required.

2.5 HEAD OF STREETSCENE AND CITY SERVICES (PUBLIC RIGHTS OF WAY): No objection but advise:

 No structures (including walls or fencing) are to be erected that cross through the line of any of the Public Rights of Way (as shown on the Definitive Map).  The lines of the Public Rights of Way (as shown on the Definitive Map) must not be obstructed in any way and must remain clear at all times (including during construction – unless a temporary closure/diversion is applied for and granted).  The users of the Public Rights of Way must not be disadvantaged in any way by the construction (during the works and following completion).  The surface of the Public Rights of Way must not be adversely affected in any way.

3. REPRESENTATIONS 3.1 NEIGHBOURS: All properties within 100m of the application site would be consulted on an application of this nature however, in this instance there are no properties within this distance to consult. A site notice was posted and two representations were received raising the following concerns:  Many residents in the area experience noise from the existing turbine at New Park Farm. Erecting an additional turbine on this site would increase the noise levels.  This rural area is renowned for its peace and tranquility, so extraneous noises are conspicuous, particularly at night, because of the low background noise levels.  Additional health and safety risks have been noted by Vestas and GE Electric.  Concerned about the effect of additional turbines on wildlife, in particular bats. Turbines pose a serious threat to bats though blade strike or barotraumas. This is completely unacceptable as bats are a protected species.  This is an inappropriate development in a beautiful rural place of South Wales. There are many place – quasi industrial – where such developments are substantially more appropriate.  The sole beneficiary of this development is the land owner; the land owner will benefit at a massive cost to those living in proximity of the development.

3.2 COUNCILLORS SULLER AND WHITE: No response.

3.3 MICHAELSTON-Y-FEDW COMMUNITY COUNCIL: Raise the following concerns:  The location is on land currently allocated as "greenbelt" and would have considerable visual impact upon the landscape.  The immediate area already has two wind turbines and the Council is concerned that if this application is granted then we could see a wind farm up on Penylan.  Noise is a factor that needs to be taken into consideration; in a rural environment the level of noise would be unacceptable.  It is felt that a second wind turbine on this property would constitute a commercial enterprise and not a domestic one.  Current reports suggest that wind turbines are not economically viable.

4. RELEVANT SITE HISTORY

10/0907 INSTALLATION OF SINGLE WIND TURBINE AND Granted with CONSTRUCTION OF ACCESS conditions TRACK

5. ASSESSMENT 5.1 This application seeks full planning permission for the erection of 1 (No) wind turbine within farmland under the control of New Park Farm. The proposed location of the turbine is within a field south of Penylan Road. The application site is located within the Countryside as defined by the Newport Local Development Plan 2011-2026.

5.2 The turbine would be located approximately 290m south of Penylan Road, 280m north of the A48(M), 290m from an existing wind turbine south of Penylan Road (granted under ref: 10/0907), 480m from an existing turbine north of Penylan Road (granted under ref: 12/0257) and 510 from the nearest settlement known as Penylan to the north east. The nearest property to the proposed turbine would be Penylan Farm at approximately 190m to the north east. The applicant’s property and all other residential properties are over 500m away from the application site.

5.3 The landscape within the locality is a typical countryside setting made up of agricultural land, areas of woodland, undulating hills and broken up by country roads, farm houses and agricultural features. The landscape is dissected by Penylan Road that runs west to east to the north of the application site. Also seen within the views are large pylons (typically exceeding 40m in height) and some large telecommunications masts measuring between 25-30m.

5.4 The 1 (No) medium sized wind turbine proposed would have a tower height of 23.6m and a blade diameter of 19.2m (total height = 34.2m from ground to blade tip when vertical). The wind turbine would be white in colour.

5.5 Policies SP5 (Countryside), GP2 (General Amenity), GP4 (Highways and Accesibility), GP5 (Natural Environment), GP7 (Environmental Protection and Public Health) and CE10 (Renewable Energy) of Newport Local Development Plan 2011-2026 (Adopted January 2015) are relevant to the determination of this application.

5.6 Policy SP5 states that development in the Countryside will only be permitted where the use is appropriate in the countryside, respects the landscape character and biodiversity of the immediate and surrounding area and is appropriate in scale and design.

5.7 Policy GP2 (i) and (ii) states that development will be permitted where there will not be a significant adverse effect on local amenity, including in terms of noise, disturbance, privacy, overbearing, light, odours and air quality; and the proposed use and form of development will not be detrimental to the visual amenities of nearby occupiers or the character or appearance of the surrounding area.

5.8 Policy GP4 (vii) states that development proposals should ensure that development would not be detrimental to highway or pedestrian safety or result in traffic generation exceeding the capacity of the highway network.

5.9 Policy GP5 (ii), (v) states that development will be permitted where the proposals demonstrate how they avoid, or mitigate and compensate negative impacts to biodiversity, ensuring that there are no significant adverse effects on areas of nature conservation interest including International, European, National, Welsh Section 42 and local protected habitats and species, and protecting features of importance for ecology; and there would be no unacceptable impact on landscape quality.

5.10 Policy GP7 states that development will not be permitted which would cause or result in unacceptable harm to health because of land contamination, dust, instability or subsidence, air, heat, noise or light pollution, flooding, water pollution, or any other identified risk to environment, local amenity or public health and safety.

5.11 Policy CE10 states that renewable energy schemes will be considered favourably, subject to there being no over-riding environmental and amenity considerations. Small scale micro- generation will be encouraged within the settlement boundary. Large scale proposals may be more appropriately located outside of the defined settlement boundary if no appropriate brownfield sites exist. The cumulative impacts of renewable energy schemes will be an important consideration.

5.12 Technical Advice Note (TAN) 8 - Renewable Energy (2005) is also of relevance providing guidance on wind power and turbine technology and the typical issues associated with such development proposals.

Landscape and Visual Assessment 5.13 The proposed turbine is the same height as the existing turbine to the north west of the application site and a comparable height to a mobile phone mast to the east. The applicant has provided a photomontage of viewpoints of the proposed turbine from various locations in the surrounding area. On the whole it is considered that the turbine would not visible from the main public vantage points to the east due to the local landform, vegetation and the settlement of Penylan. Views of the turbine would start when travelling along Penylan Road to the west (when leaving the settlement of Penylan). It would be read in conjunction with an existing turbine which is located closer to Penylan Road than the proposed site. Here it would be seen with the backdrop of existing hedgerows and other vegetation. Views of the existing turbine at this point were previously considered to be acceptable and as the proposed turbine would be located much further away from Penylan Road the impact is considered to be less significant than the existing turbine. Views from the north and north west of the site would be limited and distant and therefore not considered significant.

5.14 The main views of the turbine will be from the west and south west. There will be direct views from the M4 motorway and from south of the M4. The proposed turbine would be closer to the A48(M) than the existing turbine however extensive vegetation and rising topography means the turbine would be scarcely visible. There will be limited views when travelling along Druidstone Road and direct views when travelling along Penylan Road to the east. Theoretically there would be views of the turbine from the Wentloog Levels but at a distance of approximately 3000m, it is considered that the visual effect at this distance with the turbine size proposed would be minimal. The closest accessible location to see the turbine from will be via Penylan Road that runs north of the application site. When viewed directly from the north (Penylan Road) the turbines will be visible above the hedgerow of the road. When moving further away from the site to the south and west the turbine would remain visible but obviously reducing in visual prominence within the landscape. It is considered that the visibility of the turbines should decrease due to the landform decreasing in height to only leave the blades visible.

5.15 The site is not considered to have any unacceptable effects on any Site of Special Scientific Interest, any RAMSAR site or any Special Protection Areas. The proposal is neither considered to have any unacceptable visual impact on or physical damage to features or archaeological or historic interest or to any Green Belt. The question is therefore whether the proposal has any significant adverse effect on the environment by reason of its scale and appearance. Annex D of TAN 8 (4.3) states that ‘the landscape value of an area is an important criterion in judging its suitability for wind turbine development’. Paragraph 8.4 goes on to state that it is an ‘implicit objective to maintain the character of the landscape character, i.e. no significant change in landscape character from wind turbine development’.

5.16 The turbine proposed is completely different in scale to the now familiar ‘wind farm’ utility scales (normally 100m+ in height). It is considered that the proposed turbine are similar in height (around 30m) to typical power transmission poles (pylons) or mobile phone masts, which are both familiar aspects of rural landscapes and seen within the landscape of the application site. It is considered that this small to medium sized turbine proposed will have significantly less visual impact on the landscape setting than other installations as mentioned above. While it is acknowledged that there are other installations (two other turbines, pylons and telecommunications masts) in the vicinity of the application site they are considered to be sited sufficiently apart as to avoid any significant adverse visual impact when considered in combination.

5.17 The previous assessment of the existing turbine south of Penylan Road considered the cumulative impact of the then two turbines proposed (north and south of Penylan Road). It is considered appropriate to have regard to that assessment and consider all three turbines in combination. It is considered that from close proximity (i.e. Penylan Road) and the principal public vantage point all three turbines would be visible but would not read together. This is because one turbine is to the north of Penylan Road, the other, just south of Penylan Road and the current proposal further south again at approximately 290m from the nearest other turbine. The nearest point where the three turbines would be read together would be approximately 350m away. Typically though, they would be read together at much greater distances (i.e. 750m+) such as from the motorway, Druidstone Road or the most western point of Penylan Road. At these distances the turbines would be read within the landscape setting together with the other installations (pylons and telecommunications masts) and vegetation. When read in combination it is not considered that the three turbines, of the scale and in position proposed, would be unduly prominent together and would not have a significant visual impact on the landscape setting. It is considered that the proposed turbine would have no significant adverse effect on the environment by reason of its scale or appearance and there would not be any significant change in the landscape character.

5.18 From a visual perspective the proposal is therefore considered to comply with the guidance provided in TAN 8.

Noise 5.19 TAN 8 advises that ‘noise levels from turbines are generally low, and under most operating conditions, it is likely that turbine noise would be completely masked by wind-generated background noise. There are two distinct types of noise source within a wind turbine – the mechanical noise produced by the gearbox, generator and other parts of the drive train and the aerodynamic noise produced by the passage of the blades through the air. There has been a significant reduction in mechanical noise since the early 1990’s so the latest generation of wind turbines are much quieter than those first installed’.

5.20 The applicants’ submitted information indicates that at a wind speed of 10m/s the simplified noise limit described in ETSU-R-97 (The Assessment and Rating of Noise from Wind Farms) would be met at any property greater than 250m from the site. The nearest residential property is Penylan Farm which is approximately 190m away. The applicant’s supporting information also states that at wind speeds of between 11m/s and 22m/s noise would be inaudible beyond 160m from the tower base. It would appear from this supporting information that the limits are just met. However, this noise information has been undertaken in isolation and the Head of Law and Regulation requires an in-combination assessment of the noise emitted from the existing turbine north of this proposed turbine. The assessment needs to include details of both turbines, their location in relation to noise sensitive properties and their combined noise impact on the nearest residential properties. The applicant has been asked to provide this information but it has not been forthcoming. Without this information it cannot be determined whether or not there would be a harmful impact on the amenity of residential properties as a result of noise generated by both turbines.

Highways 5.21 The Head of Streetscene and City Services (Highways) is concerned over whether there is sufficient space available for an HGV to access and egress the site when delivering the turbine. They require track tests to be submitted in order to demonstrate that the required manoeuvres are achievable and to highlight any alterations which may be required. They have also requested additional information to clarify what is proposed in terms of providing an internal access track to the turbine. The applicant has been asked to provide this information but it has not been forthcoming.

5.22 The Head of Streetscene and City Services (Highways) also requires details of the HGV delivery route, the access to be hard paved for a minimum of 12m from the edge of the carriageway, the submission of a construction management plan and a traffic management plan. These matters could be dealt with through appropriate conditions. However, matters regarding access and egress, and the internal road proposals are considered to be more fundamental and without the required information it cannot be demonstrated that there would not be any adverse impact highway safety.

Ecology 5.23 Natural Resources Wales and the Council’s Ecology Officer are satisfied that the proposed turbine would be located sufficiently far from any hedgerows in order to prevent adverse impacts on protected or priority species or habitats.

Other matters 5.24 The concerns of neighbouring residents and the community council are noted. Their concerns are discussed in the paragraphs above.

7. CONCLUSION 7.1 The applicant has failed to demonstrate that the proposed turbine, in combination with an existing turbine, would not have harmful impact on neighbouring residents in terms of noise generation. The applicant has also failed to demonstrate that the site can be adequately accessed and egressed during delivery of the turbine or that suitable internal access can be provided. As such the proposed development is considered to be unacceptable and contrary to policies GP2, GP4 and GP7 of the Newport Local Development Plan 2011-2026 (Adopted January 2015). Planning permission is refused.

8. DECISION

REFUSED

01 The application fails to demonstrate that the proposed turbine, in combination with the existing turbine north west of the application site, would not result in a harmful impact on the residential amenities of neighbouring occupiers in terms of noise generation. This is contrary to Policies GP2 and GP7 of the Newport Local Development Plan 2011-2026 (Adopted January 2015).

02 The application fails to demonstrate that the site can be adequately accessed and egressed during the delivery of the turbine and that a suitable internal access road can be provided. This is contrary to Policy GP4 of the Newport Local Development Plan 2011-2026 (Adopted January 2015).

NOTE TO APPLICANT

01 This decision relates to plan Nos: 630/KE0194/006, site location plan, photomontage, Ecological Assessment (Acer Ecology, September 2013), design and access statement and planning statement (Ventus Vox) and Generalised Noise Predictions (Hayes McKenzie Partnership Ltd, 26 July 2011).

02 The development plan for Newport is the Newport Local Development Plan 2011 – 2026 (Adopted January 2015). Policies SP5, GP2, GP4, GP5, GP7 and CE10 were relevant to the determination of this application.

03 The proposed development (including any demolition) has been screened under the Environmental Impact Assessment Regulations and it is considered that an Environmental Statement is not required.

APPLICATION DETAILS

No: 24 15/0378 Ward: MARSHFIELD, TREDEGAR PARK

Type: TREES IN CONSERVATION AREAS

Expiry Date: 12-MAY-2015

Applicant: S MORGAN, NATIONAL TRUST

Site: NATIONAL TRUST, TREDEGAR HOUSE, PENCARN WAY, DUFFRYN, NEWPORT, SOUTH WALES, NP10 8TH

Proposal: WORKS TO AND FELLING OF TREES PROTECTED BY TREDEGAR PARK CONSERVATION AREA

DECISION NO OBJECTIONS

1. CONSULTATIONS 1.1 WILDLIFE IN NEWPORT: No objection

2. INTERNAL COUNCIL ADVICE 2.1. HEAD OF STREETSCENE AND CITY SERVICES (TREE OFFICER): No objections.

2.2 HISTORIC BUILDINGS CONSERVATION OFFICER: No response.

3. REPRESENTATIONS 3.1 NEIGHBOURS: All neighbours with a common boundary were consulted (36No properties), a site notice displayed and a press notice was published.

3.3 COEDKERNEW COMMUNITY COUNCIL: No response.

4. RELEVANT SITE HISTORY 13/0973 WORKS TO AND FELLING OF TREES PROTECTED BY Granted with TREDEGAR PARK CONSERVATION AREA Conditions

5. ASSESSMENT 5.8 The application relates to the following work within the Tredegar House Conservation Area. 30% crown reduction of oak (417), felling of pine (482), reduce weight of limbs of cedar (473), deadwood cedar (456, 460 & 468), fell cedar (453, 461 & 472), deadwood and 20% crown reduction of lime (399).

5.9 A tree report was submitted and the proposed work was discussed with the applicant. The work is of a remedial nature and trees require the work to ensure the continued safety of the public as the trees have been identified as a risk. The remedial work will not affect the character of the Conservation Area and the trees do not merit a TPO.

5.10 Therefore, the Councils Tree Officer (TPOS and Private land) has no objections the proposals.

7. CONCLUSION 7.1. There are no objections to the application.

8. DECISION

NO OBJECTIONS

NOTE TO APPLICANT

01 This decision relates to plan Nos: Summary of key historic planting phases, Tree Report and subsidiary works and tree schedule.

02 The development plan for Newport is the Newport Local Development Plan 2011 – 2026 (Adopted January 2015). No policies were relevant to the determination of this application.

03 The extent of the work hereby approved shall be agreed on site by the Council's Woodland Officer prior to any works to the trees commencing. Reason: In the interests of the health and longevity of the trees and preserving their amenity value.

APPLICATION DETAILS

No: 25 14/1263 Ward: MARSHFIELD, TREDEGAR PARK

Type: LISTED BUILDING

Expiry Date: 08-MAR-2015

Applicant: NATHAN GOSS, NATIONAL TRUST

Site: GATE LODGES NORTH WEST OF TREDEGAR HOUSE, PENCARN WAY, DUFFRYN, NEWPORT

Proposal: LISTED BUILDING CONSENT FOR THE RETENTION OF THE RE ROOFING OF 2 ENTRANCE LODGES TO TREDEGAR HOUSE, USING EXISTING SLATES AND BREATHABLE BAT FRIENDLY MEMBRANE. REPLACE THE FLASHBAND ROLL MOP DETAIL WITH AN ORIGINAL LEAD ROLL MOP DETAIL. DECORATE THE WINDOWS AND DOORS.

DECISION REFER TO CADW WITH RECOMMENDATION TO GRANT

1. CONSULTATIONS

1.1 ANCIENT MONUMENT SOCIETY- No Response

1.2 CBA WALES HISTORIC BUILDINGS – No Response

1.3 GEORGIAN GROUP- No Response

1.4 THE ROYAL COMMISSION – No Response

1.5 SOCIETY FOR THE PROTECTION OF ANCIENT BUILDINGS – No Response

1.6 NEWPORT CIVIC SOCIETY - No Response

1.7 VICTORIAN SOCIETY – No Response

1.8 TWENTIETH CENTURY SOCIRTY - No Response

2. INTERNAL COUNCIL ADVICE 2.1 No relevant internal consultation.

3. REPRESENTATIONS 3.1 The application was advertised by way of a site notice and press notice. No responses received.

4. RELEVANT SITE HISTORY No relevant site history

5. ASSESSMENT 5.1 Listed Building Consent is sought for the retention of the re-roofing, and replacement of flashband roll mop details with original lead roll, mop detail as well as decorating the windows and doors of both gate lodges.

5.2 The Lodges are part of the Tredegar House estate. Tredegar House is a Grade 1 listed building set in landscaped parkland setting on the South side of the M4. It is Listed as one of the finest Restoration houses in Britain. The pair of lodges, gates and piers with flanking walls to the North West of Tredegar House are Grade II listed structures. They are listed as unaltered example of a pair of gate lodges to a major country house.

5.3 The lodges are featured on the Council’s At Risk Register and were considered to be at risk because of their poor condition with slow decay facing the structure. They are vacant structures and at the time of survey it was noted that extensive dry rot was likely within the lodges. The National Trust have subsequently taken on the property and have prioritised the refurbishment of the structure, which is welcomed.

5.4 Policy SP9 of the adopted Local Development Plan (2011-2026) states that ‘The conservation, enhancement and management of recognised sites within the natural, historic and built environment will be sought in all proposals.’ Planning Policy Wales is also clear that in such as case as this ‘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.’ In this case the materials that have been reinstated in the refurbishment works are appropriate for the character of the building. Where original material could be used it has been and replacements are on a like for like basis.

5.5 The proposed works undertaken are detailed and considered separately below:

Re-roofing the lodges using existing slates and using breathable bat friendly membrane. The work undertaken has resulted in some minor timber repairs to the roof structure, illustrated in Photographs 7, 15 and 16. The timber work has used softwood to match that historic fabric within the structure, and has been undertaken to the same level of detail in terms of sizing. The membrane that has been installed is noted to be breathable bat friendly which is supported to enable the continued/potential use of the structure for bats. The addition of 3 bat vents to the lodges has been done in a sensitive manner allowing minor adaptation to allow for a protected species. It is not considered that the addition of the small vents affects the special character of the buildings. The re-roofing has meant a large majority of the existing slates have been reused, which is supported. The remaining 40% has seen the use of salvaged slated that have been matched to the existing. It is considered that the work has maintained as much historic fabric as possible and resulted in like for like materials being reinstated. The sprocketted eaves mentioned in the list description illustrates the design detail even in the roofing of the properties and this has not been overlooked. The result of the works is well done and is not considered to impact on the significant character of the buildings.

The replacement of flashband roll mop detail with an original lead roll mop detail and the decoration of the windows and doors.

These proposals are for the repair and restoration of key features of the properties. The flashband has been replaced with a lead roll mop design, using the original material in the original design. In addition, the redecoration of the windows and doors have resulted in a well presented finish and is considered appropriate maintenance. Altogether this work is considered to have a positive outcome and not to have impacted on the special character of the properties.

5.5 The Local Planning Authority has had special regard to the desirability of preserving the building or its setting or any features of special architectural or historic interest which it possesses as noted under section 16 (2) of the Planning (Listed Buildings and Conservation Areas) Act 1990.

5.6 Overall the proposal is considered to be acceptable. It has brought a Listed Building at Risk into a good state of repair which is no longer of concern. These positive, sensitive and high quality works are considered not to have a detrimental impact the character of this Grade II Listed Building.

7. CONCLUSION 7.1 The work is considered to have been necessary, particularly due to the inclusion of the Lodges in the at Risk Register in Newport. The works are acceptable and have had a positive effect on the structures and has not had a detrimental impact on the character of these listed buildings.

8. DECISION

REFER TO CADW WITH RECOMMENDATION TO GRANT

NOTE TO APPLICANT

01 The development plan for Newport is the Newport Local Development Plan 2011 – 2026 (Adopted January 2015). Policy SP9 was relevant to the determination of this application.

02 Section 16(2) of the Town and Country Planning (Listed Building and Conservation Areas) Act 1990 was relevant to the determination of this application.

APPLICATION DETAILS

No: 26 15/0308 Ward: PILLGWENLLY

Type: FULL

Expiry Date: 21-MAY-2015

Applicant: O DOKANI

Site: 160, COMMERCIAL ROAD, NEWPORT, NP20 2PJ

Proposal: CHANGE OF USE FROM A1 TO SUI-GENERIS (LAUNDRETTE)

DECISION GRANTED WITH CONDITIONS

1. CONSULTATIONS 1.1 NEWPORT ACCESS GROUP: No response.

1.2.1 NATURAL RESOURCES WALES: The application site lies partially within Zone C1 as defined by the Development Advice Map (DAM) referred to under Technical Advice Note 15: Development and Flood Risk (TAN15) (July 2004). Our Flood Map information, which is updated on a quarterly basis, confirms the site to be within the 0.1% (1 in 1000 year) annual probability tidal flood outlines of the River Usk, a designated main river.

1.2.2 Given the scale of the proposed development (and in the absence of a flood consequence assessment) we consider the risk could be acceptable subject to the developer being made aware of the potential flood risks, and advised to install flood-proofing measures as part of the development. In areas at risk of flooding, we recommend that consideration be given to the incorporation of flood resistance/resilience measures into the design and construction of the development. These could include flood barriers on ground floor doors, windows and access points, implementation of suitable flood proofing measures to the internal fabric of the ground floor, and locating electrical sockets/components at a higher level above possible flood levels.

2. INTERNAL COUNCIL ADVICE 2.1.1 PUBLIC PROTECTION MANAGER: I confirm I have no objection to the proposals, however, if the first floor is residential then the insulation between ground and first floor would need to be upgraded. The following condition should be attached if appropriate; “Prior to first occupation, a scheme of sound insulation works to the floor/ceiling structure between ground and first floor shall be implemented in accordance with details that have first been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The approved scheme shall be retained thereafter in perpetuity. Reason: To ensure that the amenities of occupiers of other premises in the vicinity are protected”.

2.1.2 I would also recommend the hours of use are restricted as per the application

2.2 HEAD OF STREETSCENE AND CITY SERVICES (HIGHWAYS): It’s considered that a laundrette would provide a facility to serve the local area and therefore I would expect a good proportion of trips to be made on foot. When taking this into consideration along with the existing use I would offer no objection to the application.

3. REPRESENTATIONS 3.1 NEIGHBOURS: All properties that share a common boundary with the application site were consulted (7No addresses). No representations were received.

3.2 SITE NOTICE: Posted 9th April 2015.

4. RELEVANT SITE HISTORY 95/0138 INSTALLATION OF ROLLER SHUTTER GRILLES TO FRONT AND Granted SIDE OF SHOP FRONT 94/1071 INSTALLATION OF ROLLER SHUTTER DOORS Granted

5. ASSESSMENT 5.1 This application seeks planning permission for the change of use of a retail unit (A1) to a Laundrette (Sui Generis) at the end-of-terrace property known as 160 Commercial Road, Newport. The application site lies within the Commercial Road District Centre.

5.2 No external alterations are proposed as part of the scheme, with the unit only being altered internally to provide the necessary facilities to operate as a Laundrette; i.e. washers and dryers. It is proposed that the unit would operate between 0800-2300 7 days a week.

5.3 As the property lies within the district centre, policy R7 (Non-retail uses in District Centres) of the Newport Local Development Plan 2011-2026 (Adopted January 2015) as well as policy GP2 (General Amenity). Policy R7 states that “in district centres activities in use classes A2 (financial and professional services), A3 (food and drink) and various leisure and community uses will be permitted only where: i) the concentration of such uses at ground floor level would not prejudice the viability of the centre’s retailing role; ii) satisfactory car parking and access arrangements exist or can be provided; iii) there would be no unacceptable effect on the local residential amenities or the general character of the area in terms of noise and disturbance or extra traffic generated”.

5.4 The supporting text to that policy states that Planning Policy Wales acknowledges that a range of uses is appropriate within District Centres, including financial and professional services and food and drink. Providing an appropriate mix of uses is important to the vitality and viability of a centre and to its usefulness to the population it serves. However, it is important that the primary shopping function of a District Centre is not undermined by an over provision of other uses.

5.5 An assessment has been made of the current units within the District Centre. The 67 commercial units are currently distributed as follows;

Use No of units % of units A1 46 68.66% A2 4 5.97% A3 15 22.39% C2 1 1.49% Sui 1 1.49%

5.6 If this application were granted with the current A1 unit being changed to a Sui Generis use, the units would comprise the following;

Use No of units % of units A1 45 67.16% A2 4 5.97% A3 15 22.39% C2 1 1.49% Sui 2 2.99%

5.7 As can be seen from the information above, there is a strong retail presence within the District Centre. These retail uses are random interspersed with non-retail uses. There is no particular section of the District Centre which suffers from a proliferation of non-retail uses. It is considered that the change of use proposed would have only a marginal impact on the provision of retail space within the District Centre, with 45 of the 67 units (67.16%) remaining as a retail use. As such, it is not considered that the proposal would have a detrimental impact on the vitality and/or and viability of the District Centre and, in fact, would add a useful community facility to serve the local population, thereby potentially being important to the vitality and viability of a centre and to its usefulness to the population it serves.

5.8 The property in question is a corner unit, adjacent to an A1 use. Within the block itself, there are a total of 7 units, 5 of which would remain as retail with an A3 use as well as the proposed use accounting for the remaining 2 units. There are also numerous retail uses within the immediate vicinity on the eastern side of Commercial Road. As such, it is not considered that harm would arise from the presence of the proposed use in terms of the distribution and proximity of non-shopping uses within the frontage.

5.9 The Public Protection Manager has stated that noise insulation should be provided between the ground floor and any flats above. The Council’s Council Tax records show that there are 3 flats on the upper floor of the property. As such, it is considered that this noise insulation would be required considering the additional noise which would be generated by the required machines, over and above the noise which would be generated by the permitted retail use. The opening hours originally proposed were not considered acceptable in close proximity to residential properties. The agent has since agreed to reduced hours of 0800-2100 Monday-Saturday and 0900-1700 Sundays, Bank and Public Holidays. Otherwise, it is not considered that the proposed use would have a detrimental impact on visual or residential amenity in the area given the nature of the activity in the District Centre.

5.10 The Council’s Highways Officer has offered no objection to the proposal in terms of car parking or highways issues given its location in the District Centre and the parking requirement already generated by the permitted use.

7. CONCLUSION 7.1 Having regard to the aforementioned policies of the Newport Local Development Plan 2011-2026 (Adopted January 2015), it is concluded that the proposed use would be acceptable within the District Centre and also acceptable in regards to amenity in the area. Planning permission is therefore granted with conditions.

8. DECISION

GRANTED WITH CONDITIONS

01 The development shall be implemented in accordance with the following plans and documents; 1405.1 and Access Statement. Reason: In the interests of clarity and to ensure the development complies with the submitted plans and documents on which this decision was based.

Pre-occupation conditions 02 Prior to occupation of the unit as a laundrette, a scheme of sound insulation works to the floor/ceiling structure between ground and first floor shall be implemented in accordance with details that have first been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The approved scheme shall be retained thereafter in perpetuity. Reason: To ensure that the amenities of occupiers of other premises in the vicinity are protected.

General conditions 03 The hours of operation shall be restricted to 08:00 to 21:00 Monday to Saturday and 09:00 to 17:00 on Sundays, Bank or Public Holidays. Outside of these hours the premises shall be vacated and closed to the public. Reason: In the interests of the amenities of occupiers of adjoining properties.

NOTE TO APPLICANT

01 The development plan for Newport is the Newport Local Development Plan 2011 – 2026 (Adopted January 2015). Policies R7 and GP2 were relevant to the determination of this application.

03 The developer is advised to install flood proofing measures. Further information can be obtained from the ODPM publication “Preparing for Floods” via the Planning Portal website at www.planningportal.gov.uk.

APPLICATION DETAILS

No: 27 14/0721 Ward: STOW HILL

Type: LISTED BUILDING

Expiry Date: 16-SEP-2014

Applicant: BARCLAYS BANK PLC

Site: BARCLAYS BANK PLC, 14-15, COMMERCIAL STREET, NEWPORT, GWENT, NP20 1HE

Proposal: LISTED BUILDING CONSENT FOR REFURBISHMENT COMPRISING REPLACEMENT OF EXISTING COUNTERLINE WITH NEW STUDWORK PARTITION HOUSING ASD SELF SERVICE MACHINES AND OPEN COUNTER POSITION, SUPPORTING STRUCTURE AT BASEMENT LEVEL, NEW FLOORING AND NEW CEILING AND TWO VENTILATION UNITS LOCATED AT THE SIDE OF THE BUILDING WITHIN THE RECESSED LIGHT WELL AND SERVING A NEW INTERNAL SYSTEM AT GROUND AND FIRST FLOOR LEVEL

DECISION GRANTED WITH CONDITIONS SUBJECT TO CADW

1. CONSULTATIONS 1.1 ANCIENT MONUMENT SOCIETY: No response received.

1.2 COUNCIL FOR BRITISH ARCHAEOLOGY: No response received.

1.3 GEORGIAN GROUP: No comments.

1.4 NEWPORT ACCESS GROUP: No response received.

1.5 ROYAL COMMISSION FOR ANCIENT MONUMENTS: No response received.

1.6 SOCIETY FOR THE PROTECTION OF ANCIENT BUILDINGS: No response received.

1.7 THE VICTORIAN SOCIETY: No response received.

2. INTERNAL COUNCIL ADVICE 2.1 HISTORIC BUILDINGS AND CONSERVATION OFFICER: Has no objection to the proposal subject to only the described works forming part of the application.

3. REPRESENTATIONS 3.1 PRESS NOTICE (published 16 August 2014): No representations received.

3.2 SITE NOTICE (displayed 29 July 2014): No representations received.

4. RELEVANT SITE HISTORY

12/0377 RE-OPENING OF FAN LIGHT TO FRONT ELEVATION, Granted INSTALLATION OF 2NO. CCTV CAMERAS AND INSTALLATION OF NEW CONDENSERS 12/0376 LISTED BUILDING CONSENT FOR INTERNAL WORKS, Granted with CLEANING OF EXTERNAL STONEWORK, Conditions REPLACEMENT SIGNAGE AND INSTALLATION OF CCTV CAMERA, RE-OPENING OF FAN LIGHT TO FRONT ELEVATION 12/0312 REPLACEMENT OF EXISTING 2NO. INDIVIDUAL Granted LETTER SIGNAGES, 1 NO. PROJECTING SIGNAGE AND REPLACEMENT OF 2NO. BRANCH NAMEPLATES

5. ASSESSMENT 5.1 This application seeks listed building consent for various refurbishment works and alterations to the listed building located in a prominent position on the junction of Commercial Street and Corn Street within the Town Centre Conservation Area.

5.2 This application seeks consent for refurbishment works comprising of ;  Replacement of existing counterenil with new studwork partition housing,  New self service machines and open counter position,  Supporting structure at basement level,  New flooring and new ceiling,  Two ventilation units within recessed light well

5.2 The proposed alterations to the counterline would involve the removal of the existing modern counter and replacement with a new counter in a slightly altered position together with a new open counter position with a new supporting structure provided at basement level. It is also proposed to replace the existing self-service machines in the same location.

5.3 Areas of ceiling tiles are to be replaced on the ground floor with areas of decorative ceiling re-painted. On the first floor, some areas of ceiling tiles are proposed to be replaced, new flooring is proposed to the existing staff roof and an additional partition wall to the Comms room. Ventilation serving the ground floor would be installed on the first floor.

5.4 Policies GP2 (General Amenity), CE5 (Locally Listed Buildings and Sites) and CE7 (Conservation Areas) of the Newport Local Development Plan 2011-2026 (Adopted January 2015) are relevant to the determination of this application.

5.5 The Council's Historic Building and Conservation Officer has no objection to the proposals as it is not considered that they would adversely effect the character and appearance of the listed building.

5.6 It is considered that the proposed nilhsibnufeli works would not have an unacceptable impact on the character and appearance of the area or the fabric of the listed building.

7. CONCLUSION 7.1 It is not considered that the proposed works would have an unacceptable impact on the character and appearance of the conservation area or listed building and therefore comply with policies GP2, CE5 and CE7 of the Newport Local Development Plan.

8. DECISION

GRANTED WITH CONDITIONS SUBJECT TO CADW

01 The development shall be implemented in accordance with the following plans and documents: D0558-014_012, 2/6205-201-P1, D0558-014_016, D0558-014_032, D0558- 014_013, D0558-014_033, 10523-50-01-200, D0558-014_400 Rev A. 2/6205-200-P1, 2/6205-202-P1, D0558-014_401, D0558-014_402, D0558-014_014, D0558-014_015, D055/-014_035. Reason: In the interests of clarity and to ensure the development complies with the submitted plans and documents on which this decision was based.

NOTE TO APPLICANT

01 The development plan for Newport is the Newport Local Development Plan 2011 – 2026 (Adopted January 2015). Policies GP2, CE5 and CE7 were relevant to the determination of this application.

02 Section 16(2) of the Town and Country Planning (Listed Building and Conservation Areas) Act 1990 was relevant to the determination of this application.

APPLICATION DETAILS

No: 28 15/0389 Ward: STOW HILL

Type: DISCHARGE CONDITIONS

Expiry Date: 02-JUN-2015

Applicant: C CHEN

Site: GOLDEN HART INN, 20, CARDIFF ROAD, NEWPORT, NP20 2ED

Proposal: PARTIAL DISCHARGE OF CONDITION 02 (FUME EXTRACTION) OF PLANNING PERMISSION 14/1121 FOR THE ERECTION OF REAR CANOPY AND REAR STEEL FLUE

DECISION APPROVED

1. CONSULTATIONS 1.1 No external consultation was undertaken.

2. INTERNAL COUNCIL ADVICE 2.1 PUBLIC PROTECTION MANAGER: No objection.

3. REPRESENTATIONS 3.1 None

4. RELEVANT SITE HISTORY 14/1121 ERECTION OF REAR CANOPY AND REAR STEEL FLUE Granted with Conditions

5. ASSESSMENT 5.1 This application seeks to partially discharge condition 02 (fume extraction) of planning permission 14/1121, as referenced above.

5.2 Condition 02 states: “Fumes from the food preparation areas shall be mechanically extracted and the extraction system shall be provided with de-greasing and de-odorising filters. Details of the extraction equipment (including scaled schematics, location plans, odour attenuation measures and future maintenance) shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority prior to its installation, and the equipment shall be installed in accordance with the approved details prior to the commencement of use for the cooking of food. The equipment shall thereafter be maintained in accordance with the approved detail.s Reason: To ensure that the amenities of occupiers of other premises in the vicinity are protected and in the interests of visual amenities”.

5.3 The applicant has submitted the information required by the condition above, including details of odour attenuation measures and scaled schematics. The Council’s Public Protection Manager considers that this information is sufficient and the equipment proposed would be fit for purpose. The extraction flue would be sited on the rear elevation and be screened by both the neighbour’s extension and the rear section of the application site. It is therefore considered acceptable in visual amenity terms.

7. CONCLUSION 7.1 The submitted information is concluded to be acceptable. This application is therefore approved.

8. DECISION

APPROVED

NOTE TO APPLICANT

01 This decision relates to plan Nos: Ventilation system information pack and grease trap information.

02 The development plan for Newport is the Newport Local Development Plan 2011 – 2026 (Adopted January 2015). No policies were relevant to the determination of this application.

APPLICATION DETAILS

No: 29 15/0292 Ward: ST JULIANS

Type: FULL

Expiry Date: 11-MAY-2015

Applicant: R JONES, S D MAINTENANCE

Site: 45, CAERLEON ROAD, NEWPORT, NP19 7BW

Proposal: RETENTION OF ESCAPE WINDOW TO SIDE ELEVATION TOGETHER WITH AIR CONDITIONING UNITS

DECISION GRANTED WITH CONDITIONS

1. CONSULTATIONS 1.1 NEWPORT ACCESS GROUP: No response.

2. INTERNAL COUNCIL ADVICE 2.1 HEAD OF LAW AND REGULATION (NOISE): No objection.

3. REPRESENTATIONS 3.1 NEIGHBOURS: All properties sharing a common boundary were consulted (13 addresses). No responses were received.

4. RELEVANT SITE HISTORY

14/0683 DEMOLITION OF PART OF EXISTING BUILDING TO GRANTED WITH ALLOW ACCESS TO REAR COURTYARD AREA CONDITIONS 14/1257 SUBDIVISION OF BUILDING TO CREATE 3NO. UNITS REFUSED AND CHANGE OF USE OF UNIT B TO HOT FOOD TAKEAWAY (A3), ASSOCIATED EXTERNAL ALTERATIONS AND INSTALLATION OF EXTRACTION EQUIPMENT

5. ASSESSMENT 5.1 This application seeks full planning permission for the retention of an escape window within the side elevation of the building together with three air conditioning units at 45 Caerleon Road in the St. Julians Ward.

5.2 The property is a commercial unit comprised of several adjoining blocks that are likely to have been erected at various stages of the buildings history. The unit in question is one of two commercial units with a shared parking forecourt that comprise 45 Caerleon Road. A cycle shop operates from the adjacent unit. The immediate locality is predominantly commercial in appearance and character, but is in close proximity to residential properties to the north and east. A main railway line serving trains to the midlands and the north runs along the eastern intervening boundary behind the building in question. The building has a rear courtyard area located at the southern part of the site. The building is currently undergoing refurbishment and appears to have undergone some external alterations that may be currently unauthorised.

5.3 The application is to seek the retention of a first floor window that was created into the first floor of the north-east facing side elevation. The window is currently shown to be serving a showroom area, but it is not known if the area will remain as a showroom following the current refurbishment. The window was installed following a request from the Fire Officer to provide an emergency exit. The three air conditioning units have also been installed externally onto the north-east facing side elevation of the building.

5.4 The window opening measures 0.9 metres in width by 1.2 metres in height. It is located at a height of 4.2 metres from the level of an adjacent access lane that runs to the side of the building. The window is a single pane with a white UPVC frame. It is proposed to be obscure glazed to prevent overlooking to neighbouring occupiers, but is able to be opened (as it has to provide an emergency access for occupiers of the building). The air conditioning units each measure 0.9 metres in width by 1 metre in height and are installed at a height of 3.6 metres from the side access lane.

5.5 Policies GP2 (general amenity) and GP6 (quality of design) of the Newport Local Development Plan (NLDP) 2011-2026 (adopted January 2015) are relevant to the determination of this planning application.

5.6 The window does have the potential to overlook an area of the neighbouring property at 47 Caerleon Road to the north. However, the main area that the window overlooks would be the front driveway and side gable end wall of the property. The front driveway is not considered to form private amenity space as it has open views from the public highway at Caerleon Road. There are two windows at first floor level in the neighbouring side gable that would have indirect views to the new window at no.45. They are thought to serve bedroom windows so would be considered to be protected as they serve habitable rooms. The angle between the new window at no.45 and the existing windows at no. 47 would be obtuse and would not offer significant views between them. Given the obtuse angles between the new window and the existing bedroom windows it is not considered that any harm to privacy would occur so it is considered acceptable. The applicant has stated that the window would be obscure glazed and should they choose to replace the clear glazing with obscure glazing in the future they would be able to do so without planning permission. It is not considered appropriate to impose a planning condition requiring that obscure glazing is installed as there is no recognised harm caused by the window in its current state.

5.7 The air conditioning units are of a common design that is reasonably expected to be seen in the context of commercial buildings such as the application site. The units do face towards the residential property at 47 Caerleon Road so there is potential for any noise emitted from the units to be heard at that property. No objections have been raised by the Head of Law and Regulation (Noise) and it is considered that if the units do produce a level of noise that results in a nuisance to the occupiers of no.47 the Head of Law and Regulation would be able to enforce under noise nuisance legislation in the event that a complaint was made. There is currently no reason to believe that the units (if properly maintained) would result in noise and disturbance to the neighbouring occupiers so overall they are considered acceptable.

7. CONCLUSION 7.1 The existing window and air conditioning units by reasons of scale, location and design are considered to maintain neighbouring privacy and amenities and the retention of them is considered acceptable.

7.2 The development is in accordance with policies GP2 and GP6 of the Newport Local Development Plan (NLDP) 2011-2026 (adopted January 2015).

7.3 Planning permission is granted subject to the following conditions.

8. DECISION

GRANTED WITH CONDITIONS

01 The development shall be implemented in accordance with the following plans and documents: Caer 105 Rev. A – Existing First Floor Plan; Caer 1002 – Existing Elevations; Design and Access Statement; Site Location Plan and Site Layout Plans. Reason: In the interests of clarity and to ensure the development complies with the submitted plans and documents on which this decision was based.

NOTE TO APPLICANT

01 The development plan for Newport is the Newport Local Development Plan 2011 – 2026 (Adopted January 2015). Policies GP2 and GP6 were relevant to the determination of this application.

APPLICATION DETAILS

No: 30 15/0321 Ward: TREDEGAR PARK

Type: FULL

Expiry Date: 27-MAY-2015

Applicant: L DAVIES, PERSIMMON HOMES EAST WALES

Site: THE BOULEVARDS DEVELOPMENT SITE, PENCARN WAY, DUFFRYN, NEWPORT, NP10 8YE

Proposal: RETENTION OF NEW SITE ENTRANCE WALL TO DEVELOPMENT SITE

DECISION GRANTED WITH CONDITIONS

1. CONSULTATIONS 1.1 No external consultation was undertaken.

2. INTERNAL COUNCIL ADVICE 2.1 HEAD OF STREETSCENE AND CITY SERVICES (TREE OFFICER): Assurance is required from the applicant’s Tree Consultant that there will be no impact on the roots of any adjacent trees.

2.2 HEAD OF STREETSCENE AND CITY SERVICES (HIGHWAYS): No objection.

3. REPRESENTATIONS 3.1 NEIGHBOURS: A site notice was posted on 13th April 2015.

4. RELEVANT SITE HISTORY 14/0609 REDEVELOPMENT OF SITE FOR 250 DWELLINGS WITH Granted with ASSOCIATED INFRASTRUCTURE, PUBLIC OPEN SPACE Conditions AND CAR PARKING FACILITIES 13/0669 DEMOLITION OF THE EXISTING BUILDINGS AND Granted with REDEVELOPMENT OF SITE FOR HOUSING AND Conditions ASSOCIATED INFRASTRUCTURE (OUTLINE)

5. ASSESSMENT 5.1 This application seeks retrospective planning permission for the erection of site entrance walls at The Boulevards Development Site (former Panasonic factory), Pencarn Way, Duffryn, Newport.

5.2 The main site entrance is accessed off a roundabout on Pencarn Way. A wall has been erected either side of the entrance road; the walls measuring 4m in width (with 0.47m wide piers at either end), 0.47m deep and reaches a height of 1.5m at the centre of the wall, with the piers measuring 1.8m in height. The wall has been constructed of pent stone with Portland coping and pier caps above. Both walls include an entrance plaque at the centre, displaying the name of the site. The walls abut the footway are 2m from the adjacent vehicular highway.

5.3 Policies GP2 and GP6 of the Newport Local Development Plan 2011-2026 (adopted January 2015) are relevant to the determination of this application. It is considered that the design and scale of the walls are acceptable in a residential area. They utilise high quality, durable materials which will complement the wider redevelopment site. Given the scale of the walls and their siting away from the nearest neighbouring property (yet to be occupied), it is not considered that the walls would result in a detrimental impact by way of overbearing impact, loss of light or loss of privacy.

5.4 No objection has been raised by the Council’s highways officer. The comments of the Council’s Tree Officer are noted although as the work has already been completed, any impact on the trees in question (if any) would have already occurred and can no longer be prevented.

7. CONCLUSION 7.1 Having regard to the aforementioned policies of the Local Development Plan, it is concluded that the design and impact of the walls is acceptable. Planning permission is therefore granted with conditions.

8. DECISION

GRANTED WITH CONDITIONS

01 The development shall be implemented in accordance with the following plans and documents; PL-01[E], D35, SL-02 and Design and Access Statement. Reason: In the interests of clarity and to ensure the development complies with the submitted plans and documents on which this decision was based.

NOTE TO APPLICANT

01 The development plan for Newport is the Newport Local Development Plan 2011 – 2026 (Adopted January 2015). Policies GP2 and GP6 were relevant to the determination of this application.

BEVERLEY OWEN HEAD OF REGENERATION, INVESTMENT AND HOUSING