CITY AND COUNTY OF SWANSEA
NOTICE OF MEETING
You are invited to attend a Meeting of the
AREA 2 DEVELOPMENT CONTROL COMMITTEE
At: Council Chamber, Civic Ce ntre, Swansea.
On: Tuesday, 10 December 2013
Time: 2.00 pm
Members are asked to contact Ryan Thomas (Planning Control Manager) on 635731 should they wish to have submitted plans and other images of any of the applications on this agenda to be available for display at the Committee meeting.
AGENDA
Page No.
1 To receive Apologies for Absence.
2 To receive Disclosures of Personal and Prejudicial Interests from 1 - 2 Members.
3 To approve as a correct record the Minutes of the meeting of the 3 - 7 Area 2 Development Control Committee held on 12 November 2013.
4 Items for deferral / withdrawal.
5 Determination of planning applications under the Town and 8 - 155 Country Planning Act 1990.
Patrick Arran Head of Legal, Democratic Services & Procurement Monday, 2 December 2013 Contact: Democratic Services - 636824
ACCESS TO INFORMATION LOCAL GOVERNMENT ACT 1972 (SECTION 100) (AS AMENDED)
(NOTE: The documents and files used in the preparation of this Schedule of Planning Applications are identified in the ‘Background Information’ Section of each report. The Application files will be available in the committee room for half an hour before the start of the meeting, to enable Members to inspect the contents).
1.
Agenda Item 2 Disclosures of Interest
To receive Disclosures of Interest from Councillors and Officers
Councillors
Councillors Interests are made in accordance with the provisions of the Code of Conduct adopted by the City and County of Swansea. You must disclose orally to the meeting the existence and nature of that interest.
NOTE: You are requested to identify the Agenda Item / Minute No. / Planning Application No. and Subject Matter to which that interest relates and to enter all declared interests on the sheet provided for that purpose at the meeting.
1. If you have a Personal Interest as set out in Paragraph 10 of the Code, you MAY STAY, SPEAK AND VOTE unless it is also a Prejudicial Interest.
2. If you have a Personal Interest which is also a Prejudicial Interest as set out in Paragraph 12 of the Code, then subject to point 3 below, you MUST WITHDRAW from the meeting (unless you have obtained a dispensation from the Authority’s Standards Committee)
3. Where you have a Prejudicial Interest you may attend the meeting but only for the purpose of making representations, answering questions or giving evidence relating to the business, provided that the public are also allowed to attend the meeting for the same purpose, whether under a statutory right or otherwise. In such a case, you must withdraw from the meeting immediately after the period for making representations, answering questions, or giving evidence relating to the business has ended , and in any event before further consideration of the business begins, whether or not the public are allowed to remain in attendance for such consideration ( Paragraph 14 of the Code).
4. Where you have agreement from the Monitoring Officer that the information relating to your Personal Interest is sensitive information , as set out in Paragraph 16 of the Code of Conduct, your obligation to disclose such information is replaced with an obligation to disclose the existence of a personal interest and to confirm that the Monitoring Officer has agreed that the nature of such personal interest is sensitive information.
5. If you are relying on a grant of a dispensation by the Standards Committee, you must, before the matter is under consideration:
i) Disclose orally both the interest concerned and the existence of the dispensation; and ii) Before or immediately after the close of the meeting give written notification to the Authority containing:
Z:\Committees\A Agenda Pack\Committees\Development Management & Control Committee\2013-2014\13 Sept 26\02 - Councillor and Officer Disclosures of InterestPage Form.doc 1 a) Details of the prejudicial interest; b) Details of the business to which the prejudicial interest relates; c) Details of, and the date on which, the dispensation was granted; and d) Your signature
Officers
Financial Interests
1. If an Officer has a financial interest in any matter which arises for decision at any meeting to which the Officer is reporting or at which the Officer is in attendance involving any member of the Council and /or any third party the Officer shall declare an interest in that matter and take no part in the consideration or determination of the matter and shall withdraw from the meeting while that matter is considered. Any such declaration made in a meeting of a constitutional body shall be recorded in the minutes of that meeting. No Officer shall make a report to a meeting for a decision to be made on any matter in which s/he has a financial interest.
2. A “financial interest” is defined as any interest affecting the financial position of the Officer, either to his/her benefit or to his/her detriment. It also includes an interest on the same basis for any member of the Officers family or a close friend and any company firm or business from which an Officer or a member of his/her family receives any remuneration. There is no financial interest for an Officer where a decision on a report affects all of the Officers of the Council or all of the officers in a Department or Service.
Z:\Committees\A Agenda Pack\Committees\Development Management & Control Committee\2013-2014\13 Sept 26\02 - Councillor and Officer Disclosures of Interest Form.docPage 2 Agenda Item 3
CITY AND COUNTY OF SWANSEA
MINUTES OF THE AREA 2 DEVELOPMENT CONTROL COMMITTEE
HELD ON TUESDAY 12 NOVEMBER 2013 AT THE CIVIC CENTRE, SWANSEA AT 2.00 P.M.
PRESENT : Councillor P Lloyd (Vice-Chair) presided
Councillor(s) : Councillor(s) : Councillor(s) :
J C Bayliss L James J A Raynor R A Clay Y V Jardine T H Rees A C S Colburn A J Jones J C Richards D W Cole M H Jones R V Smith A M Cook S M Jones G J Tanner J P Curtice D J Lewis C M R W D Thomas W Evans R D Lewis D W W Thomas E W Fitzgerald K E Marsh M Thomas T J Hennigan C L Philpott
36. APOLOGIES FOR ABSENCE
Apologies for absence were received from Councillors N S Bradley, J E Burtonshaw, M C Child, R Francis-Davies, J Newbury, G Owens, R J Stanton and R C Stewart.
37. DISCLOSURES OF PERSONAL AND PREJUDICIAL INTERESTS
In accordance with the provisions of the Code of Conduct adopted by the City and County of Swansea, the following interests were declared:
Councillor L James - Minute Nos. 38 and 39 - Personal - Planning Applications 2013/0467 (Item 1), 2013/1331 (Item 2) and 2013/1056 (Item 5) - as Member of the Gower Society.
Councillor C M R W D Thomas - Minute Nos. 38 and 39 - Personal - Planning Applications 2013/1330 (Item 3), 2013/1056 (Item 5) and 2013/1300 (Item 6) - I know the applicants.
38. MINUTES
RESOLVED that the Minutes of the meeting of the Area 2 Development Control Committee held on 15 October be agreed as a correct record.
Page 3 Minutes of the Area 2 Development Control Committee (12.11.2013) Cont’d
39. ITEMS FOR DEFERRAL/WITHDRAWAL
RESOLVED that the undermentioned planning applications BE DEFERRED for the reasons outlined below:
(Item 1) Application No. 2013/0467
Residential development consisting of up to 24 dwellings (outline) including the demolition of existing buildings at former Bible College Derwen Fawr Road, Swansea.
Reason
To allow Members to assess the proposal from within the site.
(Item 6) Application No. 2013/1300
Two detached dwellings (variation of condition 01 of planning permission 2005/1908 granted at appeal 12 February 2009 to extend the period of time for a further 5 years to commence works at 79 Mumbles Road, West Cross, Swansea.
(NOTE : Late letter of no objection from Mumbles Community Council reported.)
Reason
For further clarification from the applicant regarding the commencement of development.
40. DETERMINATION OF PLANNING APPLICATIONS UNDER THE TOWN AND COUNTRY PLANNING ACT 1990
The Planning Control Manager submitted a schedule of planning applications. Amendments to this schedule were reported and are indicated below by (#).
RESOLVED that:
(1) the undermentioned planning applications BE APPROVED subject to the conditions in the report and/or indicated below:
Page 4 Minutes of the Area 2 Development Control Committee (12.11.2013) Cont’d
(#) (Item 3) Application No. 2013/1330
Demolition of existing rear extension/outbuildings, new single storey rear extension, new shopfront, front canopy, 2.5m high fence, front ramp, rear external plant and provision of 8 car parking spaces and external alterations at Spar Stores, 51 Bishopston Road, Bishopston, Swansea.
(NOTE : x A visual presentation was given.
x Mrs Lewis (local resident) and Mr Stephenson (agent) addressed the Committee.
x Additional conditions added as follows:
4. Notwithstanding the submitted plans details of the proposed boundary treatment facing number 49a Bishopston Road, including colour and finish, shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority prior to the commencement of development. The approved boundary treatment shall be completed prior to the first use of the development hereby approved and shall thereafter be maintained in accordance with the approved details unless otherwise agreed in writing by the Local Planning Authority.
Reason
In the interests of the residential amenities of the occupier of number 49a Bishopston Road.
5. Prior to the commencement of development a construction management plan shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The development shall thereafter be completed in accordance with the approved construction management plan unless otherwise agreed in writing by the Local Planning Authority.
Reason
In the interests of the amenities of neighbouring occupiers, highway and pedestrian safety.)
Page 5 Minutes of the Area 2 Development Control Committee (12.11.2013) Cont’d
(Item 4) 2013/1389 Application No. 2013/1389
Demolition of buildings (application for Conservation Area Consent) at Spar Stores, 51 Bishopston Road, Bishopston, Swansea.
(#) (Item 5) 2013/1056 Application No. 2013/1056
Single storey side extension, single storey kitchen extension, two single storey front extensions, increase in ridge height to allow for further living accommodation and associated fenestration alterations at former Stables 1, Dunvant Road, Three Crosses, Swansea.
(NOTE : x A visual presentation was given.
x Mrs Tardioli (applicant) addressed the Committee.
st x Report updated at p 58, 1 paragraph should read ‘sliding patio doors’ not ‘inwardly opening patio doors’.)
(2) the undermentioned planning applications BE REFUSED for the reasons outlined below:
(#) (Item 2) Application No. 2013/1331
Detached garage to serve Plot 5 at land at Morfryn, St. Annes Close, Langland, Swansea.
(NOTE : x Report updated as follows:-
Page 39 - the application was advertised by way of a site notice only.
Page 41 - Plans: add plan number 10.15/16C.
x Late letter from Mumbles Community Council of no objection reported.
x Application refused contrary to officer recommendation for the following reason:
Page 6 Minutes of the Area 2 Development Control Committee (12.11.2013) Cont’d
The proposed garage by virtue of its scale and design would represent a visually incongruous form of development which would be detrimental to the character and appearance of the area contrary to the provisions of Policy EV1 and HC7 of the City and County of Swansea Unitary Development Plan (2008) and the Council’s adopted Supplementary Planning Guidance entitled “A Design Guide for Householder Development 2008”.
x Prior to refusal an additional condition was added.
The meeting ended at 3.43 p.m.
CHAIR
S: Area 2 Development Control Committee - 12 November 2013 (GB/EJF) 12 November 2013
Page 7
CITY AND COUNTY OF SWANSEA Agenda Item5 1. BISHOPSTON DINAS A SIR ABERTAWE 5. COCKETT
7. DUNVANT Report of the Head of Economic Regeneration 8. FAIRWOOD & Planning to the Chair and Members of the 9. GORSEINON Area 2 Development Control Committee 10. GOWER 11. GOWERTON 12. KILLAY NORTH DATE: 10 TH DECEMBER 2013 13. KILLAY SOUTH 29 14. KINGSBRIDGE 18. LOWER LOUGHOR 20. MAYALS 9 27 35 23. NEWTON 18 24. OYSTERMOUTH 14 25. PENCLAWDD 27. PENLLERGAER 11 28. PENNARD 5 29. PENYRHEOL 25 Page 8 32. SKETTY 35. UPPER LOUGHOR 7 8 12 36. WEST CROSS
13 32
20 10 36 28 1 23 24
Phil Holmes BS(Hons), MSc, Dip Econ Head of Economic Regeneration & Planning
TWO STAGE VOTING
Where Members vote against officer recommendation, a two stage vote will apply. This is to ensure clarity and probity in decision making and to make decisions less vulnerable to legal challenge or awards of costs against the Council.
The first vote is taken on the officer recommendation.
Where the officer recommendation is for “approval” and Members resolve not to accept this recommendation, reasons for refusal should then be formulated and confirmed by means of a second vote.
The application will not be deemed to be refused unless and until reasons for refusal have been recorded and approved by Members. The reason(s) have to be lawful in planning terms. Officers will advise specifically on the lawfulness or otherwise of reasons and also the implications for the Council for possible costs against the Council in the event of an appeal and will recommend deferral in the event that there is a danger that the Council would be acting unreasonably in refusing the application.
Where the officer recommendation is for “refusal” and Members resolve not to accept this recommendation, appropriate conditions should then be debated and confirmed by means of a second vote. For reasons of probity, Member should also confirm reasons for approval which should also be lawful in planning terms. Officers will advise accordingly but will recommend deferral if more time is required to consider what conditions/obligations are required or if he/she considers a site visit should be held. If the application departs from the adopted development plan it (other than a number of policies listed on pages 89 and 90 of the Constitution) will need to be reported to Planning Committee and this report will include any appropriate conditions/obligations.
The application will not be deemed to be approved unless and until suitable conditions have been recorded and confirmed by means of a second vote.
Where Members are unable to reach agreement on reasons for refusal or appropriate conditions as detailed above, Members should resolve to defer the application for further consultation and receipt of appropriate planning and legal advice.
Page 9
CONTENTS
OFFICER ITEM APP. NO. SITE LOCATION REC.
1 2013/0261 Land at Cae Duke Loughor Road Loughor Swansea APPROVE Construction of 106 residential units and associated works, including a new access spine road, public open space, recreational space, surface water attenuation ponds & reed bed, and public footpath linking onto Waun Road
2 2013/1067 Ash Grove Vicarage Lane Llangennith Swansea SA3 APPROVE 1JA Retention of change of use of existing outbuilding to ancillary living accommodation
3 2013/1491 College Mill Llangennith Swansea SA3 1HU APPROVE Retention and completion of replacement stable block including additional agricultural storage facility
4 2013/1292 Heritage Acres Penmaen Swansea SA3 2HD APPROVE Replacement detached dwelling
5 2013/1366 27 Slade Road, Newton, Swansea, SA3 4UE APPROVE Retention and completion of replacement dwelling (amendment to planning permission 2011/1339 granted 28th March 2013)
6 2013/0467 Former Bible College Derwen Fawr Road Swansea APPROVE Residential development consisting of up to 24 dwellings (outline) including the demolition of existing buildings
7 2013/1121 18 Lon Teify, Cockett Swansea SA2 0YB APPROVE Single storey side/rear extension, rear & side roof extension incorporating one rear dormer, one side dormer on the south west elevation and 2 side dormers on the north east elevation.
Page 10 TH AREA 2 DEVELOPMENT CONTROL COMMITTEE – 10 DECEMBER 2013
OFFICER ITEM APP. NO. SITE LOCATION REC.
8 2013/1300 79 Mumbles Road West Cross Swansea SA3 4BL APPROVE Two detached dwellings (variation of condition 01 of planning permission 2005/1908 granted at appeal 12/02/2009 to extend the period of time for a further 5 years to commence works)
9 2013/1460 Land opposite 9 Applegrove, Reynoldston, Swansea, REFUSE SA3 1BZ Detached dwelling (outline)
Page 11 TH AREA 2 DEVELOPMENT CONTROL COMMITTEE – 10 DECEMBER 2013 TH AREA 2 DEVELOPMENT CONTROL COMMITTEE – 10 DECEMBER 2013
ITEM 1 APPLICATION NO. 2013/0261 WARD: Kingsbridge Upper Loughor Area 2
Location: Land at Cae Duke Loughor Road Loughor Swansea Proposal: Construction of 106 residential units and associated works, including a new access spine road, public open space, recreational space, surface water attenuation ponds & reed bed, and public footpath linking onto Waun Road Applicant: Barratt Homes South Wales
BACKGROUND INFORMATION
POLICIES
Policy Policy Description Policy AS1 Accessibility - Criteria for assessing location of new development. (City & County of Swansea Unitary Development Plan 2008)
Policy AS2 Accessibility - Criteria for assessing design and layout of new development. (City & County of Swansea Unitary Development Plan 2008)
Policy AS6 Provision of car parking in accordance with adopted standards. (City & County of Swansea Unitary Development Plan 2008)
Policy EV1 New development shall accord with a defined set of criteria of good design. (City & County of Swansea Unitary Development Plan 2008).
Policy EV2 The siting of new development shall give preference to the use of previously developed land and have regard to the physical character and topography of the site and its surroundings. (City & County of Swansea Unitary Development Plan 2008).
Policy EV3 Proposals for new development and alterations to and change of use of existing buildings will be required to meet defined standards of access. (City & County of Swansea Unitary Development Plan 2008)
Policy EV23 Within green wedges development will only be permitted if it maintains the openness and character of the green wedge and does not contribute to the coalescence of settlements or adversely affect the setting of the urban area. (City & County of Swansea Unitary Development Plan 2008)
Policy EV24 Within the greenspace system, consisting of wildlife reservoirs, green corridors, pocket sites and riparian corridors, the natural heritage and historic environment will be conserved and enhanced. (City & County of Swansea Unitary Development Plan 2008)
Page 12 TH AREA 2 DEVELOPMENT CONTROL COMMITTEE – 10 DECEMBER 2013
ITEM 1 (CONT’D) APPLICATION NO. 2013/0261
Policy EV30 Protection and improved management of woodlands, trees and hedgerows which are important for their visual amenity, historic environment, natural heritage, and/or recreation value will be encouraged. (City & County of Swansea Unitary Development Plan 2008)
Policy EV33 Planning permission will normally only be granted where development can be served by the public mains sewer or, where this system is inadequate, satisfactory improvements can be provided prior to the development becoming operational. (City & County of Swansea Unitary Development Plan 2008)
Policy EV34 Development proposals that may impact upon the water environment will only be permitted where it can be demonstrated that they would not pose a significant risk to the quality and or quantity of controlled waters. (City & County of Swansea Unitary Development Plan 2008)
Policy EV35 Development that would have an adverse impact on the water environment due to: i) Additional surface water run off leading to a significant risk of flooding on site or an increase in flood risk elsewhere; and/or, ii) A reduction in the quality of surface water run-off. Will only be permitted where it can be demonstrated that appropriate alleviating measures can be implemented. (City & County of Swansea Unitary Development Plan 2008)
Policy HC1 Allocation of housing sites for 10 or more dwellings. (City & County of Swansea Unitary Development Plan 2008)
Policy HC3 Provision of affordable housing in areas where a demonstrable lack of affordable housing exists. (City & County of Swansea Unitary Development Plan 2008)
Policy HC17 The Council will negotiate with developers to secure improvements to infrastructure, services, and community facilities; and to mitigate against deleterious effects of the development and to secure other social economic or environmental investment to meet identified needs, via Section 106 of the Act. (City & County of Swansea Unitary Development Plan 2008)
Policy HC24 Provision of public open space within new residential developments. (City & County of Swansea Unitary Development Plan 2008)
Policy EV4 New development will be assessed against its impact on the public realm. (City & County of Swansea Unitary Development Plan 2008)
Page 13 TH AREA 2 DEVELOPMENT CONTROL COMMITTEE – 10 DECEMBER 2013
ITEM 1 (CONT’D) APPLICATION NO. 2013/0261
SITE HISTORY
App No. Proposal 2007/2097 Construction of 209 dwellings, indoor sports barn, two outdoor sports pitches, new vehicular access off Loughor Road and associated parking, open space and landscaping works (Additional drainage plans received) Decision: Withdrawn Decision Date: 26/04/2012
99/0340 RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT, NEW PLAYING FIELDS, CHILDRENS PLAY AREA AND PROVISION OF SCREEN PLANTING (OUTLINE) Decision: Withdraw Decision Date: 22/10/1999
2012/1012 Use of property as a dwelling house without complying with agricultural occupancy condition 1 of planning permission 81/546 granted on 23rd February 1982 and condition 1 of planning permission 82/167 granted 29th June 1982 (application for a Certificate of Lawfulness) Decision: Was Lawful Decision Date: 11/09/2012
2003/1046 Rear conservatory extension Decision: Grant Permission Conditional Decision Date: 16/07/2003
2008/2359 Front canopy and front bay window Decision: Grant Permission Conditional Decision Date: 02/02/2009
2007/2866 Two storey side extension Decision: Grant Permission Conditional Decision Date: 23/01/2008
2011/1191 Single storey side extension Decision: Grant Permission Conditional Decision Date: 13/10/2011
2009/0425 To remove overhanging limbs from 2 oak trees covered by TPO No. 536 Decision: Grant Tree Pres Order Consent (C) Decision Date: 03/06/2009
2005/1729 Side conservatory Decision: Grant Permission Conditional Decision Date: 03/10/2005
Page 14 TH AREA 2 DEVELOPMENT CONTROL COMMITTEE – 10 DECEMBER 2013
ITEM 1 (CONT’D) APPLICATION NO. 2013/0261
RESPONSE TO CONSULTATIONS
Initial Plans (108 units) Thirty Three neighbouring properties were directly consulted and 4 site notices were placed close to the site. The application was also advertised in the press as being an application accompanied by and Environmental Statement and as being a ‘DEPARTURE’ from the development plan.
TWENTY NINE LETTERS OF OBJECTION have been received. The concerns raised are as follows:
• There is already an increase in traffic on Loughor Road and it is becoming increasingly busy particularly at peak times where it is almost gridlocked, despite the by-pass. Trinity Street, Lime Street and Libanus Road will be used increasingly more as the unofficial bypass for Gorseinon Centre to get to the site. • During the start of the school day, cars are parked on both sides of the road from the bottom of Loughor Road to its junction with the Highfield Estate. • Pontybrenin School & Gorseinon College are virtually impassable and highly dangerous at drop off / pick up times which has been overlooked and not taken into account in the traffic survey. • The traffic survey is highly flawed – no pedestrians recorded – many people walk around the neighbourhood on a daily basis during the times the traffic survey was carried out, so the fact that not a single pedestrian passed in the 6 hours tested us very questionable / unrealistic • The spine Road will cause more congestion. • Loughor Road already has an access to Heritage Park and a mini roundabout into Highfield, in very close proximity, both of which have caused accidents and frequent near misses – many drivers fail to give way at the roundabout. Children walking to school will be put at even greater danger if another entrance is allowed from Loughor Road. • The plans encourage other means of transport including public transport and cycling to work. It would take a brave or foolhardy cyclist to brave the Loughor Road in the rush hour. Given the lack of public transport in this area, a car is a necessity. • The impact of construction traffic will be significant and has not been considered in the planning submission. • The proposal and additional traffic will lead of a decrease in air quality. • No strategic assessment of traffic from all UDP housing allocation sites feeding onto Loughor Road has been undertaken. • The quantity of housing proposed will have a significant effect on the existing community. The population of Kingsbridge is currently given as 4,000+. Assuming that 108 dwellings house 254 people (2.35 people per dwelling), the population will increase sharply. I believe this will be damaging to the existing community. In addition, as public transport, walking and cycling do not offer viable alternatives to the use of a car in this location, the proposal can not be supported by local infrastructure. No shops, no post office, no chemist, in fact no retail premises within walking distance. Also no health centre or surgery.
Page 15 TH AREA 2 DEVELOPMENT CONTROL COMMITTEE – 10 DECEMBER 2013
ITEM 1 (CONT’D) APPLICATION NO. 2013/0261
• The proposal submitted is for 108 houses on approximately half of the land allocated for housing in the Unitary Development Plan. Whilst this proposal on its own may be considered acceptable, a significant quantity of land allocated for housing will remain. We note that the application includes scope for future development. We do not believe that the infrastructure in this area can accommodate this and future applications. • The infrastructure of Gorseinon is already at breaking point i.e. dentists, schools and GP’s and health centres. • Local hospitals are full. Morriston is full to capacity with wards closing, waiting times increasing, breaches of ambulance and A&E is constant. More pressure on an already over pressurised health service. • A survey has admitted that the local primary school, Te Uchaf is oversubscribed. I would like to point out that the other primaries in the area are also full, whilst the Welsh medium primary for the catchment area, Ysgol Cymreag Pontybrenin is full to bursting point. More houses in the area sill create even more pressure on oversubscribed schools. • Public utilities are already over-stretched and power cuts are fairly frequent. Extra housing will put a strain on sewerage, lighting and other services. • More antisocial behaviour as children will have nothing to do. • Police / emergency services will be unable to cope with increases in population to the area. • Loss of green belt area again. We live in a small town and would like to maintain that – we do not live in a city. • The area to be developed extends outside the area set out in the draft UDP. • Noise nuisance to neighbours, we tolerated Cae Duke Estate when it was built 14 years ago, won’t tolerate any more building work. • The proposal has little regard for the standard of living of future occupants. The developer has squeezed properties onto the site with little regard for the standard of living of the future occupants. High housing density encourages a high turn over in occupants which is detrimental to the stability of the community. High density housing and a high turn over in occupants also creates problems of antisocial behaviour. • Sewerage & flood plain damage. The sewerage work is already overworked. Orders have been made to clear up due to the effect on the estuary. • Culverting & surface water drainage issues which would exacerbate problems already on Waun Road. Current ditches will not cope with the run off. • The stench from the sewage works would indicate that the system at Gowerton cannot cope at present. It has not been confirmed that the sewers have the capacity to accept the additional flow from the proposed development in this application. • Storm water drains are inadequate already leading to flooding; surface water drainage has not been fully investigated. • We do not believe that there would be sufficient capacity in the water supply of water to accommodate the proposed development. There are already problems in the supply to the current vicinity and there are problems with the water supply being discoloured. • The site drains into the Afon Lliw, tributary of the Burry Inlet & Loughor Estuary site if Special Scientific Interest (SSSI), part of the Carmarthen Bay and Estuaries candidate Special Area of Conservation (cSAC) – impacting on the European Site.
Page 16 TH AREA 2 DEVELOPMENT CONTROL COMMITTEE – 10 DECEMBER 2013
ITEM 1 (CONT’D) APPLICATION NO. 2013/0261
• Loss of historical site of interest i.e. Roman Road which runs right through the site. • The Local Authority designated green area has a proposed access road driven through it. • The land that the site access road passes through is subject to a S106 agreement for open space. This piece of land forms the boundary between the historic villages of Upper Loughor and Kingsbridge. We do not feel that the development of this land is in the spirit of the S106 agreement. The development also includes the construction of several houses on the area of open space subject to an S106 agreement. This proposal breaches the S106 agreement. • Loss of wildlife habitat and grazing land which is already at a premium in this area. • The area is already overdeveloped. • Brownfield sites should be considered over green fields and wedges. • Three storey houses are completely out of character for the area. • Spurs in the road plans clearly indicate an intention to extend the site further in the future with the possibility of even further developments into the green fields and increasing all the issues raised, if planning permission is given to this development, breaching planning policy. • If planning permission is granted for the initial 108 houses it will be relatively easy to gain permission for further development. If this happens the pressure on existing roads, sewerage and other facilities will be enormous. • There is a complete disregard for the rural aspect of the area that such a large scale development would cause. The pleasant green area would be completely obliterated and the associated wildlife e.g. badgers, foxes etc destroyed. I would point out that many hedgerows have already been cleared by developers illegally prior to planning consent being obtained in an effort to get rid of any wildlife habitat, a matter that has been reported to the planning dept on several occasions. • The area between Ffordd Cae Duke and Highfield is a designated “green wedge” area and in accordance with the original planning application for Heritage Park should not be developed. Why are criteria allowed to change to accommodate subsequent planning applications. • The site access road passes through land earmarked as EV24 protected open space in the UDP. This is the last piece of natural green land left open on Loughor Road. Replacing this with a tree lined, landscaped road can not replace the local character that will be lost as a result of this proposal. Loughor will become irrevocably linked to Kingsbridge. • The development proposal includes houses to be built on an area of open space subjection to EV24 open space protection in the UDP. This is a breach of the UDP. As this area is semi-rural, we believe that the housing proposed is too dense and is out of character with the surrounding area. • There are many local brown field areas which could benefit from a development of this nature without putting it in the middle of a pleasant green area surrounded by private housing. • There are already plans for two other developments on that road already. • The initial planning application for the Cae Duke Colliery site was allowed in order to clear up and improve the visual area. This I agree it has achieved. However to allow this new development into greenfield is a retrograde step and will ruin the rural aspect of the area. • The development is extremely high density. This will erode what remains of the green wedge separating Kingsbridge from Loughor.
Page 17 TH AREA 2 DEVELOPMENT CONTROL COMMITTEE – 10 DECEMBER 2013
ITEM 1 (CONT’D) APPLICATION NO. 2013/0261
• It will add strain to the existing sewerage. The water pressure is already substandard and will only worsen with extra demand. • The credit crunch is on going and houses aren’t being sold, never mind building new ones. • Policy E09 (2) of the Lliw Valley plan concedes that “it is desirable to retain a green wedge between the two communities of Loughor and Kingsbridge”. • The development has made a proviso for recreational space but this space is intersected by the only road into the development. To site a recreational space in which children would play adjacent to a main road and intersected by the only road into the development seems to be highly dangerous and a recipe for an accident to happen. • The track behind Highfield should remain as it was thought to be a ‘public right of way’ and green wedge land should stay as such. • The site may have a detrimental impact on the already prone to flooding area at the bottom of Waun Road making it hazardous. • I do not feel that this application or previous applications have ever taken into consideration the objections of the residents of Gorseinon and Loughor, it’s just the same proposal altered very slightly. It seems the applicant has no concern for the social consequences of this development. • Detriment on badger population near to the proposed development area and other wildlife, to include bats, jays and other indigenous species. • Loss of trees and hedgerows will have a detrimental effect on all wildlife. • Enabling works have facilitated the spread of Japanese knotweed. • The proposed development fails to comply with the following Welsh Assembly Policies from Planning Policy Wales (March 2002) 5.2.8 Trees & Woodlands Trees, woodlands and hedgerows are of great importance both as wildlife habitats and in terms of their contribution to landscape character and beauty. Local Planning Authorities should seek to protect tree, groups of trees and areas of woodland where they have natural heritage value or contribute to the character or amenity of a particular locality . Still stand. 9.2.8 Housing Local planning authorities should consider the following criteria in deciding which sites to allocate for housing in their UDP’s. The availability of previously developed sites and empty or underused buildings and their suitability for housing use; the location and accessibility of potential development sites to jobs, shops and services by modes other than the car, and the potential for improving such accessibility; the capacity of the existing and potential infrastructure including public transport, water and sewerage, other utilities and social infrastructure (such as schools and hospitals) to absorb further development and the cost of adding to further infrastructure; the ability to build communities to support new physical and social infrastructure, including the consideration of the effect on welsh language to provide sufficient demand to sustain appropriate local services. • I suspect that given the ‘future road links’ shown on the plan, this will eventually lead to the building of yet more houses in the area behind Harding Close, and that this proposal is a cynical ploy to achieve this end.
Page 18 TH AREA 2 DEVELOPMENT CONTROL COMMITTEE – 10 DECEMBER 2013
ITEM 1 (CONT’D) APPLICATION NO. 2013/0261
Llwchr Town Council – The Council proposes to object to the application for the following reasons: (i) Has concerns that the level of traffic generated by the development will be too high having regard to existing levels; and (ii) Has concerns regarding the adequacy of the educational facilities to cope with the potential numbers of children living in the residential units.
Amended Plans (106 Units) Following negotiations with officers, amended plans were received showing a reduction of the number of units from 108 to 106 units.
All previous objectors were reconsulted with regard to the amended plans. A further SEVENTEEN letters of objection have been received raising the following objections:
• The inevitable substantial increase in population which will result from this proposed application along with the housing development currently under construction in this area will have a significant negative impact on an already highly congested local road network. • The increased population will also have a detrimental impact on the local schools and amenities. The Loughor/Gorseinon area has had problems with groups of children/youths that do not have adequate after school facilities resulting in gangs of children/youths hanging around on the local streets and shopping areas. Potentially adding to the number of children/youths in the area is a recipe for anti social behaviour • I notice in this application the Local Authority designated green area has a proposed road access driven through it. The two "Access left for future development" entries shown on the proposal gives me great cause for concern. If this current application is approved the future developments earmarked for this area will only compound the above problems. • I do not feel that this application or previous applications have ever taken into consideration the objections of the residents of Gorseinon and Loughor, it is just the same proposal altered very slightly. It seems to me the applicant has no concern for the social consequences of this development. • This development is proposed on land which has historically been designated ‘green wedge’. I was under the impression that no building was allowed on this land – when did that change?? Allowing development of this land will make a mockery of the ‘green wedge’ policy which it appears can be overturned whenever large developers find an attractive area in which to build. • There are many brownfield sites in the area which would benefit greatly from development – the area in question is not one of them! The effect will be detrimental to the environment and to the communities involved. I would urge you reject this application and preserve the pleasant rural aspect of the area. • Another concern is the complete disregard for the rural aspect of the area that such a large scale development would cause. The pleasant green area would be completely obliterated and the associated wildlife e.g. badgers, foxes etc destroyed. I would point out that many hedgerows have already been cleared by developers illegally prior to planning consent being obtained in an effort to get rid of any wildlife habitat, a matter that has been reported to the planning department on several occasions for investigation. • The average property has two cars, and the infrastructure of Gorseinon/Loughor isn't in place to take the vehiclesPage that 19 the new properties will bring. TH AREA 2 DEVELOPMENT CONTROL COMMITTEE – 10 DECEMBER 2013
ITEM 1 (CONT’D) APPLICATION NO. 2013/0261
• I am a regular walker around the area and the existing estates already have blocked pavements because cars are on pavements instead of driveways. The area will become one grid-locked car park with very few green areas. • In view of the complete mess the Council made regarding the flow of construction traffic for the Persimmon Kingsbridge Fields Development lower down on Loughor Road, can the Council advise where construction traffic will be entering and leaving Cae Duke, over what dates, and during which hours. • A large number of extra dwellings will put an extra strain on public utilities. This area is already subject to frequent power cuts low water pressure and more houses will only make the situation worse. • It is noted that there has been clearance started on the Cae Duke development is this in order when the planning has not been approved yet? • All these houses are being built on top of a mine, how many more houses will be built before the mine collapses. • The development has made a proviso for recreational space but this is intersected by the only road into the development. To site a recreational space in which children would play adjacent to a main road and intersected by the only road in to the development seems to me to be a highly dangerous and a recipe for an accident to happen. • There is no documentation in the proposed plans to confirm if there is sufficient capacity in the sewage system to accommodate the proposed developments. We also note that there are at least two other new housing estates (one being constructed i.e. Kingsbridge Fields and one being planned off Glebe Road Loughor) in the close vicinity that would put even further strain on a system that already requires updated/replacing. Again there is no documentary evidence in the plans to show that any surface water from the developments can be dealt with adequately. • We object to any two and a half storey housing if the application was granted as again privacy would be lost. • We note having compared the boundaries of both application sites that there is a discrepancy on the northern boundary of the current application. Our client has not received the requisite notice required of an applicant who wishes to apply for planning consent on another ownership. • We note that the access road is to be gained over land subject to a S106 Agreement to which Loughor RFC is a party. It was formerly agreed that this access be granted, only due to the fact that an earlier planning condition relating to Heritage Park and impacting on our clients land had not been dovetailed into a highways Section 38 agreement. This error by the Council gave a ransom strip to the developer of Heritage Park and as this is no longer an issue as our client has the right to access the proposed playing ground via Ffordd Cae Duke and Heritage Park. • We note that the recently amended site plan shows potential access onto our clients land but short of the boundary. If this application were to be granted we urge the council not to repeat the earlier mistake of requiring access onto the Cae Duke site and then not adopting the highway to the boundary.
Llwchwr Town Council – The proposed amendments do not address the concerns of the Council outlines previously and as such the council would wish to continue with its objection t the application.
Page 20 TH AREA 2 DEVELOPMENT CONTROL COMMITTEE – 10 DECEMBER 2013
ITEM 1 (CONT’D) APPLICATION NO. 2013/0261
Natural Resources Wales (NRW) Initial Comments (18/04/13) Prior to determination, we would seek further information regarding the proposed means of surface water drainage. As your Authority is aware, the site is located in an area where there are ongoing concerns regarding the foul and surface water drainage networks, which are resulting in additional pollution and nutrient loading spilling to the Burry Inlet (Carmarthen Bay and Estuaries) SAC. This has resulted in a Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) being prepared to enable development in this area to go forward. Protection of the water environment is a material planning consideration and your Authority must be satisfied that the proposed method of foul and surface water drainage will not cause any detriment to water quality. We note that a drainage statement has been prepared in support of this application, (Hammonds Yates ref. 1421 dated 22/01/13,) which details the proposed means of foul and surface water disposal.
Surface Water - We note that site investigation works included as appendix 8 to the Environmental Statement (ES) (Integral Geotechnique Site Investigation Report) have recommended that infiltration methods are not suitable due to ground conditions. It is therefore proposed to install an adoptable gravity drainage network which comprises of the roads and private drainage systems. It is unclear from the drainage statement what techniques are to be used for the private drainage systems and it is indicated that further investigation is required. The proposed surface water sewers will exit the site at the southern boundary into an underground attenuation tank, which is to be sized to accommodate the 1 in 100yr storm event plus climate change. The piped outfall will then discharge via a hydrobrake into the adjacent existing ditch. It is stated that the discharge rate into the ditch will be equivalent to ‘greenfield’ runoff of the development site area. This ditch will then pass through a reed bed and eventually discharge into the River Lliw.
We would prefer to see overground storage used at the site as underground storage can result in future/long term maintenance issues. An above ground SUDS system would also provide some biodiversity value to the site and have been successful in reintroducing biodiversity in the urban environment. Furthermore, it is not clear whether this attenuation tank is intended to manage surface water run-off during construction. Experience has show that pollution of surface water drains and attenuation tanks with sediments during the construction phase of this type of development is common. We have seen prolonged pollution incidents in watercourses from contaminated surface water systems and attenuation tanks. These issues are usually difficult and expensive to resolve and can result in enforcement action. Again, above ground attenuation would be preferable and we would especially like to see an above ground system in place to manage surface water during construction.
If however your Authority is satisfied that underground storage is appropriate then an agreement must be in place to ensure the long term maintenance of the surface water system. No calculations have been provided with the application in support of the proposed surface water drainage system. The detailed design of the underground storage tank (or any other attenuation system) is a matter for Dwr Cymru Welsh Water (DCWW) and your Authority’s Drainage Engineers to advise on as the adopting authorities.
However, we will require design calculations and drawings of the system to enable us to determine whether it is designed to the required standards/storm events . This is to ensure the tank or other attenuation features are adequately designed to not increase flood risk elsewhere. Page 21 TH AREA 2 DEVELOPMENT CONTROL COMMITTEE – 10 DECEMBER 2013
ITEM 1 (CONT’D) APPLICATION NO. 2013/0261
We would advise that the design of the attenuation tank should incorporate a system to manage exceedance flows should the storage reach capacity.
We would also welcome the use of additional sustainable drainage systems (SUDS) as part of the development proposal. This is in line with TAN15 guidance (July 2004). While we recognise ground conditions may not be suitable for infiltration techniques, other SUDS could be implemented, for example attenuation pond, swales, grey-water recycling etc. No details have been provided as to whether these techniques have even been considered, or evidence provided to show why they could not be used. Please also note that any works which may affect the flow in the ditch, which is classed as an ordinary watercourse, will require prior consent from the Lead Local Flood Authority (LLFA) which in this instance will be Swansea Council.
Carmarthen Bay and Estuaries European Marine Site (Surface Water) - As you are aware, the ultimate destination of surface water discharged from this site via the Afon Llan is the Carmarthen Bay and Estuaries Special Area of Conservation. As such we advise that you must consider this application under Regulation 61 (1) of the Conservation of Species and Habitats Regulations 2010. This states that an appropriate assessment of the implications for that site in view of its conservation objectives must be undertake in respect of any plan or project which:
a) is likely to have a significant effect on a European site or a European offshore marine site (either alone or in combination with other plans and projects), and
b) is not directly connected with or necessary for the management of that site.
Should a competent authority be unable to conclude no significant effect, an appropriate assessment will be required. In considering whether it can ascertain whether the project would have an adverse effect on the integrity of the European site, the competent authority should consider whether the imposition of conditions, or other restrictions, on the project, and the way in which it would be carried out, would enable it to be ascertained that the project would not have an adverse effect on the integrity of the site. We advise that the quality and quantity of surface water discharges from the site are issues that should be considered in the Regulation 61 assessment.
Foul Drainage - With regard to foul water drainage, we note from section 3.1 of the drainage statement that all foul flows will discharge into the public sewer. We also note that a point of connection has been agreed with DCWW. We assume from this that DCWW are satisfied capacity exists at the treatment works (Gowerton) to accommodate the flows generated, without causing pollution. We would recommend that you confirm this with DCWW prior to determination. We would also remind your Authority that to accord with the terms and content of the agreed MOU, foul connections should only be allowed when compensatory surface water removal has been implemented within the same catchment. We note from section 3.1 that a scheme is currently being negotiated between Waterman Transport & Development and DCWW. Any agreed scheme must be recorded on the Hydraulic Register of compensatory surface water disposal as held by your Authority. Compensatory phosphate removal should also be implemented at the Llannant STW pro rata to the size of the development to accord with the requirements of the Water Framework Directive.
Page 22 TH AREA 2 DEVELOPMENT CONTROL COMMITTEE – 10 DECEMBER 2013
ITEM 1 (CONT’D) APPLICATION NO. 2013/0261
Carmarthen Bay and Estuaries European Marine Site (Foul Water) - We would also refer you to the following document: “Habitats Regulations Assessment of the effects of wastewater associated with new development in the catchment of the Carmarthen Bay and Estuaries European Marine Site”: Final Version (v2) David Tyldesley Associates, 10 December 2012. We note that you will be using this report as the Habitats Regulations Assessment for all planning applications in Swansea that fall within the foul drainage catchment area for the Burry Inlet and Loughor Estuary (unless there are other ecological concerns that fall outside the water quality issues covered by this report).
Water Quality / Pollution Prevention - The Water Framework Directive is mentioned as part of the supporting documents, but there is no reference to the actual waterbody in question (Loughor, waterbody number GB531005913500). It is currently failing to meet its ecological requirements and as such, if planning is secured it is imperative that all appropriate steps are taken to ensure the development does not cause any further deterioration. We note that a construction management plan is to be produced, which will detail what pollution prevention measures are to be implemented on site. This must include a detailed surface water management plan (for the construction phase) and site specific pollution prevention plan. Ideally, we would like to see this information prior to determination, but accept that this could be provided under an appropriately worded condition on any permission granted. This plan should include the following: • Identification of surrounding watercourses and potential pollution pathways from the construction site to those watercourses. • How each of those watercourses and pathways will be protected from site run off during construction. • How the water quality of the watercourses will be monitored and recorded. • How surface water runoff from the site during construction will be managed/discharged. Please note that it is not acceptable for ANY pollution (e.g. sediment/silt/oils/chemicals/cement etc.) to enter the surrounding watercourses.
Any drains laid must also be protected in a way that prevents dirty water from the construction site entering them. Please note that allowing site drainage to enter the foul sewerage system during the construction phase is unacceptable.
Ecology/Biodiversity - We note that some of the habitats and species considered in the ES are included on the UK BAP and Section 42 list of habitats and species of principal importance for conservation of biological diversity in Wales. We remind you of your duty to have regard to the purpose of conserving biodiversity when exercising your authority’s functions (Section 40 Natural Environment and Rural Communities Act 2006). As such we welcome the proposal as outlined in section 5.10 (Ecology) and 5.11 (Trees and Hedgerows) to retain features identified as important or of value.
Habitats - The ES highlights the presence of the following UK BAP and Section 42 habitats: Purple moor grass and rush pasture. We note that this habitat will be subject to total loss at the site, but was assessed as being of low conservation value.
Badgers - We note from the ES that there are badger setts within 50m of the boundary of the application site but none within the site itself.
Contaminated Land - We note that a Site Investigation Report, prepared by Integral Geotechnique has been prepared (ref: 11034/MJE/12, Nov 2012) to support this application. We have no comments however in terms of controlled waters. Page 23 TH AREA 2 DEVELOPMENT CONTROL COMMITTEE – 10 DECEMBER 2013
ITEM 1 (CONT’D) APPLICATION NO. 2013/0261
The developer should address risks to controlled waters from contamination at the site, following the requirements of Policy for Wales and the Environment Agency’s which can be found on the website www.environment-agency.gov.uk
In consideration of the above, we would ask that determination of the application is deferred until the requested information regarding the discharge calculations and the private drainage systems has been submitted for review and comment.
ADDITIONAL COMMENTS (05/11/13 Having reviewed the information on you website, it appears that the information relevant to Natural Resources Wales (NRW) comprises of a revised Drainage Statement, (ref: 1421, Rev. C, dated 24/09/13) and a plan titled ‘ Off-Site surface Water Proposals Layout’ (Job No. 1421, Dwg no 301, Rev C, dated June 2013). These documents have been produced by Hammond Yates.
In our previous response, (dated 18 April 2013), we asked that further information be provided regarding surface water drainage. This latest set of information is insufficient to enable us to fully advise your Authority on the acceptability of the drainage system proposed for this development . As this is a full application for a large residential development, which is located in a sensitive area in terms of water quality, we would expect full drainage proposals to be provided and agreed prior to determination.
Surface Water Drainage - A statement is made within Section 3.2 of the drainage report that the use of sustainable drainage techniques (SUDS) will be investigated. We note however that a site investigation report (Integral Geotechnique Report 9833/AF/07) recommends infiltration measures should not be employed due to ground conditions. We would again like to repeat our previous observations that the use of alternative, non infiltration techniques for drainage should be fully investigated and implemented within the development site itself. There is no evidence to show whether such SUDS techniques have even been considered by the applicant for this proposal.
This section also states that flow control devices are to be used to limit the rate of discharge into the receiving ditch course to ‘greenfield’ run-off. The calculated Greenfield run-off rates have not been provided, nor have the design standards and drawings for the proposed drainage system. As highlighted in our previous response, this information should be submitted prior to determination . These calculations should include the area of the development to which the drainage system applies and the calculations used to determine the attenuation and maximum discharge rates. This information is requested so that your Authority can be satisfied that the system has been designed to the required standards/storm events and that the run-off rates are appropriate.
The proposed surface water drainage strategy appears to rely on off-site storage ponds to attenuate flows, thereby allowing a greater density of development on site without setting land aside for SUDS within the application site itself. We must assume that the off-site land allocated for attenuation is either within the applicant’s ownership or that agreement has been reached with the landowner. This should be clarified within the document .
Furthermore, we would also seek confirmation as to whether this off-site work is part of the existing planning application, or whether it subject to a separate planning application? If it is to be considered as part of this application, we would query whether the planning application ‘red line’ boundary needs to be amended? Page 24 TH AREA 2 DEVELOPMENT CONTROL COMMITTEE – 10 DECEMBER 2013
ITEM 1 (CONT’D) APPLICATION NO. 2013/0261
In addition we would also seek clarification as to the responsibility for maintenance of these off-site features in perpetuity, as it presumably would not be adopted as part of the development site infrastructure?
Until all relevant information, as detailed above is provided, we are unable to advise your Authority on the acceptability of the surface water drainage system proposed for this development.
Foul Water Drainage - With regard to the foul water drainage proposals, we welcome and support the proposal to discharge to the main public sewer. As indicated in our previous response, confirmation that sufficient hydraulic capacity exists to accept the foul flows should be sought from DCWW.
Furthermore we again acknowledge that negotiations are taking place between Waterman Transport & Development and DCWW to identify an appropriate compensatory surface water removal scheme to enable this development to move forward. Ideally, this scheme should be delivered within the same sewerage catchment (Gowerton) and an agreement should be made prior to determination.
Other - All other comments made in our previous response with regard to water quality, pollution prevention, biodiversity, habitats and protected species still stand.
In consideration of the above, we would again ask that determination of the application is deferred until further information regarding the management of surface water from the development has been submitted for review and comment. Based on the information provided to date we are unable to advise your Authority on the acceptability of the proposals. Should you be unable to defer determination and are minded to approve this application, we would ask to be informed of this decision. We would also ask that we be granted further time in which to provide additional advice and to enable us to provide some planning conditions which we consider must be included on any permission granted.
FINAL COMMENTS (26/11/13)
Surface Water Drainage - In our response on 5 November 2013, we raised concerns in relation to the off-site storage ponds in that these were located outside of the red line planning boundary. We also queried whether this land was within the applicant’s ownership and what, if any measures were in place to ensure this area of land was not subject to future development. We welcome the provision of the revised location plan (Job No. 1421, Dwg No. 101, Rev C), which confirms that the attenuation ponds are within the red line planning boundary. We also note from the UDP extract you have provided, that the land to the south of the proposed development is located within a ‘green wedge’ area, thereby safeguarding it against future development. We can confirm that this information has addressed our concerns regarding the location of the attenuation ponds.
We have also reviewed the additional information provided, which includes an overall drainage area plan (drawing no. 277), drainage layout sheets (drawing no’s 211 & 212) and a plan detailing the attenuation areas (drawing no 203) and a micro-drainage report (dated 22.10.2013). Our comments below are based on this information as well as that previously provided.
Page 25 TH AREA 2 DEVELOPMENT CONTROL COMMITTEE – 10 DECEMBER 2013
ITEM 1 (CONT’D) APPLICATION NO. 2013/0261
We note from drawing no. 277 that the impermeable area to be served by the proposed drainage system has been identified as 1.86 ha. We can confirm that the Greenfield run- off rate of 9.6 l/s, as provided in the micro-drainage report, is considered suitable for use for the 1.86 ha development. This rate of discharge applies for the area served by the drainage scheme. All water which enters the system must be accounted for, and if other green areas drain into this system, then these too must be reflected in any calculations. We can also confirm that a 20% addition for climate change has been used in the calculations for the storage ponds (micro-drainage report ref: Pond calcs_95536). However, with the exception of the calculations for the ponds, no design standards or calculations have been provided for the remainder of the surface water drainage system. Supporting calculations used to design the whole system should be submitted in writing to your Authority for approval.
As indicated in our previous responses, as this is a full application for a large residential development, we would expect the drainage proposals to be agreed prior to determination. However we note that your Authority’s drainage engineers are satisfied that the development will be acceptable subject to the inclusion of appropriate planning conditions.
We would agree with the conditions put forward by your Drainage Engineer, Mr Dan McAuley (sent to us by email on 26 November 2013). If your Authority are minded to approve this application then these conditions must be included to ensure a satisfactory drainage scheme for the site. In particular, we welcome proposed condition 3 which relates to the need for a long term ownership and maintenance of the drainage scheme to ensure the long term operation of the system.
With regard to proposed condition 2, we are satisfied that this will address our comments with regard to the need for further detailed design standards/calculations. In discharging any future planning condition, your Authority must be satisfied that the proposed surface water system includes sufficient storage in line with current guidance.
Foul Water Drainage - Our previous comments in relation to foul water drainage from the site remain. We are also aware that Waterman Transport & Development have submitted 2 drainage reports relating to off-site surface water removal schemes, which it is stated in a covering email by Asbri Planning, have identified sufficient surface water removal to cater for the foul flows generated from this development site. We agree with DCWW that the most appropriate way forward on this matter is to take these schemes to the Technical Working Group for discussion and approval.
Pollution Prevention - As noted in our response of 18 April 2013, we welcome the intention to produce a construction management plan for the site. This must include a site specific pollution prevention plan and particular care must be given to the protection of the surrounding water environment. If planning permission is granted, we would ask that conditions are included.
We would recommend that the CMP include as a minimum: Identification of surrounding watercourses and potential pollution pathways from the construction site to those watercourses. How each of those watercourses and pathways will be protected from site run off during construction.
Page 26 TH AREA 2 DEVELOPMENT CONTROL COMMITTEE – 10 DECEMBER 2013
ITEM 1 (CONT’D) APPLICATION NO. 2013/0261
How the water quality of the watercourses will be monitored and recorded. How surface water runoff from the site during construction will be managed/discharged. Please note that it is not acceptable for ANY pollution (e.g. sediment/silt/oils/chemicals/cement etc.) to enter the surrounding watercourses. storage facilities for all fuels, oils and chemicals construction compounds, car parks, offices etc details of the nature, type and quantity of materials to be imported on to the site measures for dealing with any contaminated material (demolition waste or excavated waste) identification of any buried services, such as foul sewers, so that they are protected details of emergency contacts, for example Natural Resources Wales hotline 0800 807 060
Waste Management - Given the nature and scale of this development, we would recommend that a site waste management plan (SWMP) is produced. Completion of a SWMP will help the developer /contractor manage waste materials efficiently, reduce the amount of waste materials produced and potentially save money. Guidance on SWMPs is available from the DEFRA website (www.defra.gov.uk). We acknowledge that a SWMP may be something best undertaken by the contractor employed to undertake the project. Furthermore, we note that these documents are often ‘live’ and as such, we would recommend an appropriately worded condition is included on any permission granted. The following condition is suggested, but could be amended as you see fit. Please note that any waste materials that are generated on site (either as a result of construction or demolition) must be stored and treated in line with relevant environmental legislation. Any waste materials transported off site must be done so by a registered waste carrier and disposed of at an appropriately licensed facility.
Contaminated Land - It is possible that historic uses of the site may have led to contamination. As a precautionary measure, we would recommend that a condition is included.
Ecology/Biodiversity - Our comments made in our response of 18 April 2013 with regard to ecology, habitats, and protected species still stand. We have no further comments to make in this regard.
Japanese knotweed/Invasive Species - If the alien plant species, Japanese knotweed (or any other invasive species) is present on site, appropriate measures must be implemented for the removal or long-term management. The spread of Japanese knotweed is a contravention of the Wildlife and Countryside Act 1981 (as amended) and is also a controlled waste under the Environmental Protection Act 1990. As such it must be disposed of in an appropriate manner. If not treated properly, Japanese knotweed will continue to grow and spread and can easily compromise the structural integrity of all hardstanding areas and built structures of the development.
Dwr Cymru / Welsh Water (DCWW) Initial Comments – Sewerage – conditions – The proposed development would overload the existing public sewerage system downstream of the proposed development. Currently we have no improvements planned as part of out Capitol Investment Programme. As a result we consider any development prior to improvements being undertaken to be premature and therefore we would recommend you resist and refuse the proposed development. Page 27 TH AREA 2 DEVELOPMENT CONTROL COMMITTEE – 10 DECEMBER 2013
ITEM 1 (CONT’D) APPLICATION NO. 2013/0261
It may, however be possible for the developer to fund the accelerate provision of replacement infrastructure or to requisition a new sewer under Section 98-101 of the Water Industry Act 1991. Reason: To prevent hydraulic overloading to the public sewerage system, to protect the health and safety of existing residents and ensure no detriment to the environment.
Our concerns may be overcome by undertaking works consistent with one of the fundamental principle of the Memorandum of Understanding (MoU) between all signatories including the City & County of Swansea and Dwr Cymru / Welsh Water, i.e. by providing compensation on the foul flows from the development by the removal of surface water which currently enters the combined sewer network. Any such compensation would preferably be located within the catchment of the combined storm overflow (CSO) downstream of Cae Duke, namely the Rhosog Pumping Station CSO. Alternatively, any compensation scheme may be located within the wider Gowerton Catchment area. It should be noted that the applicant has sought to address the issues arising from the MoU through early engagement with us, however, as this issue is still outstanding we have no option by to object at this time.
Additional Comments – I am mindful of your proposed ‘Grampion’ condition to secure a scheme to be delivered and surface water removed prior to occupation.
Coal Authority The Coal Authority considers that the content and conclusions of the Site Investigation Report are sufficient for the purposes of the planning system and meets the requirements of PPW in demonstrating that the application site is, or can be made, safe and stable for the proposed development. The Coal Authority therefore has no objection to the proposed development,
Glamorgan Gwent Archaeological Trust You will recall that following an archaeological evaluation of the application area by Cambria Archaeology in 2007 and the submission of an updated Archaeological Desk Based Assessment by the Dyfed Archaeological Trust (report number 2012/79) in 2012 in support of the proposed development at Cae Duke we had no objection to the positive determination of this application provided a condition be attached to any consent granted. We therefore recommend that a condition requiring the applicant submit a detailed programme of investigation for the archaeological resource should be attached to any consent that is granted by your Members. We envisage that this programme of work would take the form of a watching brief during the initial topsoil stripping/ground work required for the development, and the recording of the features named in the assessment, with detailed contingency arrangements including the provision of sufficient time and resources to ensure that archaeological features that are located are properly excavated, recorded and a report containing the results and analysis of the work is produced.
Highway Observations This proposal is for the erection of up to 106 dwellings on land adjacent to Cae Duke. A previous application (2007/2097) for 209 dwellings and a sports barn was withdrawn prior to determination. This development site is one of 3 allocated sites along Loughor Road / Glebe Road and recently consent was granted for 86 dwellings off Loughor Road opposite the Belgrave Road junction. In considering any of the three allocated sites, the cumulative traffic impact needs to be considered and this aspect has been covered.
Page 28 TH AREA 2 DEVELOPMENT CONTROL COMMITTEE – 10 DECEMBER 2013
ITEM 1 (CONT’D) APPLICATION NO. 2013/0261
Access and Traffic - The site is to be accessed from a new mini roundabout located between the existing Cae Duke and Highfield accesses. The proposed mini roundabout will address highway safety concerns associated with excessive speed at that location. The recent development opposite the Belgrave Road junction considered the combined affect of the then Cae Duke development for 209 Dwellings and the sports barn and concluded that the impact on Loughor Road and its junctions with Belgrave Road and West Street was acceptable, with both junctions continuing to operate within theoretical capacity. This current proposal is predicted to generate 60 two-way movements in the am peak and 68 two-way movements in the pm peak. The predictions are based on nationally held data for residential developments. Sensitivity testing has been undertaken, using artificially high trip rates derived from the existing Cae Duke estate adjacent to this site. The sensitivity test has considered up to 145 two-way movements in the pm peak and the network is shown to be able to accommodate that artificially high traffic generation. It should be noted that the previous proposal for 209 dwellings with a sports barn was predicted to generate far higher traffic volumes and testing for that including the Loughor Road development of 86 dwellings indicated that junctions along Loughor Road would continue to operate within capacity.
Accessibility - There is a two hourly service past the site which currently enters Highfield and circumnavigates along Belgrave Road. To the west of the site at Bryn Road approximately 450m away, there is a 20 min frequency service and a 10 - 15 min frequency service east of the site at West Street which is over 700m away. Welsh Government guidance recommends that the walking distance to bus facilities in an urban environment should be between 300m and 500m. The service currently serving Highfield is too infrequent to be considered suitable and therefore the next nearest service is on Bryn Road and is within the recommended maximum of 500m. Footways are present along Loughor Road and provide for pedestrian movements in the locality. Additionally, footways will be provided within the site layout and there is a proposal to connect the site southward towards Waun Road where there is a footpath and bridleway. This will improve the accessibility of the site and allow for both pedestrian and possibly cycle movements to enable connection to NCN Route 4, The Wales Coastal Path and LC37 footpath together with LC38 Bridleway all of which are south of the site. The details of the actual connection would be subject to further detailed design to ensure safety. Local facilities are available in Gorseinon. Walking distance is approximately 1.3Km to Gorseinon Cross and this is approaching the maximum recommended walking distance to facilities of 1.5Km for urban areas.
Highway Safety - As previously recommended and conditioned with the Loughor Road development, the site will need to contribute to a package of measures identified under the safe routes in the community scheme (£73,882). This includes for crossing facilities on Loughor Road together with traffic management and general safety improvements in the area with a related scheme to provide a school drop off facility for Pontybrenin school. The latter would be subject to separate planning consent. All three allocated sites in this area will be required to contribute to the works on a pro-rata basis.
Local Concerns - A number of local concerns have been raised relating to traffic and road safety issues which are addressed below;
Page 29 TH AREA 2 DEVELOPMENT CONTROL COMMITTEE – 10 DECEMBER 2013
ITEM 1 (CONT’D) APPLICATION NO. 2013/0261
• Traffic Volume - Traffic levels on Loughor Road are commensurate with its function providing the main access route from Loughor to Kingsbridge and onwards. Peak hour volume, as with any local distributor road, does result in some localised congestion. The additional traffic movements associated with the development have been assessed and results indicate that the additional traffic will not add significantly to current flows.
• Congestion at Pontybrenin School - This issue is recognised and this development, as with others in the locality, is required to contribute to a scheme to provide a school drop-off facility. This will help to reduce school time congestion along that part of Loughor Road.
• No pedestrian flows in traffic survey - Traffic surveys normally concentrate on vehicle movements as that is what causes congestion. Pedestrian movement is catered for with footway provision in the area and is unlikely to be of such a volume as to present any issues.
• Additional access onto Loughor Road - The site access will be positioned sufficiently distant from both Highfield and Cae Duke so as not to present any proximity issues. Additionally, the inclusion of a mini roundabout at the access will help to reduce speed and increase safety. Testing indicates that no congestion issues will occur as a result of the access.
• Lack of Public Transport and Cycle facilities - This is addressed in the report with distances to current public transport provision and additional cycle/footpath links to the wider network.
• UDP allocated sites not included within assessment - All relevant UDP sites have been assessed with the previous submission and also with the nearby Loughor Road scheme. Additionally, the third UDP site is currently being considered and this also includes cumulative traffic impact. It is considered that further duplication of this is not necessary on this occasion.
• Lack of accessibility leading to traffic congestion - The accessibility of the site has been addressed in the report. Additionally, traffic volume issues have been assessed as acceptable and are also included in this report.
• Additional development of remaining land would have unacceptable impact - Any further development would need to be assessed on its merits. Developers will often include possible future links to adjacent undeveloped land.
• Construction site congestion – a condition will be added requiring a construction site management plan to be submitted and approved in the interests of highway safety.
Highway Conclusions - The traffic impact of the development has been formally assessed and is considered to be acceptable. Contribution towards safer routes in the communities will be required and the provision of a mini roundabout at the access will potentially improve safety along that part of Loughor Road.
Page 30 TH AREA 2 DEVELOPMENT CONTROL COMMITTEE – 10 DECEMBER 2013
ITEM 1 (CONT’D) APPLICATION NO. 2013/0261
Highway Recommendation - I recommend that no highway objections are raised subject to the following; i. Prior to any works commencing on site, a contribution shall be made towards a scheme for local highway safety enhancements. ii. Prior to any works commencing on site the proposed mini roundabout detail shall be submitted and approved. The approved details shall be implemented prior to beneficial occupation of any dwelling within the site. Note the off site highway works will be subject to an agreement under Section 278 of the Highways Act 1980. iii. A pedestrian/cycle path shall be constructed linking the application site to the Footpath/Bridleway (LC37/LC38) in accordance with details to be submitted and agreed. iv. The applicant shall submit a detailed Travel Plan for approval within 12 months of consent and the Travel Plan shall be implemented prior to the beneficial use of the development commencing. v. Prior to any works commencing on site, a construction management plan shall be submitted for approval. The development shall be carried out in accordance with the approved construction management plan.
Drainage Observations Initially, concerns were raised with regard to the proposed drainage of the site and the use of an attenuation tank. However following negotiations and amendments to the plans showing attenuation ponds instead of tanks, the Drainage Officer has comments that having reviewed the additional information submitted by Hammonds Yates via emails dated 11 th , 15 th and 18 th November we find the details contained therein acceptable, therefore we recommend that conditions are appended to any permissions given.
Pollution Control Observations No objection subject to conditions
Education Observations The Schools in the catchment area for the site are: English Medium Primary - Pontybrenin Primary English Medium Secondary - Penyrheol Comprehensive Welsh Medium Primary - YGG Pontybrenin Welsh Medium Secondary - Ysgol Gyfun Gwyr .
At present there is spare capacity at all the 4 schools (2 Welsh & 2 English) for 2012 and 2013. With regard to future capacity (2019) both of the English schools have capacity. As such it is not necessary to ask for contributions for the English schools. The projected capacities suggests that there will be a deficiency in Welsh school places. The S106 contribution for the welsh school places therefore would equate to: £44,288 for primary (£10,372 x 4.27) £47,544 for secondary (£15, 848 x 3) = Total £91,832
Housing Enabling Observations I can confirm that there is a demand for affordable housing in the Loughor Area. The proposal includes 30 units representing 28% provision across the site. It will comprise of 20 low cost ownership units and 10 DQR social rented units which will be pepper-potted across the site which is considered to be integrated enough within the site to satisfy our requirements. This is acceptable to the Housing Service.
Page 31 TH AREA 2 DEVELOPMENT CONTROL COMMITTEE – 10 DECEMBER 2013
ITEM 1 (CONT’D) APPLICATION NO. 2013/0261
Arboricultural Observations Initial Comments - Insufficient information is provided within the submitted arboricultural report. Please can all details be provided to the British Standard 5837:2012 Trees in relation to design, demolition and construction – Recommendations. This must include:
Full tree survey data; Accurate and scalable Tree Constraints Plan clearly showing the above ground constraints and below ground constraints of the trees on or adjacent to the site that are affected by the development including the trees around the reed beds and drainage area; Detailed Aboricultural Impact Assessment; Accurate and scalable plan showing the proposed design clearly overlaid onto the Tree Constraints Plan; Scalable and clear Tree Protection Plan/method statement.
Additional Comments - A tree survey report written by Treescene Ltd dated 17 th October 2013 has been submitted. This report provides details regarding the quality, condition and constraints of the trees and hedgerows on this site. Also an Arboricultural Impact Assessment (AIA) and Tree Protection Plan written again by Treescene dated 25 th October has been submitted. Overall this proposal provides adequate space for many of the retained trees and hedgerows on this site. Some trees and hedgerows as identified within the Treescene AIA have been highlighted to be removed. Further to this some branch pruning work will be required to many of the boundary trees/hedgerows on this site. Overall the proposal is acceptable in arboricultural terms subject to the inclusion of the planning conditions and informative.
Ecology Observations
The site has features that are of ecological value several of these will be lost as the site is developed. As part mitigation for this loss please could a condition be added to any permission we give ensuring the retention of the southern hedge row, the hedge buffer zone and badger proof fence to the west of the site, the open space and the area containing the attenuation ponds and reed bed. The recommendations in section 5 of the ecological report should be followed
APPRAISAL
This application is reported to Committee for decision and a Site Visit has been requested by Councillor Will Evans to assess the impact of the development on existing dwellings and to assess the impact of the new access road. In addition, the application is considered to represent an acceptable Departure from the provisions of the Development Plan.
Full planning permission is sought for the construction of 106 residential units and associated works, including a new access spine road, public open space, recreational space, surface water attenuation ponds and reed bed, and public footpath linking onto Waun Road
Site and Surroundings
The application site is located to the South of Loughor Road, on the fringes of the existing urban area, between Kingsbridge and Lower Loughor, and is sited approximately 1.4km to the south of the nearest urban centre of Gorseinon District Centre.
Page 32 TH AREA 2 DEVELOPMENT CONTROL COMMITTEE – 10 DECEMBER 2013
ITEM 1 (CONT’D) APPLICATION NO. 2013/0261
The site boundaries are defined by the highway of Loughor Road to the north (approx 100m in length), the residential estate of Highfield to the east, the residential estate of Heritage Park, field hedgerow boundaries to agricultural fields to the south and west, within part of the site adjoining Waun Road to the west.
To the north of the site is Loughor Road which has a variety of traditional and more recent housing forms including wide fronted rendered cottages directly opposite the site entrance. There are expansive views to the south over the shallow Afon Lliw Valley to Craig Cefngolau. The site is highly prominent from the south and forms a green edge to the settlement when viewed from the A484.
The site does not include the land known as the former Cae Duke Colliery site which separates the application site from the southern boundary of houses in Heritage Park.
The irregular shaped site comprises approximately 4.07 hectares of land, currently characterised by a mixture of improved and semi-improved pasture land used for grazing horses and cattle, with areas of gorse, scrub woodland, and mature hedgerows and trees.
The majority of the site is allocated as a housing site under Policy HC1 (104) of the City & County of Swansea Unitary Development Plan 2008 (UDP).
The northern section of the site, however, is allocated as ‘greenspace’ under Policy EV24 of the Unitary Development Plan 2008.
The Proposal
The application consists of 106 residential units with the following dwelling mix: • 13no. five bedroom houses • 49no. four bedroom houses • 26no. three bedroom houses • 12no. two bedroom houses • 6no. one bedroom flats
Thirty dwellings are proposed to be ‘affordable housing’ which equates to 28% provision across the site. It will comprise of 20 low cost ownership houses (12no. three bedroom houses and 8no. two bed houses) and 10 DQR (Development Quality Requirement) social rented units (4no. two bedroom houses and 6no. one bedroom flats).
Car parking is provided in the layout in various ways including private drives, garages and small parking courts.
A new access road and mini roundabout is proposed from Loughor Road, opposite No. 188 Loughor Road. It is proposed that the new access road will be offered for adoption by the Local Highway Authority (via a Section 38 agreement).
An area of open space of approx 0.8ha is proposed adjacent to the Loughor Road frontage and it is intended that much of the existing hedge boundary to Loughor Road will be retained.
Page 33 TH AREA 2 DEVELOPMENT CONTROL COMMITTEE – 10 DECEMBER 2013
ITEM 1 (CONT’D) APPLICATION NO. 2013/0261
A local area of play (LAP) of approx 148sq.m is proposed within the site adjacent to plots 13-14 which is a facility intended to be equipped with play facilities and will provide a small area of unsupervised open space specifically designed for young children for play close to where they live. These open spaces are proposed to be managed and maintained by a private management company.
A new public footpath is proposed linking the application site to Waun Road, including a new footpath adjacent to the southern hedge boundary
Two surface water attenuation ponds and reed bed would be located to the south of the development site within the ‘green wedge’ area. The future maintenance of the ponds is also proposed to be managed by a private management company.
No TPO trees are to be removed as part of the application, however part of the existing hedgerow adjacent to Loughor Road and the raised hedgerow within the site would need to be removed to accommodate the new access road. Three non-protected hedgerows within the site and 5 non-TPO trees would be removed. The hedge forming the eastern and southern boundary would be retained.
An Environmental Statement (ES) was submitted voluntarily by the applicant in association with the application.
Main Issues
The main issues for consideration with regard to this application relate to the acceptability of residential development at this greenfield site in terms of the impacts of the development on the character and appearance of the area, residential amenity impacts on neighbouring occupiers, impact of the development on access, parking, highway safety and impacts upon environmental interests having regard to the provisions of the polices of the City and County of Swansea Unitary Development Plan 2008 (UDP) listed within the previous pages. There are in this instance no additional overriding issues for consideration under the provisions of the Human Rights Act.
Principle of Development
The site forms part of an allocated housing site within the current UDP under Policy HC1 (Housing Sites) (104) ‘Land South of the Former Cae Duke Colliery, Loughor Road’ where the potential for 212 homes is indicated. This site represents approximately 4ha of the wider allocation and with 106 homes within the red line, it has a density of approximately 26 homes per hectare.
It is allocated within the Greater North West Swansea housing policy zone. The amplification to the policy confirms that it is not necessary to phase the release of greenfield land given the relatively low levels of release proposed. These greenfield sites (including this site) are all within this housing policy zone where there would otherwise be a housing land shortage due to the lack of available alternative sites within existing settlements. Having regard to Policy HC1, the principle of residential development on this greenfield site is acceptable in accordance with the UDP housing strategy.
Page 34 TH AREA 2 DEVELOPMENT CONTROL COMMITTEE – 10 DECEMBER 2013
ITEM 1 (CONT’D) APPLICATION NO. 2013/0261
It is noted however that the scheme does not include the whole of the housing allocation site HC1 (104) as it excludes the land to the north and east of the allocation. However it is noted that within the proposed layout, provision is made for future access to this land.
The main access road to the site will be within an area of ‘greenspace’ as defined under Policy EV24. The historic designation of this land was to prevent the coalescence of Kingsbridge and Loughor. However, the housing allocation which is subject to this application has no other vehicular access point. It is noted that the land in question is in private ownership and at present is not accessible or able to be used by the general public. The land is not of high landscape quality and is screened from view by a large hedge adjacent to Loughor Road. The new road will bisect the land, with much of the hedge row fronting Loughor Road remaining. The land would be open space and would provide access to the general public thus making it more accessible for informal recreational uses.
The introduction of a new access road through the space would allow a central access and a ‘gateway’ landscape for the new estate. An avenue of trees is proposed along the new access road which would enable the introduction of a stronger landscape structure which would create two distinct green recreational spaces. The existing hedgerows along the northern, eastern and southern boundaries would be predominantly retained and repaired with new infill planting.
Policy EV24 states that within the greenspace system, the environment will be conserved and enhanced, and those development proposals which would be likely to have a significant adverse effect on the greenspace system or which do not provide appropriate compensatory or mitigation measures will not be permitted. It is considered that the new access road would not have a significant adverse effect on the greenspace system due to the compensatory and mitigation proposals for new planting and the opening up of the land for public access and use. As such the location of the new access road is considered to be acceptable when considered under the provisions of Policy EV24 in this instance.
Previous related planning history and legal agreement
Outline planning permission was granted in 1994 for the original residential development at Cae Duke (now built out as the residential estate at Heritage Park), and this was subject to a legal agreement requiring inter alia the following:-
1) a small area for playing fields immediately to the south of the houses with access off the estate road from Heritage Park. (This area is outside the boundary of the current planning application), 2) the retention of an area of open space to the east and south east of the development for open space, recreational or agricultural use (this land lies between the current residential estates of Heritage Park and Highfield where the new access road is proposed), 3) the creation of a woodland boundary between the above protected open space and the eastern boundary of the new housing development at Heritage Park. (This woodland boundary has been planted out and is outside the current application site).
These elements of the legal agreement were required to be completed before completion of 75% of the houses in the Heritage Park development. However, whilst planning permission was granted in 1997 for the playing fields, this was not implemented. Page 35 TH AREA 2 DEVELOPMENT CONTROL COMMITTEE – 10 DECEMBER 2013
ITEM 1 (CONT’D) APPLICATION NO. 2013/0261
Reserved matters details for 88 houses at Heritage Park were granted approval in February 1988 (ref. 98/0032). A unilateral undertaking was entered into by the owner of the land to pay monies towards other recreational facilities in the area in lieu of provision of the playing fields.
It is noted, however, that the legal agreement in respect of the open space and woodland in the north eastern section of the current application site is still in effect, and the relevant clauses of that legal agreement are proposed to be varied within the Section 106 Agreement in association with this planning application.
Visual Amenity and Urban Design
The site is located to the south of Loughor Road between the settlements of Kingsbridge and Loughor. The development proposes a new roundabout on Loughor Road with a new access road running through the open space (as referred to above) in a southward direction to the new housing estate. The first line of the housing estate would be located to the south of the existing raised hedgerow which is to be retained.
The proposed street layout within the site is considered to be well defined as the street structure is legible with a clear ‘spine’ street and secondary streets off this. The proposed streets would be directly overlooked by housing frontages with special designed houses to turn the corners. The front gardens would be defined and softened by hedges which gives a strong sense of enclosure reminiscent of traditional welsh settlements whilst maximising the natural surveillance of the public realm. The side and rear boundaries treatment are proposed to generally be brick in order provide a robust good quality boundary treatment. There are some instances where additional brick walls are required which can be controlled by condition.
The adjoining area to the north is also allocated for housing development under policy HC1 (104). The proposed layout of the application site indicates two street connections to the adjoining land, however the adjoining land is at a higher level and the layout plan indicates a 2.5m crib lock retaining wall where one of the street connections would be made. Therefore it will be important to condition the final levels of the streets and houses on the application site to ensure that the future connections can be made.
The southern part of the layout would be outward facing with the frontages of the houses including front doors facing the countryside. This is a welcome orientation given that all recent developments have backed onto the countryside and as a result many of the views to existing developments are currently dominated by rear fences. The outward facing arrangement facing south across the Afon Lliw Valley also includes a pedestrian footpath and a new hedge along the site boundary which links to Waun Road. This ensures that the scheme achieves a positive relationship to the countryside and that the expansive rural views are available for all to enjoy as part of the public realm.
The Design and Access Statement indicates that the existing overhead power line across the site will be relocated underground which will improve the visual appearance of the locality.
The proposed layout aims to accommodate parked cars without allowing them to dominate the living environment. To this end a variety of parking solutions are proposed which varies depending on the context: Page 36 TH AREA 2 DEVELOPMENT CONTROL COMMITTEE – 10 DECEMBER 2013
ITEM 1 (CONT’D) APPLICATION NO. 2013/0261
o The majority of parking provision is on plot to the side of dwellings (many dwellings benefit from garages) where it is convenient for users and not visually prominent. o In some less sensitive locations, the parking provision is located to the front of the houses served and is softened by planting.
A range of dwelling sizes are proposed from 1 bed flats up to 5 bed homes which forms the basis for interesting street-scenes and helps establish a balanced community. The houses are proposed to be predominantly two stories with pitched roofs, although some would also have rooms in the roof areas to create focal buildings at key points. A number of the proposed houses are to be enlivened by gable two storey features and single storey bays. The proposed materials include red and buff bricks and ivory render with grey tiled roofs – all of which respond to the character of the area and would create an interesting streetscene. There is no strong architectural character to this locality and it is considered that the proposal represents a distinctive sense of place.
The development of a part of this wider allocated site is welcomed. The proposed layout is legible, the homes have a positive relationship to the street and the outward facing homes along the southern boundary are especially notable. Two areas of public open space would be created and house designs would be distinctive thereby adding character to the area
As such it is considered that the proposed design and layout of the estate is acceptable and complies with the provisions of Policy EV1 and EV2 of the UDP.
Residential Amenity
With regard to the amenity of existing residents in Heritage Park and Highfield, the existing properties that would be closest to the proposed development are Nos. 19 and 23 Ffordd Cae Duke, Heritage Park and Nos. 16 – 40 Highfield.
To the rear of 19 Ffordd Cae Duke would be a single storey triple garage (serving plots 1 and 2) which would be set over 20m from the rear elevation of No. 19 and at a significantly lower level. To the rear of 23 Ffordd Cae Duke would be the rear gardens of Plots 1 and 7, which would be over 20m from the rear elevation of No 23 and again would be at a significantly lower level. As such in terms of overbearance, overlooking and overshadowing, neither of the properties in Ffordd Cae Duke would be adversely affected due to the sufficient separation distances and lower land levels. As such the application is considered to be acceptable in this regard.
With regard to houses in Highfield, the closest dwelling would be No 16 Highfield which would be located 22m from the side elevation of the nearest proposed house fronting onto the open space, and the distance gradually increases up to. No 40 Highfield which would be located 31m from the proposed house to its rear.
All of the proposed houses within the new development would be located in excess of the minimum 21m standard in relation to all the existing dwellings in Highfield and Ffordd Cae Duke.
As such it is considered that there would be no adverse impacts upon the residential amenity of the surrounding existing dwellings with regard to overbearance, overlooking and overshadowing impacts. Page 37 TH AREA 2 DEVELOPMENT CONTROL COMMITTEE – 10 DECEMBER 2013
ITEM 1 (CONT’D) APPLICATION NO. 2013/0261
No. 118 Loughor Road is located adjacent to the proposed mini-roundabout and opposite the proposed new access road. Whilst it is acknowledged that the proposed development may result in additional noise and disturbance from the new access, this is unlikely to be significant given the relatively high existing background noise levels already arising from traffic using Loughor Road.
In terms of the residential amenities of the future occupiers of the development, the site layout has been amended to ensure a minimum separation distance of 21m from rear to rear elevations of all the dwellings. In addition the vast majority of the proposed plots would have rear gardens of a length of 10m. On this basis, it is considered that the proposed layout would not give rise to any harmful impacts on the residential amenities of the future occupiers.
Having regard to the above, it is considered that the proposed development would not result in any significant impacts on the amenities of existing residents in Heritage Park, Highfield and Loughor Road and would not raise adverse impacts in respect of the residential amenities of the proposed development. The proposal would therefore be in accordance with Policy EV1 of the UDP.
Highways Impacts
Vehicular access would be derived from a new access road and mini roundabout from Loughor Road. The new access road would have footpaths on both sides which would run the entire length of the new road within the estate. A new foot path is proposed along the southern boundary of the site which will connect to Waun Road.
A previous application (2007/2097) for 209 dwellings and a sports barn was withdrawn prior to determination. This development site is one of 3 allocated sites along Loughor Road / Glebe Road and recently consent was granted for 86 dwellings off Loughor Road opposite the Belgrave Road junction. In considering any of the three allocated sites, the cumulative traffic impact needs to be considered and this aspect has been addressed.
Access and Traffic - The site is to be accessed from a new mini roundabout located between the existing Cae Duke and Highfield accesses. The proposed mini roundabout will address highway safety concerns associated with excessive speed at that location. The recent development opposite the Belgrave Road junction considered the combined affect of the then Cae Duke development for 209 dwellings and the sports barn and concluded that the impact on Loughor Road and its junctions with Belgrave Road and West Street was acceptable, with both junctions continuing to operate within theoretical capacity. This current proposal is predicted to generate 60 two-way movements in the am peak and 68 two-way movements in the pm peak. The predictions are based on nationally held data for residential developments. Sensitivity testing has been undertaken, using artificially high trip rates derived from the existing Cae Duke estate adjacent to this site. The sensitivity test has considered up to 145 two-way movements in the pm peak and the network is shown to be able to accommodate that artificially high traffic generation. It should be noted that the previous proposal for 209 dwellings with a sports barn was predicted to generate far higher traffic volumes and testing for that including the Loughor Road development of 86 dwellings indicated that junctions along Loughor Road would continue to operate within capacity.
Page 38 TH AREA 2 DEVELOPMENT CONTROL COMMITTEE – 10 DECEMBER 2013
ITEM 1 (CONT’D) APPLICATION NO. 2013/0261
Accessibility - There is a two hourly service past the site which currently enters Highfield and circumnavigates along Belgrave Road. To the west of the site at Bryn Road approximately 450m away, there is a 20 min frequency service and a 10 - 15 min frequency service east of the site at West Street which is over 700m away. Welsh Government guidance recommends that the walking distance to bus facilities in an urban environment should be between 300m and 500m. The service currently serving Highfield is too infrequent to be considered suitable and therefore the next nearest service is on Bryn Road and is within the recommended maximum of 500m. Footways are present along Loughor Road and provide for pedestrian movements in the locality. Additionally, footways will be provided within the site layout and there is a proposal to connect the site southward towards Waun Road where there is a footpath and bridleway. This will improve the accessibility of the site and allow for both pedestrian and possibly cycle movements to enable connection to NCN Route 4, The Wales Coastal Path and LC37 footpath together with LC38 Bridleway all of which are south of the site. The details of the actual connection would be subject to further detailed design to ensure safety. Local facilities are available in Gorseinon. Walking distance is approximately 1.3Km to Gorseinon Cross and this is approaching the maximum recommended walking distance to facilities of 1.5Km for urban areas.
Highway Safety - As previously recommended and conditioned with the Loughor Road development, the site will need to contribute to a package of measures identified under the safe routes in the community scheme (£73,882). This includes for crossing facilities on Loughor Road together with traffic management and general safety improvements in the area with a related scheme to provide a school drop off facility for Pontybrenin School. The latter would be subject to separate planning consent. All three allocated sites in this area will be required to contribute to the works on a pro-rata basis.
Local Concerns - A number of local concerns have been raised relating to traffic and road safety issues which are addressed below;
• Traffic Volume - Traffic levels on Loughor Road are commensurate with its function providing the main access route from Loughor to Kingsbridge and onwards. Peak hour volume, as with any local distributor road, does result in some localised congestion. The additional traffic movements associated with the development have been assessed and results indicate that the additional traffic will not add significantly to current flows.
• Congestion at Pontybrenin School - This issue is recognised and this development, as with others in the locality, is required to contribute to a scheme to provide a school drop-off facility. This will help to reduce school time congestion along that part of Loughor Road.
• No pedestrian flows in traffic survey - Traffic surveys normally concentrate on vehicle movements as that is what causes congestion. Pedestrian movement is catered for with footway provision in the area and is unlikely to be of such a volume as to present any issues.
Page 39 TH AREA 2 DEVELOPMENT CONTROL COMMITTEE – 10 DECEMBER 2013
ITEM 1 (CONT’D) APPLICATION NO. 2013/0261
• Additional access onto Loughor Road - The site access will be positioned sufficiently distant from both Highfield and Cae Duke so as not to present any proximity issues. Additionally, the inclusion of a mini roundabout at the access will help to reduce speed and increase safety. Testing indicates that no congestion issues will occur as a result of the access.
• Lack of Public Transport and Cycle facilities - This is addressed in the report with distances to current public transport provision and additional cycle/footpath links to the wider network.
• UDP allocated sites not included within assessment - All relevant UDP sites have been assessed with the previous submission and also with the nearby Loughor Road scheme. Additionally, the third UDP site is currently being considered and this also includes cumulative traffic impact. It is considered that further duplication of this is not necessary on this occasion.
• Lack of accessibility leading to traffic congestion - The accessibility of the site has been addressed in the report. Additionally, traffic volume issues have been assessed as acceptable and are also included in this report.
• Additional development of remaining land would have unacceptable impact - Any further development would need to be assessed on its merits. Developers will often include possible future links to adjacent undeveloped land.
• Construction site traffic / congestion – a condition will be added requiring a construction site management plan to be submitted and approved in the interests of highway safety.
Highway Conclusions - The traffic impact of the development has been formally assessed and is considered to be acceptable. Contribution towards safer routes in the communities will be required and the provision of a mini roundabout at the access will potentially improve safety along that part of Loughor Road.
Highway Recommendation – The Head of Transpiration and Engineering recommends that no highway objections are raised subject to the following; i. Prior to any works commencing on site, a contribution shall be made towards a scheme for local highway safety enhancements. ii. Prior to any works commencing on site the proposed mini roundabout detail shall be submitted and approved. The approved details shall be implemented prior to beneficial occupation of any dwelling within the site. Note the off site highway works will be subject to an agreement under Section 278 of the Highways Act 1980. iii. A pedestrian/cycle path shall be constructed linking the application site to the Footpath/Bridleway (LC37/LC38) in accordance with details to be submitted and agreed. iv. The applicant shall submit a detailed Travel Plan for approval within 12 months of consent and the Travel Plan shall be implemented prior to the beneficial use of the development commencing. v. Prior to any works commencing on site, a construction management plan shall be submitted for approval. The development shall be carried out in accordance with the approvedPage construction 40 management plan. TH AREA 2 DEVELOPMENT CONTROL COMMITTEE – 10 DECEMBER 2013
ITEM 1 (CONT’D) APPLICATION NO. 2013/0261
In the light of the above, the proposal is considered to be acceptable and in accordance with the provisions of Policies AS1, AS2, AS6 and EV3 of the UDP
Affordable Housing
UDP Policy HC3 (Affordable Housing) highlights that where a demonstrable lack of affordable housing exists, the Council will seek to negotiate the inclusion of an appropriate element of affordable housing on suitable sites. The evidence base for this need is the Local Housing Market Assessment which assessed the dynamics of the housing market in around Swansea and underpins the Council’s Housing Strategy. The affordable housing provisions has been subject to negotiations which has resulted in a total of 30 affordable housing units being agreed, comprising of 20 low cost home ownership units and 10 social rented units. These units have been identified on the submitted plans and have been sited throughout the site. The provision of the agreed level of affordable housing can be secured by a S106 planning obligation.
Education
The Director of Education has requested a financial contribution for local the following schools within the catchment of the application site:
English Medium Primary - Pontybrenin Primary English Medium Secondary - Penyrheol Comprehensive Welsh Medium Primary - YGG Pontybrenin Welsh Medium Secondary - Ysgol Gyfun Gwyr .
At present there is spare capacity at all the 4 schools (2 Welsh & 2 English) for 2012 and 2013. With regard to future capacity (2019) both of the English schools have capacity.
As such it is not necessary to ask for contributions for the English schools. The projected capacities suggest that there will be a deficiency in Welsh school places. The S106 contribution for the welsh school places therefore would equate to: £44,288 for primary (£10,372 x 4.27) £47,544 for secondary (£15, 848 x 3) = Total £91,832
Open Space / Play Space Provision
UDP Policy HC24 (Play Areas / Public Open Space) requires new housing developments where the level and nature of open space provision in the locality is inadequate, to: make provision for open space within or near to the development or: to contribute towards the provision or improvement of existing off-site facilities.
An appropriate area of open space is to be maintained at the north of the application site adjacent to Loughor Road, as previously referred to earlier in this report. At present this area is not accessible to the public; however the inclusion of this space for public access / informal recreation is acceptable in terms of providing open space in relation to this application.
Page 41 TH AREA 2 DEVELOPMENT CONTROL COMMITTEE – 10 DECEMBER 2013
ITEM 1 (CONT’D) APPLICATION NO. 2013/0261
In addition a Local Area of Plan (LAP) of approx 148sq.m is proposed within the site adjacent to plots 13-14 which is a facility intended to be equipped with play facilities and will provide a small area of unsupervised open space specifically designed for young children for play close to where they live. These open spaces are proposed to be managed and maintained by a private management company.
The provision of the 2 areas of open space within the application site is considered to be acceptable and complies with the provisions of Policy HC24 of the UDP.
Ecological Issues
The applicant has submitted an extended Phase 1 Habitat Survey which highlights that the trees and hedgerows have an intrinsic interest in a local context and are likely to function as important sources of shelter and corridors for both bats and birds. The grassland area was considered to have a low intrinsic ecological interest.
The Council’s Ecologist has confirmed that the loss of a number of the hedgerows within the site is acceptable as long as measures are taken to mitigation for this loss. As such it is considered appropriate to recommend conditions ensuring the retention of the southern hedge row, the hedge buffer zone and the provision of a badger proof fence to the west of the site, and the open space and the area containing the attenuation ponds and reed bed. The recommendations in section 5 of the ecological report should be followed.
Trees
The site contains a number of trees, none of which are subject to Tree Preservation Orders (TPO). A Tree Survey report, an Arboricultural Impact Assessment (AIA) and Tree Protection Plan was submitted which provides details regarding the quality, condition and constraints of the trees and hedgerows on this site. The Council’s Tree Officer considers that the details submitted provide adequate space for many of the retained trees and hedgerows on this site. Some trees and hedgerows as identified have been highlighted to be removed and some branch pruning work will be required to many of the boundary trees/hedgerows on this site. It is considered that the proposal is acceptable in arboricultural terms subject to the inclusion of the planning conditions and informatives.
Coal Mining Issues
The Coal Authority considers that the content and conclusions of the Site Investigation Report are sufficient for the purposes of the planning system and meets the requirements of Planning Policy Wales in demonstrating that the application site is, or can be made, safe and stable for the proposed development. As such, the Coal Authority has no objection to the proposed development.
Archaeological Issues
Glamorgan Gwent Archaeological Trust have confirmed that they have no objection to the positive determination of this application provided a condition be attached to any consent granted requiring the applicant submit a detailed programme of investigation for the archaeological resource.
Page 42 TH AREA 2 DEVELOPMENT CONTROL COMMITTEE – 10 DECEMBER 2013
ITEM 1 (CONT’D) APPLICATION NO. 2013/0261
The programme of work should take the form of a watching brief during the initial topsoil stripping/ground work required for the development, and the recording of the features named in the assessment, with detailed contingency arrangements including the provision of sufficient time and resources to ensure that archaeological features that are located are properly excavated, recorded and a report containing the results and analysis of the work is produced.
Water Quality Issues
This application is one of a number of major planning applications that have been held in abeyance since 2009, due to ongoing concerns raised by Europe and Welsh Government regarding the water quality of the Loughor Estuary which is part of the following European protected sites: Carmarthen Bay and Estuaries Special Area of Conservation; Carmarthen Bay Special Protection Area; and Carmarthen Bay RAMSAR (CBEEMs). The City and County of Swansea as Local Planning Authority has followed the precautionary approach advised by its statutory advisor CCW towards all development that drains into CBEEMs, and carried out the following Habitat Regulations Assessment
Burry Inlet Habitat Regulations Assessment
Introduction
The City and County of Swansea, as the competent authority, is required under Regulation 61(1) of the Conservation of Habitats and Species Regulations 2010 (known as the ‘Habitat Regulations’) to undertake a Habitat Regulations Assessment of any project likely to have an effect on a European Site, or candidate/proposed European Site, either alone or in combination with other plans or projects, that is not necessary to the management of the site for management of the site for nature conservation.
In this instance, the European sites potentially affected are the Carmarthen Bay and Estuaries European Marine Site (CBEEMS), the Carmarthen Bay Special Protection Area (SPA) and the Burry Inlet SPA and RAMSAR site. Before deciding to give permission we must therefore first consider whether this development is likely to have a significant effect on the CBEEMS either alone or in combination with other plans or projects in the same catchment area.
Following an investigation of likely significant effects on the CBEEMS features water quality was identified as the only factor that might have an effect this is discussed below.
Water Quality
With regard to the water quality issues in the Burry inlet and Loughor Estuary, the City and County of Swansea has followed the advice of their statutory advisor, and has commissioned a preliminary assessment under the above Regulations which is limited to the assessment of potential wastewater effects only.
This assessment notes that as part of their review of consents (RoC) under regulation 63 the Environment Agency (EA) undertook a detailed Habitats Regulations assessment in relation to the effects of their consented activities. Consent modifications were identified to enable the Environment Agency to conclude no adverse effect on the integrity of the CBEEMS in respect of their consents operating at their maximum consented limits. Page 43 TH AREA 2 DEVELOPMENT CONTROL COMMITTEE – 10 DECEMBER 2013
ITEM 1 (CONT’D) APPLICATION NO. 2013/0261
As the consents in question have already been subject to a full assessment (alone and in- combination) under the provisions of the Habitat Regulations, there is no need for the City and County of Swansea to undertake a further assessment where development can be accommodated within the post RoC discharge consent limits.
It is the opinion of the authority that this development can be accommodated within the post RoC discharge consent limits, and will not be likely to have a significant effect either alone or in-combination on the Carmarthen Bay and Estuaries SAC, the Carmarthen Bay SPA, or the Burry Inlet SPA and RAMSAR. Such effects can be excluded on the basis of the objective information available through the Environment Agency review.
Other Possible Effects on CBEEMS features
In addition, it is considered that there are no other potential adverse effects from this development proposal, either alone or in combination with other plans or projects on the above protected European sites.
On this basis there is no requirement to make an appropriate assessment of the implications of the proposed development in accordance with regulation 61(1).
The LPA has therefore satisfied its obligations as the ‘competent authority’ under the Habitats Directive and associated Habitat Regulations. This is in line with the requirements of National Policy Guidance and Policy EV25 of the Unitary Development Plan.
Hydraulic Capacity Issues in Gowerton WwTW Drainage Network
Whilst the LPA is satisfied that it has addresses the issues relating to the Habitat Regulations on this site, there are still outstanding issues in the Gowerton Waste Water Treatment Works (WwTW) catchment area.
In 2011 Dwr Cymru Welsh Water adopted the findings of a study commissioned to investigate the problems and solutions relating to foul drainage in this drainage catchment area. The have also prepared a plan of improvements works for Gowerton WwTW catchment area to start in 2020 (AMP7). In the meantime they are prepared to bring forward schemes if developers finance them.
In addition, the Council has kept a register of savings made on brownfield sites and some of these have been completed. The register is required by the Memorandum of Understanding 2011 agreed and signed by the City & County of Swansea, together with its partners Carmarthenshire County Council, Dwr Cymru Welsh Water, and Natural Resources Wales.
Foul Drainage
This development will separate surface water and land drainage from foul water, so the only drainage impact on the existing sewerage drainage system to Gowerton WwTW would be the foul connections. It is estimated that the maximum foul flow from this site can easily be accommodated by potential surface water removal schemes or compensatory water savings already made from other brownfield developments in the area.
Page 44 TH AREA 2 DEVELOPMENT CONTROL COMMITTEE – 10 DECEMBER 2013
ITEM 1 (CONT’D) APPLICATION NO. 2013/0261
Dwr Cymru Welsh Water has not objected to this scheme. Whilst Natural Resources Wales raised concerns last autumn regarding the impact of new residential development on the water quality of the estuary, there is no conclusive evidence that supports this view, and the Agency has since agreed to the Council’s adopted Habitats Regulation Assessment. The HRA conclusions are based on objective information available through the 2010 Environment Agency’s own Review of Consents of Gowerton WwTW.
The current application if approved will be subject to planning conditions controlling drainage, including the use of SUDs, on this basis, there is no known evidence to justify refusal on drainage grounds . Subject to further control by conditions, it is considered that the drainage arrangements for this scheme are acceptable and can meet the overarching aims of sustainable development in this area, and satisfy the provisions of Policies EV33, EV34, and EV35 of the UDP.
Land and Surface Water Drainage
The arrangements for surface water drainage have been submitted and have been considered by the Council’s Drainage Officer and NRW. Surface water from the roofs, hard surfaces and roads will be discharged via an attenuation pond and reed bed system at greenfield rates.
The details provided are considered to be satisfactory in principle, but it is considered necessary to secure further details of the drainage arrangements via conditions, prior to the commencement of development on site, to ensure there is no potential future harm to the water environment of the estuary or the amenities of existing and future residents. On the basis of the information submitted to date, it is considered that there are no overriding reasons to warrant a refusal of permission on drainage grounds alone.
Subject to further control by conditions, it is considered that the drainage arrangements for this scheme are acceptable and are in accordance with the provisions of Policies EV33, EV34 and EV35 of the UDP.
Environmental Sustainability
The applicant has submitted a pre-assessment document which confirms the dwellings proposed would be capable of achieving Code for Sustainable Homes Level 3 and are capable of achieving 1 credit under ENE 1 (Dwelling Emission Rate). This mandatory sustainability standard may be secured by condition.
Other Material Considerations
The concerns raised by third parties are summerised above and have been addressed within the above appraisal. This includes reference to UDP policy considerations, the current status of this greenfield site, its acceptability for development and impacts upon schools. The highway access and public safety concerns relating to traffic (including during the course of construction) are considered in the Highways section above. The design and layout considerations have been carefully assessed and amendments have been made to ensure that the design and layout would be acceptable. The impact on trees, local wildlife and ecology has been properly assessed by NRW, the Council’s Ecologist and the Council’s Arboricultural Officer and subject to conditions is considered to be satisfactory in this respect. Page 45 TH AREA 2 DEVELOPMENT CONTROL COMMITTEE – 10 DECEMBER 2013
ITEM 1 (CONT’D) APPLICATION NO. 2013/0261
Concerns have been raised with regard to air quality from car fumes – the site is not located in a specified area of concern with regard to air quality and the Pollution Control Team have raised no objections to this development.
The management of the attenuation ponds, the public open space and the LAP will be secured under the Section 106 Planning Obligation Agreement.
Conclusion
The proposal is for residential development of 106 dwellings on a site allocated for housing in the UDP. The proposal is considered to be acceptable in terms of its impacts on the character and appearance of the area, impacts on residential amenity and impacts on access, parking and highway safety.
The layout and design of the development will create a distinctive development that has had regard to the hedgerows bounding the site and will enable land not previously accessible to the public to be used as open space / informal recreation, and will provide connections to the wider sections of the allocated housing site.
The drainage proposals have been considered in the above report including the foul connections and the hydraulic capacity issues, as well as the land / surface water drainage issues. It is considered that the requirements of DCWW and NRW for compensatory surface water savings in the Gowerton WwTW catchment area can be accommodated for by potential surface water removal scheme or the Council’s Register of savings made from brownfield sites within the Gowerton WwTW catchment area
RECOMMENDATION
That planning permission be GRANTED subject to the following conditions and the applicant entering into a S106 Planning Obligation to provide:
• 30 units of affordable housing on the site; • an education contribution of £91,832, • a highways contribution of £73,882; • management plans for future maintenance and management of the attenuation ponds, the public open space and the local area of play (LAP); • the variation of the original S106 in respect of the open space and woodland in the north eastern section of the site.
1 The development hereby permitted shall begin not later than five years from the date of this decision. Reason: To comply with the provisions of Section 91 of the Town and Country Planning Act, 1990.
Page 46 TH AREA 2 DEVELOPMENT CONTROL COMMITTEE – 10 DECEMBER 2013
ITEM 1 (CONT’D) APPLICATION NO. 2013/0261
2 Prior to the beneficial occupation of the development hereby approved either, a) a surface water removal strategy delivering sufficient compensation for the foul flows from the development shall have been implemented in accordance with details which have been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority prior to the commencement of development, or, b) Works to upgrade the sewage infrastructure at Gowerton WwTW have been implemented in full and written confirmation of this has been issued by the Local Planning Authority. Reason: To prevent hydraulic overloading of the public sewage system and pollution of the water environment.
3 Unless otherwise agreed in writing with the Local Planning Authority, foul water and surface water discharges must be drained separately from the site and no surface water or land drainage shall be allowed to connect (either directly or indirectly) to the public foul sewerage system. Reason: To prevent hydraulic overloading of the public sewerage system and pollution of the environment.
4 Surface water from the site shall discharge at no greater than 5.85l/s/ha as stated in email dated 18 November 2013 from Hammonds Yates. Reason: To reduce surface water loading to the watercourse network and reduce surface water flood risk downstream.
5 No development shall commence until the developer has prepared a scheme for the comprehensive and integrated drainage of the site showing how foul water, surface water and land drainage will be dealt with and this has been approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. This scheme shall include details of a sustainable drainage system (SuDS) for surface water drainage and/or details of any connections to a surface water drainage network. The development shall not be brought into beneficial use until the works have been completed in accordance with the approved drainage scheme, and this scheme shall be retained and maintained as approved unless otherwise agreed in writing by the Local Planning Authority. Reason: To ensure that a satisfactory comprehensive means of drainage is achieved and that no adverse impact occurs to the environment or the existing public sewerage system and to minimise surface water run-off.
6 Prior to the commencement of any development, a scheme for the ownership and maintenance of the surface water system shall be submitted and agreed in writing with the Local Planning Authority. The works/scheme shall be constructed and completed in accordance with the approved plans/specification at such time(s) as may be specified in the approved scheme. Reason: To ensure the satisfactory long-term operation of the surface water management scheme to prevent the increased risk of flooding to the development itself and surrounding third parties.
Page 47 TH AREA 2 DEVELOPMENT CONTROL COMMITTEE – 10 DECEMBER 2013
ITEM 1 (CONT’D) APPLICATION NO. 2013/0261
7 No development approved by this permission shall be commenced until a construction management plan (CMP) detailing all necessary pollution prevention measures for the construction phase of the development is submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The details of the CMP shall be implemented as approved and must be efficiently communicated to all contractors and sub-contractors (for example, via toolbox talks) and any deficiencies rectified immediately. Reason: Prevent pollution of controlled waters and the wider environment.
8 The development hereby permitted shall not be commenced until such time as a scheme to treat and remove suspended solids from surface water run-off during construction works has been submitted to, and approved in writing by, the local planning authority. The scheme shall be implemented as approved. Reason: To prevent pollution of controlled waters.
9 Any facilities for the storage of oils, fuels or chemicals shall be sited on impervious bases and surrounded by impervious bund walls. The volume of the bunded compound should be at least equivalent to the capacity of the tank plus 10%. If there is multiple tankage, the compound should be at least equivalent to the capacity of the largest tank, or the combined capacity of interconnected tanks, plus 10%. All filling points, vents, gauges and site glasses must be located within the bund. The drainage system of the bund shall be sealed with no discharge to any watercourse, land or underground strata. Associated pipework should be located above ground and protected from accidental damage. All filling points and tank overflow pipe outlets should be detailed to discharge downwards into the bund. Reason: To prevent pollution of the water environment.
10 If, during development, contamination not previously identified is found to be present at the site then no further development (unless otherwise agreed in writing with the local planning authority) shall be carried out until the developer has submitted a remediation strategy to the local planning authority detailing how this contamination shall be dealt with and obtained written approval from the local planning authority. The remediation strategy shall be implemented as approved Reason: To prevent pollution of controlled waters.
11 A detailed scheme for the eradication of Japanese Knotweed shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority, and shall be implemented prior to the commencement of work on site. Reason: In the interests of the ecology and amenity of the area.
12 No development approved by this permission shall be commenced until a Site Waste Management Plan has been produced and submitted in writing for approval by the Local Planning Authority. Reason: To ensure waste at the site is managed in line with the Waste Hierarchy in a priority order of prevention, re-use, recycling before considering other recovery or disposal option. Page 48 TH AREA 2 DEVELOPMENT CONTROL COMMITTEE – 10 DECEMBER 2013
ITEM 1 (CONT’D) APPLICATION NO. 2013/0261
13 No development shall take place until the applicant, or their agents or successors in title, has secured the implementation of a programme of archaeological work in accordance with a written scheme of investigation which has been submitted by the applicant and approved in writing by the local planning authority. 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.
14 Land Contamination - Site Characterisation The applicant shall submit a phased scheme, comprising three progressively more detailed reports, detailing measures to be undertaken in order to investigate the presence of land contamination, including relevant gas, vapour and, where appropriate, radiation related risks, at the proposed site. Where the initial investigations indicate the presence of such contamination, including the presence of relevant gas/vapour and/or radioactivity, subsequent reports shall include: A. a lost of potential receptors; B. an assessment of the extent of the contamination; C. an assessment of the potential risks; D. an appraisal of remedial options, and proposal of the preferred remedial option(s).
The reports shall be submitted individually. The provision of Phase 2 and Phase 3 reports will be required only where the contents of the previous report indicate to the Local Planning Authority that the next phase of investigation/ remediation is required. Phase 1 report: Desk Top Study : ALREADY PROVIDED AS PART OF THE APPLICATION Phase 2: Detailed Investigation : this shall: A. Provide detailed site-specific information on substances in or on the ground, geology, and surface/groundwater and in particular further characterisation of the presence of Chromium compounds and of ground gas. B. Provide for a more detailed investigation [Human Health Risk Assessment] of the site in order to confirm the presence or absence of those potentially significant source-pathway-receptor pollutant linkages identified in Phase 1. Note; where any substance should be encountered that may affect any controlled waters the applicant, or representative, must contact the Environment Agency in order to agree any further investigations required. In the event that the need for remediation is identified the applicant shall submit a subsequent detailed [Phase 3] report to the Local Planning Authority, viz: Phase 3: Remediation Strategy Reason: To ensure that the safety of future occupiers is not prejudiced.
Page 49 TH AREA 2 DEVELOPMENT CONTROL COMMITTEE – 10 DECEMBER 2013
ITEM 1 (CONT’D) APPLICATION NO. 2013/0261
15 Imported Soils - Any topsoil [natural or manufactured], or subsoil to be imported shall be assessed for chemical or other potential contaminants in accordance with a scheme of investigation to be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority in advance of its importation. Only material approved by the Local Planning Authority shall be imported. All measures specified in the approved scheme shall be undertaken in accordance with the relevant Code of Practice and Guidance Notes. Subject to approval of the above, verification sampling of the material received at the development site is required to verify that the imported soil is free from contamination and shall be undertaken in accordance with a scheme agreed with in writing by the LPA. Reason: To ensure that the safety of future occupiers is not prejudiced.
16 Imported Aggregates - Any aggregate (other than virgin quarry stone) or recycled aggregate material to be imported shall be assessed for chemical or other potential contaminants in accordance with a scheme of investigation to be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority in advance of its importation. Only material approved by the Local Planning Authority shall be imported. All measures specified in the approved scheme shall be undertaken in accordance with the relevant Code of Practice and Guidance Notes. Subject to approval of the above, verification sampling of the material received at the development site is required to verify that the imported soil is free from contamination and shall be undertaken in accordance with a scheme agreed with in writing by the LPA. Reason: To ensure that the safety of future occupiers is not prejudiced
17 Verification/Validation of Remediation Works. Prior to the occupation of any residential unit, a verification report demonstrating completion of the works set out in the approved remediation strategy and the effectiveness of the remediation shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The report shall include results of sampling and monitoring carried out in accordance with the approved verification plan to demonstrate that the site remediation criteria have been met. It shall also include any plan (a 'long term monitoring and maintenance plan') for longer term monitoring of pollutant linkages, maintenance and arrangements for contingency action, as identified in the verification plan, and the reporting of this to the Local Planning Authority. Reason: To ensure that the safety of future occupiers is not prejudiced.
18 Construction Site Management. Prior to the commencement of demolition/construction works on the application site (including all access roads) a Construction Pollution Management Plan (CPMP) should be submitted to and approved in writing by the LPA. The CPMP is to include the following: a) Demolition/Construction programme and timetable b) Detailed site plans to include indications of temporary site offices/ compounds, materials storage areas, proposed compounds, delivery and parking areas etc c) Traffic scheme (access and egress) in respect of all demolition/construction related vehicles; Page 50 - continued - TH AREA 2 DEVELOPMENT CONTROL COMMITTEE – 10 DECEMBER 2013
ITEM 1 (CONT’D) APPLICATION NO. 2013/0261
d) An assessment of construction traffic generation and management in so far as public roads are affected, including provisions to keep all public roads free from mud and silt; e) Proposed working hours; f) Principal Contractor details, which will include a nominated contact for complaints; g) Details of all on site lighting (including mitigation measures) having regard to best practicable means (BPM); h) Details of on site dust mitigation measures having regard to BPM; i) Details of on site noise mitigation measures having regard to BPM; j) Details of waste management arrangements (including any proposed crushing/screening operations); and k) Notification of whether a Control of Pollution Act 1974 (Section 61) Notice is to be served by Principle Contractor on Local Authority.
Note: items g - j inclusive need to take particular account of the potential for statutory nuisance from site related activities [see Informatives]. Reason: To ensure minimal nuisance impact on local residents/ businesses from construction activities.
19 Prior to any works commencing on site, details of the proposed mini roundabout shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The approved details shall be implemented prior to beneficial occupation of any dwelling within the site. (Note: the off site highway works will be subject to an agreement under Section 278 of the Highways Act 1980). Reason: In the interests of highway safety.
20 Prior to the first occupation of the dwellings hereby approved, the pedestrian/cycle path shall be constructed linking the application site to the Footpath/Bridleway (LC37/LC38) and Waun Road in accordance with full details (including profiles) to be submitted to and agreed in writing by the Local Planning Authority. Reason: In the interests of public accessibility by foot and by cycle.
21 The applicant shall submit a detailed Travel Plan for approval within 12 months of consent and the Travel Plan shall be implemented prior to the beneficial use of the development commencing. Reason: In the interests of highway safety.
22 Prior to the commencement of development on site, full details of a badger proof fence for the western boundary adjacent to plots 39, 41, 42, 43, 44, 45, and 49 as shown on approved plan 1421 100 Rev P Planning Layout received on 4 Oct 2013 shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The development shall then be completed in accordance with the details thereby approved. Reason: To prevent badgers accessing the rear gardens of the development.
Page 51 TH AREA 2 DEVELOPMENT CONTROL COMMITTEE – 10 DECEMBER 2013
ITEM 1 (CONT’D) APPLICATION NO. 2013/0261
23 The development shall be completed in accordance with the recommendations in section 5 of the approved Ecological Assessment Report by Barry Stewart and Associates received on the 26 February 2013. Reason: In the interests of protecting the ecology of the site and surrounding area.
24 No development including demolition work shall commence on site until all tree protection measures as that detailed within the submitted tree protection scheme written by Treescene Ltd (Dated 25th October 2013) are in place. No development shall take place except in complete accordance with this tree protection scheme. All protective fencing, ground protection, construction methods etc shall be retained intact and followed for the full duration of the development hereby approved, and shall only be removed, or altered in that time with the prior written approval of the Local Planning Authority. Reason: To ensure protection of retained trees/hedgerows on site during construction works.
25 No development including demolition work shall commence on site until all tree protection measures as that detailed within the submitted tree protection scheme written by Treescene Ltd (Dated 25th October 2013) has been implemented, inspected and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. Reason: To ensure protection of retained trees/hedgerows on site during construction works.
26 No retained trees or hedgerows shall be cut down, uprooted, destroyed, pruned, cut or damaged during the construction phase other than in accordance with the approved plans and particulars, without the prior written approval of the Local Planning Authority. Reason: To ensure the protection of the trees and hedgerows.
27 If any retained trees or hedgerows are cut down, uprooted, destroyed or die during the construction phase another tree/hedgerow shall be planted at the same location and that tree/hedgerow shall be of a size, species as specified in writing by the Local Planning Authority. Reason: To ensure the protection of the trees and hedgerows.
28 No development shall take place without the prior written approval of the Local Planning Authority of a scheme for the landscaping of the site. The landscaping scheme shall be carried out within 12 months from the completion of the development. Any trees or shrubs planted in accordance with this condition which are removed, die, become seriously diseased within 5 years of planting shall be replaced by trees or shrubs of similar size and species to those originally required to be planted Reason: To ensure as far as possible that the landscaping scheme is fully effective.
Page 52 TH AREA 2 DEVELOPMENT CONTROL COMMITTEE – 10 DECEMBER 2013
ITEM 1 (CONT’D) APPLICATION NO. 2013/0261
29 No retained trees or hedgerows shall be cut down, uprooted, destroyed, pruned, cut or damaged in any manner within 5 years from the date of the occupation of the building for its permitted use, other than in accordance with the approved plans and particulars, without the prior written approval of the Local Planning Authority. Reason: To ensure as far as possible that the landscaping scheme is fully effective.
30 If any retained trees or hedgerows are cut down, uprooted, destroyed or die within 5 years from the date of the occupation of the building for its permitted use then another tree/hedgerow shall be planted at the same location and that tree/hedgerow shall be of a size, species as specified in writing by the Local Planning Authority. Reason: To ensure as far as possible that the landscaping scheme is fully effective.
31 Prior to the commencement of development on site full details for the following shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority : A. Materials sample panel including all external materials including door and fenestration details; B. Full details of undergrounding of overhead cables including the location of the end terminal pylons / poles; C. Full details of the road levels and slab levels for the future roads links and plots 12, 13, 14 and the LAP and plots 25, 26 and 27 and the points where the future road links meet the boundaries of the site as shown on approved plan 1421 100 Rev P Planning Layout. D. Full details of all the wall boundaries to: plots 58 and 59 (entire boundary); to the rear of plot 25 connecting to the garage of plot 24; to the side of plot 19 connecting to garage; to the rear of plot 17 abutting parking spaces to apartments; between house 79 and side wall to 81; to the side garden of 12 abutting footway; to the rear of 106 connecting to garage; to the side of 100 connecting to garage; to the southern side of plot 68 and rear of plots 71 and 72, including the boundary to the two car parking spaces for plot 72. The development shall then be completed in accordance with the details thereby approved unless otherwise agreed in writing by the Local Planning Authority. E. The Entrance feature. Reason: In the interests of visual amenity.
32 Prior to superstructure works commencing on any dwelling unit hereby approved details of the phasing of the construction of the internal access roads shall be submitted to and agreed in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The development shall be completed in accordance with the approved details. Reason: To ensure that the development is provided with satisfactory vehicular access in the interests of public safety.
Page 53 TH AREA 2 DEVELOPMENT CONTROL COMMITTEE – 10 DECEMBER 2013
ITEM 1 (CONT’D) APPLICATION NO. 2013/0261
33 Notwithstanding the provisions of the Town and Country Planning (General Permitted Development) Order 1995, (or any Order revoking or amending that Order), Classes A, B, C, D and E of Schedule 2, Part 1 shall not apply. Reason: The development hereby approved is such that the Council wish to retain control over any future development being permitted in order to ensure that a satisfactory form of development is achieved at all times.
34 Notwithstanding the provisions of the Town and Country Planning (General Permitted Development) Order 1995 (or any order revoking and re-enacting that Order with or without modification), other than those enclosures indicated on the approved plans, no fences, gates or walls shall be erected within the curtilage of any dwelling house forward of any wall of that dwelling house which fronts onto a road. Reason: To ensure that the overall open plan housing layout is not prejudiced by uncontrolled development.
35 No dwelling unit in the development shall be occupied until the means of enclosure to the respective individual curtilages have been completed in accordance with condition 32 above and approved plans 1421 105 D and 106 D External Works Layout Sheets 1 and 2 received on 4 October 2013, unless otherwise agreed in writing by the Local Planning Authority. Reason: In the interests of visual amenity and general amenity.
36 The dwelling(s) shall be constructed to achieve a minimum of Code for Sustainable Homes Level 3 and achieve a minimum of 1 credit under category "Ene1 - Dwelling Emission Rate" in accordance with the requirements of the Code for Sustainable Homes: Technical Guide (November 2010 - Version 3). The development shall be carried out entirely in accordance with the approved assessment and certification. Reason: In the interests of sustainability.
37 The construction of the dwelling(s) hereby permitted and any external works shall not begin until an "Interim Certificate" has been submitted to the Local Planning Authority, certifying that a minimum Code for Sustainable Homes (Level 3) and a minimum of 1 credit under "Ene1 - Dwelling Emission Rate", has been achieved in accordance with the requirements of the Code for Sustainable Homes; Technical Advice Guide (November 2010 - Version 3). Reason: In the interests of sustainability.
38 Prior to the occupation of the dwelling(s) hereby permitted, a Code for Sustainable Homes "Final certificate" shall be submitted to the Local Planning Authority certifying that a minimum Code for Sustainable Homes (Level 3) and a minimum of 1 credit under "Ene1 - Dwelling Emission Rate", has been achieved in accordance with the requirements of the Code for Sustainable Homes; Technical Advice Guide (November 2010 - Version 3). Reason: In the interests of sustainability.
Page 54 TH AREA 2 DEVELOPMENT CONTROL COMMITTEE – 10 DECEMBER 2013
ITEM 1 (CONT’D) APPLICATION NO. 2013/0261
39 No part of the development hereby permitted shall be occupied until street lighting has been installed in accordance with a detailed scheme to be agreed with the Local Planning Authority. Reason: To ensure a convenient and safe form of development.
40 Unless otherwise agreed in writing by the Local Planning Authority, the proposed parking areas hereby approved/illustrated on the submitted plan shall be: (i) porous or permeable; or (ii) constructed to direct run-off water from the hard surface to a porous or permeable area or surface within the curtilage of the dwellinghouse; and (iii) be permanently maintained so that it continues to comply with the requirements of paragraph (i) and (ii). Reason: In the interests of sustainability.
41 Before the development hereby permitted is commenced, details of the levels of the building(s), road(s) and footpath(s) in relation to the adjoining land and highway(s) together with any changes proposed in the levels of the site shall be submitted to and agreed by the Local Planning Authority in writing. Reason: To ensure that the work is carried out at suitable levels in relation to the highway and adjoining land having regard to drainage, gradient of access, and the amenities of adjoining occupiers.
42 The garage(s) indicated in the submitted plans shall be retained for the parking of vehicles and purposes incidental to that use and shall not be used as or converted to domestic living accommodation. Reason: To ensure adequate on site car parking provision in the interests of highway safety, and residential and visual amenity.
43 Prior to the first occupation of the dwellings hereby approved the following windows shall be obscurely glazed and unopenable except for a fan light and shall be permanently retained in that condition thereafter unless otherwise agreed in writing by the Local Planning Authority: Plots 7, 101 and 103, (Rothbury) first floor bedroom 1 as shown on plan 1421 166 B received 4th October 2013; Plot 4 (Lincoln) first floor bedroom 1 side window; Plot 106 (Lincoln) first floor bedroom 2 side window and Plot 5 (Lincoln) first floor bedroom 1 rear window as shown on plan 1421 160 B received 4th October 2013 Reason: To safeguard the privacy of the occupiers of neighbouring residential properties.
INFORMATIVES
1 The applicant is advised that the development must be carried out in accordance with the approved plans. If, prior to or during the implementation of this permission, any particulars are found to be inaccurate then the Local Planning Authority must be informed and works shall not commence or be continued until the matter has been resolved. Failure to do so could lead to the serving of an enforcement or stop notice. Page 55 TH AREA 2 DEVELOPMENT CONTROL COMMITTEE – 10 DECEMBER 2013
ITEM 1 (CONT’D) APPLICATION NO. 2013/0261
2 The development plan covering the City and County of Swansea is the City and County of Swansea Unitary Development Plan. The following policies were relevant to the consideration of the application: EV1, EV2, EV3, EV4, EV23, EV24, EV30, EV33, EV34, EV35, HC1, HC3, HC17, HC24, AS1, AS2, AS6.
3 This consent is issued without prejudice to any other consents or easements that may be required in connection with the proposed development.
4 Please be aware that under the Flood and Water Management Act 2010 the City and County of Swansea is now classified as the Lead Local Flood Authority (LLFA) and as part of this role is responsible for the regulation of works affecting ordinary watercourses. Our prior written consent for any works affecting a watercourse may be required irrespective of any other permissions given and we encourage early engagement with us to avoid any issues.
5 As part of a sustainable drainage system the developer is advised to consider the use of sustainable drainage (SUDS) measures, such as permeable paving for the driveway access and car parking area, and rainwater or grey water harvesting from the new buildings, etc.
6 The developer is advised to contact Dwr Cymru Welsh Water on Tel. No. 0800 917 2652, e.mail [email protected], regarding the adequacy of water supply, and the adequacy of the sewerage system serving this area, to be agreed independently with the Water Authority.
7 Any drains laid must be protected in a way that prevents dirty water from the construction site entering them. Please also note that allowing site drainage to enter the foul sewerage system during the construction phase is unacceptable.
8 http://www.swansea.gov.uk/media/pdfwithtranslation/q/3/WLGAEAW_Guide_for_D evelopers_rev_2012.pdf Development of Land Affected by Contamination: A Guide for Developers
http://www.swansea.gov.uk/media/pdf/a/2/Imported_Materials_Guidance_WLGA.p df Requirements for the Chemical Testing of Imported Materials for Various End Uses
http://www.swansea.gov.uk/media/pdf/a/2/Imported_Materials_Guidance_WLGA.p df Requirements for the Chemical Testing of Imported Materials for Various End Uses
9 The Travel Plan shall include details of car reduction initiatives and methods of monitoring, review and adjustment where necessary. Advice on Travel Plans can be obtained from Jayne Cornelius, SWWITCH Travel Plan Co-ordinator Tel 07796 275711. The Developer must contact the Network Manager City and County of Swansea, Highways Division, Players Industrial Estate, Clydach, Swansea, SA6 5BJ. Tel 01792 841601 before carrying out any work.
Page 56 TH AREA 2 DEVELOPMENT CONTROL COMMITTEE – 10 DECEMBER 2013
ITEM 1 (CONT’D) APPLICATION NO. 2013/0261
10 Note well it is an offence under the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 to:
Cut down, uproot, top, lop, wilfully destroy or wilfully damage a tree protected by a Tree Preservation Order.
Wilful damage to a protected tree includes damage to its surrounding rooting area by: excavation work, storage of materials or machinery, parking of vehicles, deposit of soil or rubble, disposal of liquids, or the mixing of cement.
11 The Council is responsible for the naming and numbering of streets within the administrative area. All new property addresses or changes to existing addresses arising from development for which planning consent is sought must be cleared through the Council's Street Naming and Numbering Officer as soon as building work commences. Street naming and numbering proposals must be agreed with the Council prior to addresses being created or revised. Please note that there is a charge for the provision of some street naming and numbering services. For further information please visit www.swansea.gov.uk/snn or contact the Council's Street Naming and Numbering Officer, City & County of Swansea, Room 2.4.2F, Civic Centre, Swansea, SA1 3SN. Tel: 01792 637127; email [email protected]
12 Bats may be present. All British bat species are protected under Schedule 5 of the Wildlife & Countryside Act 1981 (as amended) and are listed in Schedule 2 of the Conservation of Habitats and Species Regulations 2010. This legislation implements the EC Habitats & Species Directive in the UK making it an offence to capture, kill or disturb a European Protected Species or to damage or destroy the breeding site or resting place of such an animal. It is also an offence to recklessly / intentionally to disturb such an animal. If evidence of bats is encountered during site clearance, work should cease immediately and the advice of the Countryside Council for Wales sought before continuing with any work (01792 634960).
13 The Developer must contact the Team Leader - Highways Management, City and County of Swansea (Highways), Penllergaer Offices c/o Civic Centre, Swansea, SA1 3SN (Tel 01792 636091) before carrying out any work.
14 The site of this application is crossed by high voltage overhead electricity lines. Please ensure that you contact Western Power Distribution prior to the commencement of any work within the vicinity of the electricity lines. Western Power Distribution Phoenix Way Llansamlet Swansea SA7 9HW.
15 Underground mining operations have been carried out beneath this site and the developer is advised to seek appropriate technical advice in order to decide what precautions if any, need to be taken to reduce the risk of damage from subsidence. If as a consequence of this technical advice, the developer wishes to carry out exploratory works to coal seams or to old coal workings upon this site, then his proposals should be forwarded to the Coal Authority for its written approval, prior to their execution. It is suggested that the developers discuss the proposals with the Authority's Building Control Officers prior to submitting an application under the Building Regulations.
Page 57 TH AREA 2 DEVELOPMENT CONTROL COMMITTEE – 10 DECEMBER 2013
ITEM 1 (CONT’D) APPLICATION NO. 2013/0261
PLANS
105 Rev A-external works layout Sheet 1, 106 Rev A -external works layout Sheet 2, P1453-site survey, landscape appraisal of green open space, updated archaeological desk-based assessment, ecological assessment, site investigation report, framework residential travel plan, transport assessment, tree survey, tree constraints arboricultural impact assessment, code for sustainable homes pre-assessment received 26th February 2013. Amended Plans No: 100 Rev P -Planning layout,101Rev C-site location plan, 103 Rev D, 104 Rev D, 150 Rev B, 151 Rev A, 152 Rev A, 153 Rev B, 154 Rev B, 155 Rev B, 156 Rev B, 157 Rev A, 158 Rev B, 159 Rev A, 160 Rev B, 161Rev A, 162 Rev A, 163 Rev A, 164 Rev A, 165 Rev A, 166 Rev B,167 Rev A, 168 Rev B, 169 Rev A, 170 Rev A, 172 Rev A, 174 Rev A, 176 Rev B, 177 Rev A, 178 Rev A, 179 Rev B, 180, 181, 182, 183 Rev A,184 Rev A, 105 Rev C- Street Scenes, 108 Rev C-site sections, drainage statement,. Additional plans 185, 186, 187, 188, 189, 301 Rev C, 109 Received 4th October 2013. Amended plan 1421 201 F- engineering layout dated 13th November 2013. Amended plans: 1421 203C-attenuation area dated 20th Nov 2013, 1421 277-overall drainage area, 1421 211-drainage layout sheet1, 1421-212-drainage layout sheet 2, Ponds 1 & 2 CALCS, Greenfield run off CALCS, site investigation report dated 13th November.
Page 58 TH AREA 2 DEVELOPMENT CONTROL COMMITTEE – 10 DECEMBER 2013
ITEM 2 APPLICATION NO. 2013/1067 WARD: Gower Area 2
Location: Ash Grove Vicarage Lane Llangennith Swansea SA3 1JA Proposal: Retention of change of use of existing outbuilding to ancillary living accommodation
Applicant: D. Evans T he We e lc g om a e t t o C
Priors Town k a O ch Gate Oaklea Ly War Memorial
54.3m
1
Church
K
R
A
P
L
L
E
W
5 College
The Cot Issues
Ash Grove
NOT TO SCALE This material has been reproduced from Ordnance Survey digital map data with the permission of the controller of Her Majesty’s StationeryPage 59 Office, © Crown Copyright. TH AREA 2 DEVELOPMENT CONTROL COMMITTEE – 10 DECEMBER 2013
ITEM 2 (CONT’D) APPLICATION NO. 2013/1067
BACKGROUND INFORMATION
POLICIES
Policy Policy Description Policy EV26 Within the Gower AONB, the primary objective is the conservation and enhancement of the area's natural beauty. Development that would have a material adverse effect on the natural beauty, wildlife and cultural heritage of the AONB will not be permitted. (City & County of Swansea Unitary Development Plan 2008)
Policy EV1 New development shall accord with a defined set of criteria of good design. (City & County of Swansea Unitary Development Plan 2008).
Policy EV2 The siting of new development shall give preference to the use of previously developed land and have regard to the physical character and topography of the site and its surroundings. (City & County of Swansea Unitary Development Plan 2008).
Policy EV16 Within the small villages identified on the Proposals Map, small-scale development will be approved only where it is appropriate to the location in terms of the defined criteria. (City & County of Swansea Unitary Development Plan 2008)
Policy EV9 Development within or adjacent to a Conservation Area will only be permitted if it would preserve or enhance the character and appearance of the Conservation Area or its setting. (City & County of Swansea Unitary Development Plan 2008)
SITE HISTORY
App No. Proposal 90/1590/03 TWO STOREY EXTENSION Decision: *HGPC - GRANT PERMISSION CONDITIONAL Decision Date: 29/04/1991
96/4069/S TWO STOREY FRONT, GROUND AND FIRST FLOOR SIDE EXTENSIONS, TWO STOREY REAR EXTENSION TO FORM GRANNY ANNEXE, ADDITION OF FRONT AND SIDE PORCHES, AND REPLACEMENT HIPPED ROOF Decision: *HPS106 - PERMISSION SUBJ - S106 AGREEM. Decision Date: 05/12/1997
2006/2192 Retention of two conservatories on south elevation and porch on north elevation Decision: Grant Permission Unconditional Decision Date: 14/11/2006
Page 60 TH AREA 2 DEVELOPMENT CONTROL COMMITTEE – 10 DECEMBER 2013
ITEM 2 (CONT’D) APPLICATION NO. 2013/1067
2009/0768 Detached workshop/store Decision: Grant Permission Conditional Decision Date: 16/07/2009
2012/0570 Conversion of detached workshop to ancillary living accommodation (application for a Certificate of Existing Use) Decision: Withdrawn Decision Date: 23/07/2013
2007/0890 Retention of swimming pool Decision: Grant Permission Unconditional Decision Date: 23/11/2007
2011/0973 Retention of detached workshop/store (amendment to planning permission 2009/0768 granted on 16th July 2009) Decision: Grant Permission Conditional Decision Date: 23/09/2011
RESPONSE TO CONSULTATIONS
The application was advertised on site and one individual property was consulted. ONE LETTER OF OBJECTION has been received, which is summarised as follows:
1. I would not wish permission for its use as living accommodation ancillary or otherwise to be granted. 2. Bearing in mind the scale of the main property, together with the number of residents living there, it is difficult to see the need for additional ancillary living accommodation. 3. The facilities included render it suitable for potential use as independent living accommodation. 4. Having been used for accommodation already the development has already caused noise and disturbance in terms of traffic, parking, noise and privacy and will have implications in the supply of amenities including sewerage. 5. It would set a precedent.
Llangennith Community Council - Objects on the grounds that this is a long running retrospective application and the building has been used as a let property not as accommodation for family members. If permission is granted the council requests a condition that it is for family use only be placed on this building.
The Gower Society - comments as follows:
1. We wrote on the previous application 2011/0973 and were concerned about the implications and requested a clause preventing domestic use. 2. We must question if there was any intention by the owners to use this building as a workshop. 3. In the circumstances we think that there is no alternative but to refuse this application. Page 61 TH AREA 2 DEVELOPMENT CONTROL COMMITTEE – 10 DECEMBER 2013
ITEM 2 (CONT’D) APPLICATION NO. 2013/1067
Dŵr Cymru Welsh Water - No objection subject to conditions
Highways observations – No objection subject to the annexe remaining an integral part of the main property in perpetuity and not being let or sold as a separate unit of accommodation.
APPRAISAL
This application is reported to Committee for decision and a Site Visit has been requested by Councillor Richard Lewis to assess the impact of the proposed development upon Llangennith Conservation Area and the Gower Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty.
Full planning permission is sought to retain the use of an existing detached outbuilding at the property known as Ash Grove, Village Lane in Llangennith as a unit of ancillary living accommodation. The application site lies to the south of the village, within the Llangennith Conservation Area and is considered to fall within the curtilage of a dwelling (Ash Grove) which falls within the village envelope.
There have been several previous applications on the site relating to this outbuilding. The original application for the detached workshop and store was approved in July 2009 – 2009/0768 refers. The building was however not constructed in accordance with the approved plans and as such an application to retain the building as built was submitted and approved in September 2011 – 2011/0973 refers. The current application still reflects the external appearance of the building as approved under 2011/0973 but the internal arrangements have been changed to facilitate its use as ancillary living accommodation to the main dwelling.
The main issues to be considered in this instance are the impact of the retention of the current use on the visual and residential amenities of the area and highway safety having regard to the relevant Policies of the Unitary Development Plan 2008 and the Gower Design Guide.
Policy EV1 states that developments must comply with good design criteria. Policy Ev2 refers to preference being given to developments on previously developed land and should have regard to the physical character and topography of the site and its surroundings. Policy EV9 states that developments must preserve or enhance the character and appearance of the Conservation Area. Policy EV16 refers to development within small villages being allowed where it is appropriate to the location and Policy EV26 is the overarching policy that relating to the Gower AONB that states that the primary objective is the conservation and enhancement of the area’s natural beauty.
The siting of the annexe in relation to the existing dwelling and the layout of the site would dictate that it could not be used as an independent dwelling with its own curtilage and car parking provision without unduly impacting upon the traffic conditions of the area or the residential amenities of the existing dwelling. As such it is considered that it is not suitable for use as a separate unit of accommodation. A condition to control the use to this effect is recommended. No physical alterations are proposed and as such the application is considered to comply with the provisions of Policies EV1, EV9 and EV16 of the Unitary Development Plan 2008.
Page 62 TH AREA 2 DEVELOPMENT CONTROL COMMITTEE – 10 DECEMBER 2013
ITEM 2 (CONT’D) APPLICATION NO. 2013/1067
In terms of impact upon residential amenity, as stated above there are no physical alterations proposed and the siting, scale and design of the annexe ensures that there is no undue impact upon the nearest neighbouring property to the north of the site with regards to loss of light or privacy or overbearing physical impact. As such, in this respect the application is considered to comply with the provisions of Policies EV1 and EV2 of the Unitary Development Plan 2008.
With regards to impact upon highway safety, the Head of Transportation and Engineering raises no highway objection subject to the annexe being retained as integral part of the main property in perpetuity and that it is not let or sold as a separate unit of accommodation.
The material issues raised by the objectors have been addresses above in the main body of the report whilst Dwr / Welsh Water raise no objections to the scheme.
In conclusion and having regard to all material considerations, on balance, the retention of the use of the outbuilding as ancillary residential accommodation is acceptable at this location and complies with the requirements of Policies EV1, EV2, EV9, EV16 and EV26 of the City & County of Swansea Unitary Development Plan (2008)
RECOMMENDATION
APPROVE, subject to the following condition:
1 The development hereby approved shall be used wholly in conjunction with and for the enjoyment of the occupants of the existing dwelling house and their family, and shall not be let, sublet or otherwise disposed of as a separate unit of accommodation at any time. Reason: It is not considered that the property is suitable for the creation of separate units of accommodation.
INFORMATIVES
1 The development plan covering the City and County of Swansea is the City and County of Swansea Unitary Development Plan. The following policies were relevant to the consideration of the application: EV1, EV2, EV9, EV16, EV26
2 This consent is issued without prejudice to any other consents or easements that may be required in connection with the proposed development.
3 If a connection is required to the public sewerage system, the developer is advised to contact Dwr Cymru Welsh Water's Network Development Services on 0800 917 2652.
4 The proposed development site is crossed by a public sewer. Under the Water Industry Act 1991 Dwr Cymru Welsh Water has rights of access to its apparatus at all times. To protect the integrity of the public sewer and to avoid damage thereto, no part of the building will be permitted within 3 metres either side of the centreline of the public sewer.
Page 63 TH AREA 2 DEVELOPMENT CONTROL COMMITTEE – 10 DECEMBER 2013
ITEM 2 (CONT’D) APPLICATION NO. 2013/1067
PLANS
Amended plan BBA 01B site location plan, block plan and proposed floor plan and elevations received 26th September 2013
Page 64 TH AREA 2 DEVELOPMENT CONTROL COMMITTEE – 10 DECEMBER 2013
ITEM 3 APPLICATION NO. 2013/1491 WARD: Gower Area 2
Location: College Mill Llangennith Swansea SA3 1HU Proposal: Retention and completion of replacement stable block including additional agricultural storage facility Applicant: Mr Michael Batcup W e C s t
o E t t n a d g L e o n g c r o ft West Town
H
a v e n H e Wind-rode a t D h Fairacre a e l r e
Sunnymead The Barn The Croft Ellens Green Longhouse
Dollars Cottage
ANE MOOR L
16.6m
Sunny Side
12.5m
Lower Mill
Cottage T ra c k
T r a c k
College Mill
Pond
NOT TO SCALE This material has been reproduced from Ordnance Survey digital map data with the permission of the controller of Her Majesty’s StationeryPage 65 Office, © Crown Copyright. TH AREA 2 DEVELOPMENT CONTROL COMMITTEE – 10 DECEMBER 2013
ITEM 3 (CONT’D) APPLICATION NO. 2013/1491
BACKGROUND INFORMATION
POLICIES
Policy Policy Description Policy EC11 Appropriate small scale rural business development or home based employment within, and in exceptional circumstances adjoining, existing villages or closely associated with suitable groupings of farm buildings will be permitted subject to a defined set of criteria including loss of amenity, transportation considerations, impact on landscape and village scene, and natural heritage and historic environment etc. (City & County of Swansea Unitary Development Plan 2008)
Policy EV1 New development shall accord with a defined set of criteria of good design. (City & County of Swansea Unitary Development Plan 2008).
Policy EV2 The siting of new development shall give preference to the use of previously developed land and have regard to the physical character and topography of the site and its surroundings. (City & County of Swansea Unitary Development Plan 2008).
Policy EV21 In the countryside non-residential development will only be permitted where it can be demonstrated that it is beneficial for the rural economy, or it meets overriding social or economic local needs, or it is appropriate development associated with farm diversification, sustainable tourism or nature conservation, or it provides an acceptable economic use for brown field land or existing buildings, or it is essential for communications, other utility services, minerals or renewable energy generation. (City & County of Swansea Unitary Development Plan 2008)
Policy EV22 The countryside throughout the County will be conserved and enhanced for the sake of its natural heritage, natural resources, historic and cultural environment and agricultural and recreational value through: i) The control of development, and ii) Practical management and improvement measures. (City & County of Swansea Unitary Development Plan 2008)
Policy EV26 Within the Gower AONB, the primary objective is the conservation and enhancement of the area's natural beauty. Development that would have a material adverse effect on the natural beauty, wildlife and cultural heritage of the AONB will not be permitted. (City & County of Swansea Unitary Development Plan 2008)
SITE HISTORY
App No. Proposal 2007/2124 Single storey side extension, front porch , single storey rear extension and two storey detached car port with first floor storage area Decision: Grant Permission Conditional Decision Date: 17/12/2007 Page 66 TH AREA 2 DEVELOPMENT CONTROL COMMITTEE – 10 DECEMBER 2013
ITEM 3 (CONT’D) APPLICATION NO. 2013/1491
92/0308 THE ERECTION OF STABLES AND OTHER BUILDINGS IN CONJUNCTION WITH A WELSH COB BREEDING CENTRE Decision: *HGPC - GRANT PERMISSION CONDITIONAL Decision Date: 21/07/1992
81/0786/03 SITING OF 3 TOURING CARAVANS Decision: *HRP - REFUSE PERMISSION Decision Date: 30/07/1981
80/0313/03 SITING OF 3 HOLIDAY CARAVANS DURING SUMMER MONTHS Decision: *HGPC - GRANT PERMISSION CONDITIONAL Decision Date: 24/04/1980
92/0984 2NO. TWO STOREY REAR EXTENSIONS AND INSERTION OF DORMER WINDOWS TO FRONT AND REAR ELEVATION Decision: *HGPC - GRANT PERMISSION CONDITIONAL Decision Date: 09/10/1992
RESPONSE TO CONSULTATIONS
The application was advertised on site. ONE LETTER OF OBJECTION received which can be summarised as follows:
• The application site is within the AONB of Gower and Llangennith has an Article 4 Direction and building work requires building regulation approval. This development is already near completion. • Mr Batcup states the building work started on 04/03/2013. It was reported to the parish council in Dec 2012 and the building work was well advanced at this time. • The date that this was discussed at the parish council can be confirmed by referring to the minutes of the meeting. • "Concern had been expressed by some residents regarding the building • Work at College Mill. M Batcup explained what works were being carried out and the planning requirements in respect of the application." • In his retrospective application the owner states that a site visit is not possible as there is no access from a public footpath. I would contest this as this building is directly next to the public footpath which runs around building and new L shape extension to the previous existing barn / stable. • The old building was completely demolished and the new building is not appropriate in scale, height, elevation policy EV1. • It does not protect the character of the countryside • 1.3.10 The design guide AONB for agricultural barn design has not been considered B1 - 8,9,10 & 11 general principles of barn design the farm house is lower than the barn and so are other adjacent buildings. The roof is single pitch and at a far greater angle than original roof • B1.14 a,b,c(photographs provided to prove impact of roof) • Mr Batcup states the original stables roof pitch was between 15/30 degrees and now is 40 degrees. This is patently misleading as can be seen in the photos provided. Page 67 TH AREA 2 DEVELOPMENT CONTROL COMMITTEE – 10 DECEMBER 2013
ITEM 3 (CONT’D) APPLICATION NO. 2013/1491
• The new building has a much larger footprint in excess of 27% of the original barn that was demolished. This is stated on the retrospective planning application i.e. Previous footprint 110 sQ. m new footprint 140 sQ. m. Mr Batcup considers this to be a "marginal increase" 27%? • The public right of way has been affected as what was a fenced area is now a large wall surface (picture provided).
The Gower Society – comment as follows:
1. We are confused as to what is shown on the enclosed aerial photograph and that on the application plans. Could you please look carefully and compare these? 2. As far as we can see the proposed building has in fact been already constructed. If this is the case it is not stated in the application? What are the implications of this please? 3. The extension of the existing footprint from 110 square metres to 140 square metres is not in itself great but the roof slope, increase in roof height and what appears to be a considerable loft space as well as the somewhat domestic look does concern us ie the 'bulk' of the building in the landscape is increased. 4. We presume that this is not an agricultural building as such but one that is for equestrian use. The building layout does not appear support this however therefore there are concerns about its future purpose. 5. If you are minded to approve this application we consider that a clause be added preventing future domestic use.
We register our overall strong concerns about this application and ask that you take the above points into account when arriving at your decision for this development.
Llangennith, Llanmadoc and Cheriton Community Council – NO OBJECTION, but would like to recommend a clause that this building should remain agricultural.
APPRAISAL
This application is reported to Committee for decision and a Site Visit has been requested by Councillor Richard Lewis in order to assess the impact of the proposal upon the Gower AONB.
Full planning permission is sought for the retention and completion of an agricultural building including an extension to provide additional agricultural storage at College Mill, Llangennith, Gower.
Background
Planning permission was originally granted in 1992 for the construction of a stable block and other buildings for use in conjunction with the Welsh Cob Breeding Centre. The buildings were duly constructed (92/0308 refers) and over time become dilapidated. The application building has been constructed on the original concrete slab and constructed on the footprint of the original stables with an additional extension at the southern end creating an ‘L’ shaped building. The application building also includes an increase in ridge height of some 1m to provide additional storage within the roof void.
Page 68 TH AREA 2 DEVELOPMENT CONTROL COMMITTEE – 10 DECEMBER 2013
ITEM 3 (CONT’D) APPLICATION NO. 2013/1491
For the last 5 years the applicant has been running an Alpaca breeding farm from the premises. The fleece produced by the herd is principally used to produce Welsh flannel and wool products for use not only in the applicants interior design business but also by other existing and established Mills further afield.
The holding is approximately 6 hecatres in size and the applicant intends to use the building for storing straw/feed and during winter months or periods of severe weather conditions the animals will be brought in for feeding, or when the animals are calving. The Alpaca otherwise graze in the adjacent fields in the immediate vicinity of the new building whilst the extended area will be utilised for the storage of tractors and general items of machinery used on the holding.
Main Issues
The main issues for consideration during the determination of an application such as this relates to the principle of development, the impact of the proposal upon the visual amenities of the area and the residential amenities of the neighbouring properties and highway safety having regard for the provisions of the site history and Planning Policy Wales 2012, Technical Advice Note 6 (TAN 6), the Swansea UDP and Supplementary Planning Guidance document entitled ‘A Gower Design Guide’.
Principle of Development
Planning Policy Wales 2012 states that one of the main priorities for rural areas is the creation of “a thriving and diverse local economy where agriculture-related activities are complemented by sustainable tourism and other forms of employment in a working countryside”. Furthermore the creation of employment opportunities in rural areas for the rural economy is supported in order to minimise the need for a long commute.
In addition to this both Paragraph 7.3 of PPW 2012 and TAN 6 supports proposals which help diversify the rural economy. PPW 2012 acknowledges that many manufacturing activities can be located in rural areas without causing unacceptable disturbance. It is acknowledged that small-scale enterprises have a vital role in promoting healthy economic activity in rural areas, which can contribute to both local and national competitiveness. New businesses in rural areas are essential to sustain and improve rural communities, but developments which only offer short-term economic gain may not be appropriate. Therefore on a national level agricultural related employment opportunities such as this are supported in principle.
On a local level, Policy EV21 – Rural Development of the City and County of Swansea Unitary Development Plan (2008) supports non residential development subject to compliance with the relevant set criteria. The proposal whilst still agricultural in nature produces a bi-product which in turn is considered to contribute towards and be beneficial to the rural economy. The business has been operating for a number of years and would appear viable and financially sustainable and therefore is considered to comply with the objectives of Policy EV21 of the UDP.
Policy EC11 – Rural Business Development supports appropriate small scale rural business development or home based employment within and in exceptional circumstances adjoining existing villages or closely associated with suitable groupings of farm buildings will be permitted subject to the set criteria. Page 69 TH AREA 2 DEVELOPMENT CONTROL COMMITTEE – 10 DECEMBER 2013
ITEM 3 (CONT’D) APPLICATION NO. 2013/1491
The building is clearly used for its intended purposes, therefore subject to the proposal respecting the visual amenities of the area and wider Gower AONB, the residential amenities of the neighbouring properties and highway safety, the principle of this form of use at this location is considered acceptable.
Visual Impact
As stated above the application site is situated on the concrete slab of a former stable building and includes an additional floor area of 28m² (5.4m x 5.2m) The application building remains focussed within an existing courtyard area which is relatively unobtrusive upon the wider landscape. The additional the 1 metre increase in height is noted; (giving a ridge height of some 5.4m) however, the building sits relatively low within the landscape and is well screened by surrounding vegetation and other existing buildings. Notwithstanding this, the scale and design of the building is considered appropriate, and the external appearance and quality finishes (including locally sourced timber cladding and natural slate roof) are such that its impact upon the wider landscape would be minimal. Therefore the proposal is considered to respect the visual amenities of the area and conserve the character and appearance of the wider Gower AONB in compliance with Policies EV1, EV2, EV22, EV26, EV21 and EC11 of the Swansea UDP and the Supplementary Planning Guidance document entitled ‘A Gower Design Guide’.
Residential Amenity
The application site is remote from any neighbouring residential properties and as such the proposal raises no issues of concern with regard to residential amenity in compliance with the provisions of Policies EV1 and EC11 of the Swansea UDP.
Correspondence received
With regard to the letters received and the points raised which refer principally to the scale and design of the building and consequent visual impact, this is addressed above. Any ambiguity over when the building was erected is noted, however, given that this application has been submitted to regularise that situation, this issue is not considered material to the determination of the application. The established footpath that runs parallel with the side/rear of the building is unobstructed and accessible.
Conclusion
The business is established and appears to be viable and the proposal ensures that a replacement building, which is fit for purpose, is provided to support the diversification of the rural economy. In visual terms the proposed building is considered to be appropriate and to respect the character and appearance of the existing buildings within the yard to which it relates and conserve the character and appearance of the wider Gower AONB. The scheme will raise no issues relating to residential amenity. As such the scheme is considered to respect the principles of Planning Policy Wales 2012, TAN 6, Policies EV1, EV2, EC11, EV22, EV21 and EV26 of the Swansea UDP and the Supplementary Planning Guidance document entitled ‘A Gower Design Guide’. Approval is therefore recommended.
Page 70 TH AREA 2 DEVELOPMENT CONTROL COMMITTEE – 10 DECEMBER 2013
ITEM 3 (CONT’D) APPLICATION NO. 2013/1491
RECOMMENDATION
APPROVE UNCONDITIONALLY
INFORMATIVES
1 The development plan covering the City and County of Swansea is the City and County of Swansea Unitary Development Plan. The following policies were relevant to the consideration of the application: Policies EV1, EV2, EV21, EV22, EV26 and EC11 of the Swansea Unitary Development Plan 2008.
2 This consent is issued without prejudice to any other consents or easements that may be required in connection with the proposed development.
PLANS
Site location plan, 02 existing plans, 03 proposed plans received 14th October 2013
Page 71 TH AREA 2 DEVELOPMENT CONTROL COMMITTEE – 10 DECEMBER 2013
ITEM 4 APPLICATION NO. 2013/1292 WARD: Gower Area 2
Location: Heritage Acres Penmaen Swansea SA3 2HD Proposal: Replacement detached dwelling Applicant: Dr Paul Rabaiotti Notthill
Coerhelig
Heritage Acre
The Cabin
Swn-y-Mor
Dolphin Cottage
h t
a
P P
a
t
h
(
u
m
)
Spring
Quarry
(disused)
NOT TO SCALE This material has been reproduced from Ordnance Survey digital map data with the permission of the controller of Her Majesty’s Stationery Office, © Crown Copyright.
Page 72 TH AREA 2 DEVELOPMENT CONTROL COMMITTEE – 10 DECEMBER 2013
ITEM 4 (CONT’D) APPLICATION NO. 2013/1292
BACKGROUND INFORMATION
POLICIES
Policy Policy Description Policy EV22 The countryside throughout the County will be conserved and enhanced for the sake of its natural heritage, natural resources, historic and cultural environment and agricultural and recreational value through: i) The control of development, and ii) Practical management and improvement measures. (City & County of Swansea Unitary Development Plan 2008)
Policy EV26 Within the Gower AONB, the primary objective is the conservation and enhancement of the area's natural beauty. Development that would have a material adverse effect on the natural beauty, wildlife and cultural heritage of the AONB will not be permitted. (City & County of Swansea Unitary Development Plan 2008)
Policy EV19 Replacement dwellings in the countryside, including residential chalets, will only be permitted where the residential use has not been abandoned, the proposed new dwelling is similar in terms of siting, scale, design and character and compliments the character of the surrounding area. (City & County of Swansea Unitary Development Plan 2008)
Policy EV1 New development shall accord with a defined set of criteria of good design. (City & County of Swansea Unitary Development Plan 2008).
Policy EV16 Within the small villages identified on the Proposals Map, small-scale development will be approved only where it is appropriate to the location in terms of the defined criteria. (City & County of Swansea Unitary Development Plan 2008)
SITE HISTORY
App No. Proposal 86/1630/03 CONSTRUCTION OF A DORMER WINDOW IN ROOF AND NEW FRONT PORCH. Decision: *HGPCU - GRANT PERMISSION UNCONDITIONAL Decision Date: 29/01/1987
2008/0834 Request for discharge of clause 5 of Schedule 3 of legal agreement to planning permission 190/66 granted 2nd July 1966 in order to remove the agricultural occupancy tie to the dwelling Decision: Withdrawn Decision Date: 02/10/2012
Page 73 TH AREA 2 DEVELOPMENT CONTROL COMMITTEE – 10 DECEMBER 2013
ITEM 4 (CONT’D) APPLICATION NO. 2013/1292
2008/0193 Removal of agricultural occupancy condition 5 of planning permission 190/66 granted 2nd July 1966 (application for a Certificate of Lawfulness) Decision: Was Lawful Decision Date: 14/03/2008
2008/0825 Request for discharge of section 52 legal agreement to planning permission 190/66 granted 2nd July 1966 Decision: Withdrawn Decision Date: 02/10/2012
2008/0947 Removal of condition 5 of planning permission 190/66 granted 2nd July 1966 in order to remove the agricultural occupancy tie to the dwelling Decision: CALLED IN Application (Swansea) Decision Date: 17/09/2008
RESPONSE TO CONSULTATIONS
The application was advertised on site in the form of a site notice and one neighbouring dwelling consulted. 17 LETTERS OF OBJECTION/COMMENT were received which are summarised below:
Visual amenity
• the position of the present bungalow is extremely important within an Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty • The proposed modern structure is offensive and completely out of character for the area. • The proposal will be an eyesore not just to local residents but everyone living in Gower. • It is disgusting that a building not in keeping with the AONB can even be contemplated by a rational planning department. The plans make it difficult to assess the actual increase in ridge height. • People chose to live in Gower for its natural beauty. How a building looking like a square cube place on a hillside overlooking three cliffs a massive tourist destination can enhance the area is beyond belief. • Thousands of pounds have been spent on promoting Three Cliffs and now this cube will be placed a stones throw from a world renowned beach. • There has already been one blot on the landscape in Penmaen with Mr Morgans glass monstrosity. • Heritage acre will be just one too many for the culture and natural habitat of Gower and AONB. • any new building should be sympathetic to the unique landscape of the Gower Peninsula and should not be allowed to make a radical visual statement on the part of the developer or the architect • The fact that Gower is a designated AONB should not be a bar to progress or to change.
Page 74 TH AREA 2 DEVELOPMENT CONTROL COMMITTEE – 10 DECEMBER 2013
ITEM 4 (CONT’D) APPLICATION NO. 2013/1292
• Visitors are travelling half the way around the world to see Three Cliffs Bay and its environs. The inappropriate “Lego” style development will be blight on the beauty of the area. • The property is essentially designed to be looked out of, not looked at from without. The proposed building would I believe harm the image of Three Cliffs Bay, and damage o The Gower “Brand”. • Gower planning regulations appear to have varied over the last 10 years or so. Examples include the former owners of Swyn Y Mor being denied consent to enlarge the windows of their property, while the large and controversial building on the site of Bryn Cottage has been sanctioned despite the huge visual impact on the area • If Heritage Acre is allowed, it means two inappropriate developments will exist in the immediate area. There will be little or no way of controlling future redevelopments. This could mean open season for people from more affluent areas of the country with no links or interest in the community buying good houses to redevelop in to grand futuristic designs and possibly using as second homes • In the planning application the architect has included a number of photographs of properties on North Hills Lane making disparaging comments such as "the property is of 1980s design and of little architectural merit". This property though unremarkable was built in the 1950s and is of a style typically built all over Gower in the 1950s and 60s. • This is a particularly vibrant rural community served by local schools, and buses. It is suggest the architect has shown a lack of understanding of the local architecture and is frankly ill placed to make any derogatory comments about existing properties which are in excess of 50 years old. • The case for some rebuilding and remodeling of Heritage Acre is not being disputed. What is contentious however is the need to raise the roof line of the existing building and change it to a glass and stone box? • The architect has tried to negate the impact in her drawings by use of such subterfuge such as altering the tree line sketches behind the superimposed building silhouettes. • The inclusion of three meters tall silhouettes of people to give scale is somewhat misleading. • A 2 storey build replacing the present single storey bungalow will be visible through 360º surely alien to the surrounding countryside. • The recently completed development in Stones Filed overlooking Three Cliffs Bay is outstanding and hardly noticeable from the beach. Obvious consideration went into their design and regard for the area. • Although Policy EVl of the City of Swansea Unitary Development Plan highlights that the design of a new development should be "appropriate to local context in terms of scale, height, massing, elevation treatment, materials and detailing, layout, form, mix and density", the proposed plan does not meet these criteria. • Policy EV19 states that "replacing dwellings in the countryside, including residential chalets, will only be permitted where: .... (ii) The proposed new dwelling is similar in terms of siting, scale, design and character with the dwelling it is to replace; and (iii) the development complements the character of the surrounding area". However, the new development cannot be more different from the dwelling it replaces, and its design stands out in relation to other houses in the surrounding area, and in no way does it complement the character of the surrounding area. Page 75 TH AREA 2 DEVELOPMENT CONTROL COMMITTEE – 10 DECEMBER 2013
ITEM 4 (CONT’D) APPLICATION NO. 2013/1292
• The footprint of the proposed house seems to exceed the existing bungalow in height and in length as it does not include the garage. More importantly. The two glass rooms on the second floor far exceed the existing roof. As if there are two glass boxes sticking out from the existing roof. • The glass nature of these glass rooms -floor to ceiling- is not in keeping with the existing character of houses in Gower. the • When lit at night, the glass rooms will be illuminated thus contributing to light • Pollution and affecting the wild life in the area. • The current proposal neither preserves nor enhances the landscape. It is too • Conspicuous to blend into the landscape as specified by the Gower AONB Management Plan. • Policy EV26 says that “any development within the AONB should: (i) Be of an appropriate high standard of design, and (ii) Retain and where possible enhance existing features of natural heritage and the historic environment”. • The design may be of a high standard. The design commission of Wales has made suggestions to improve the design and questions why living accommodation needs to be on the 2 nd floor as the views are still spectacular from ground level. • Policy EV19 Replacement of dwellings in the countryside, including Residential chalets, will only be permitted where:(i) The residential use has not been abandoned; (ii)The proposed new dwelling is similar in terms of siting,scale, design and character with the dwelling it is to replace; and (iii) The development complements the character of the surrounding area. The amplification of this policy states the intent to avoid the replacement of rural dwellings with inappropriate new development that detracts from the character of the countryside”. The proposal does not complement the character of the surrounding area. • The West Feature Gable will be very prominent from Glebe House. It will overlook our house, garden and fields (Page 18). Page 23 illustrates how the feature gable will be much wider than the existing building. Instead of tapering to roof apex – it will be much wider at the top than at the base – lit up – and the feature wall is higher than the roof. The plan does not give measurements. This is much clearer on p32 and 73– which also shows how the footprint of the original building is smaller than the proposed one. The proposed one does not seem to include the garage or the prominent gable end as being part of the building, yet they form one unified structure • P35: This mentions solar glare – Does this mean the reflection off the glass windows or does it mean Solar Panels. If they are in, where will they be sited? Bryn cottage has a lot of glass and this dazzles in the sunlight, which can be seen from the beach. • P.42 lighting strategy. This looks at “distraction in the landscape to refrain from it being a lighthouse” but does not suggest how this is to be avoided. It talks about maintaining the privacy of the occupants and maintain views of the landscape. How will this be achieved? There are no views at night because it is dark. • The pictures do not show how the West Gable End will look when it is lit up from the angle of the farmers’ field – which is similar to how it will look from Glebe House. • The photograph on page 8 is taken from inside the drive of Glebe house to show the rectory and North hills lane. This is misleading as it is a view only seen by residents and visitors to Glebe House. It does not show Heritage Acre. • The photograph of contemporary building – Bryn cottage: There has been plenty of controversy about this building and it continues to cause issues with planners and residents. It has taken years to get builtPage and 76 is still not lived in. TH AREA 2 DEVELOPMENT CONTROL COMMITTEE – 10 DECEMBER 2013
ITEM 4 (CONT’D) APPLICATION NO. 2013/1292
• The huge cantilevered glass rooms considerably add to the existing foot print and would create a watch tower over the beach. This added mass at a new first floor level would interrupt the unique and inspiring vistas from Cefn Bryn, from the beach and from the coastal path around Penmaen burrows and castle. • The featureless wooden slatted walls to the east and north give the appearance of an industrial building and we cannot see how this will possibly add to the experience of visitors walking up or down the lane to Three Cliffs. • The council policy EV19 clarifies in its amplification of the importance to "avoid the replacement of rural dwellings with inappropriate new development that detracts from the character of the countryside." • The proposal fails’ to accord with the objectives of good design set in on the Gower AONB Design Guide and TAN 12 • The architects employed by Dr Rabbaiotti appear to have acknowledged and photographed the properties in the locality and yet produced a design which has no bearing on the village at all. • The proposal does not integrate well with the existing character and distinctness choosing instead to introduce a boxy design which is not in keeping with the other properties. • The proposal does not integrate in any way neither in form nor massing, on the contrary, existing building styles have not been considered or adopted neither has the existing rhythm of the village properties been considered - there is no harmony between this dwelling and any of the others. • At least five properties on this side of the village have been improved in recent years, but none has seen it appropriate in any way to change the character of their homes. • Neighbourng residents have also all lived in their properties before making changes and so understand the sensitivities of the neighbourhood and how important it is to maintain the heritage of Penmaen. • There are two broad approaches to respecting character: respecting the scale and form of surrounding development and respecting the architectural style of surrounding development • Councils are under a legal duty to have particular regard to the desirability of preserving and enhancing the character and appearance of a National Trust! AONB area and this is not in line with that duty. The architects state that 'it responds sensitively to the site' and yet they don't explain how. • The proposal is contrary to Policy EV16 of the Swansea Unitary Development Plan. • the proposal with lights surrounding it at night; not blending but looking more like a factory block similar to those seen in commercial trading estates. Is this really what the council wants for Gower? • The architects claim that the proposed building conforms to the existing footprint of Heritage Acre. This is misleading when the proposed building has cantilevered boxes at first floor level extended over a much larger area. • There is an absence of scale/dimensions throughout the application which makes it difficult to judge. If existing dimensions of the bungalow are not recorded, the new build cannot easily be monitored against the claim (also misleading) that it will not exceed the ridge height. The solar panels and chimney already appear to do so.11
Page 77 TH AREA 2 DEVELOPMENT CONTROL COMMITTEE – 10 DECEMBER 2013
ITEM 4 (CONT’D) APPLICATION NO. 2013/1292
Residential Amenity
• Overlooking. • Loss of view/outlook • It will affect the privacy of houses all around it. • Heritage Acre will have the views and block them for others. • The West End Gable will overlook Glebe House, resulting in the loss of privacy • “use the building as a divider of public and private aspects of the site” (page 2) o There is no thoughts give to existing residents or explanation how the division will take place o “The garden will be illuminated at night” • How will this be achieved without the house standing out like a beacon? Could it be dangerous for shipping/ planes?
Highway Safety
••• The lane leading to Heritage Acre (now named Heritage Lane by the Architect) is simply not big enough for vehicles over 7.5 tonnes and is already badly damaged by vehicles servicing the Stones Field development. ••• When the replacement for Bryn Cottage was being built track laying vehicles were using the public road, they and the other heavy vehicles used in the construction work have destroyed the road surface. As a council tax payer I hope that the road will be repaired at the expense of the developer? ••• The road is designated as access only. The metalled surface is about 7 feet wide and has double yellow lines on both edges. In the last 12 months there has been an increase in the use of large goods vehicles travelling up and down the lane delivering to a number of properties at the bottom. Because there is no turning area at the bottom most drivers of these vehicles reverse down the lane. Those that don't have to reverse back up the hill. ••• There is no passing place and the only option is for pedestrians to climb up the bank on the left hand side or balance on the edge of the ditch. Incidents in the last 9 months include a 4 axle rigid goods vehicle falling on its side in to the ditch while reversing up the hill. ••• Emergency access to the beach is impossible when large vehicles are manoeuvring up and down the lane ••• There are concerns with potential damage to so-called Heritage Lane. Who will be responsible for repairs to the lane?
Other
• Three Cliffs Bay is one of the jewels in the crown of Gower and Swansea Bay. It was reported on the BBC this week that Wales is currently predicted to be slower recovering from the recession than most areas of the UK. The strongest areas of the local economy are education, service sector, and tourism. • In the last 5 years the number of overseas visitors to Three Cliffs Bay, using the North Hills Lane access and passing Heritage Acre has grown hugely. (A large number of these visitors are from the Far East and the Indian sub continent • The granting of the proposed plans would be of no benefit to anyone other than the developer and the ego of his architect.
Page 78 TH AREA 2 DEVELOPMENT CONTROL COMMITTEE – 10 DECEMBER 2013
ITEM 4 (CONT’D) APPLICATION NO. 2013/1292
• People do not come to Gower to see futuristic architecture. They generally come to witness the natural beauty of the area • Penmaen is a distinct community and it is quite apparent that the proposed developer has no interest what so ever of integrating in this community. • Heritage Acre was until three years ago subject of agricultural tenancy. The previous occupier was sadly widowed and sought to have the agricultural tenancy rescinded in order to sell the house and move to sheltered accommodation. Agricultural tenancies were created to protect communities? It would seem bizarre if the proposed replacement were agreed to by the planning authority. It would be moving from one extreme to the other. • The glass reflects the sun when you look at the proposed house from any point on the footpaths or the beach which will dazzle any walker. • When lit at night, the glass rooms will be illuminated thus contributing to light • Pollution and affecting the wild life in the area. • The proposed feature lighting around the house and in the garden, as well as the lighting from the glass rooms will make the proposed house more like a light house. This will affect the experience of holiday makers and tourists of enjoying the countryside at night. • The views labelled from “public car park and viewing point” on page 14 are not. They have been taken inside the drive gates of Glebe House (permission not asked) • The notice on the post outside the house, is at the end of a no – through road, so very few residents knew about it • The application record does not come up online under the postcode or road name. You have to know the number from the post to find the plans. • Attempts to object online using the form were unsuccessful, as an “internal error” meant that it could not be done. • On line, the date for objections is the 18 th November whilst on the notice it is the 18 th October. • The piston Community Council also seemed unaware of these proposals. • Overall it’s been very difficult for objections to be raised.
Ilston Community Council: OBJECT for the following reasons:
The Community Council held a special meeting to consider the application, which was attended by a large number of concerned villagers, all but one of whom were opposed to the application.
The Community Council object strongly to the application on the grounds that the proposed development is clearly contrary to a number of the Policies in the Approved Development Plan, in particular, Policies EV16, EV19, EV26 and also EV2, which only permit development which meets the following criteria:
EV16 – Small Villages i) It is of a scale, density and layout compatible with the size and form of settlement, ii) It has a design that in its form, elevational treatment, detailing and use of materials is sympathetic to the architectural character of the village; iv) It has an acceptable relationship with adjacent buildings, spaces and landscape, including coastal features, v) It will not harm the amenity of neighbouringPage 79 residents, and TH AREA 2 DEVELOPMENT CONTROL COMMITTEE – 10 DECEMBER 2013
ITEM 4 (CONT’D) APPLICATION NO. 2013/1292
vi) It can be accessed without prejudicing highway safety and without detriment to the character of the village.
EV19 – Replacement Dwellings/Chalets ii) The proposed new dwelling is similar in terms of its siting, scale, design and character with the dwelling it is to replace, and, iii) The development complements the character of the surrounding area.
EV26 – Within the Gower AONB, the primary objective is the conservation and enhancement of the area’s natural beauty. Development that would have a material adverse effect on the natural beauty, wildlife and cultural heritage of the AONB will not be permitted. Any development with the AONB should: i) Be of an appropriately high standard of design, and ii) Retain and where possible enhance existing features of natural heritage and the historic environment.
EV2 – Siting
ii) Effectively integrating with the landscape, seascape or coastline by utilizing topography to integrate into the contours of the site and avoiding conspicuous locations on prominent skylines and ridges, iii) Retaining important views into and out of the site, iv) Taking into account and where possible retaining site features including existing buildings, topography, landscape, archaeological and water features, trees and hedgerows. vii) Not prejudicing the viability and function of any agricultural land adjoining the site. xiii) Having full regard to existing adjacent developments and the possible impact of environmental pollution from those developments, as well as the creation of any environmental pollution to the detriment of neighbouring occupiers (including light, air and noise).
The proposed development conflicts with the above criteria.
This Community Council does not oppose sympathetic developments in the area, but is aware that a recent replacement dwelling at the top of Northhills Lane was pushed to ensure it was in keeping with the vernacular, used local materials and kept within all policies. This should be the precedent followed for this application, not the precedent of Bryn Cottage (House).
Those present at the meeting and the members of the Community Council are particularly concerned that the original bungalow had a ridge height restriction imposed when it was built. The plans make it difficult to accurately determine the height of the new flat roof, but it is very evident that as the living rooms will be on the first floor, the bulk and volume of the building will be significantly different to the existing and will be very intrusive on the landscape.
The fact that the “box” on the west end is to be all glass suggests that light pollution from this and outside lighting will be significant. It was pointed out that people move to and live in the country to avoid excessive light. They want to enjoy the views of the coast and the sky at night, which is not possible with excessive lighting. Page 80 TH AREA 2 DEVELOPMENT CONTROL COMMITTEE – 10 DECEMBER 2013
ITEM 4 (CONT’D) APPLICATION NO. 2013/1292
Heritage Acre is not on main drainage, and cannot be connected to same. The septic tank is not satisfactory and there is always a sewage problem in the field below the bungalow. There is a big worry that discharge from the pool may make this situation worse.
Recent renovations to a couple of the chalets in Stone’s field were designed carefully to ensure they were appropriate to the area. This Heritage Acre proposal is not appropriate or complementary to the area.
The lane down to Heritage Acre is narrower than the modern delivery Lorries. Despite the efforts of the owner of Stone’s Field to insist on small vehicles delivering the necessary materials, larger ones have inevitably come and forced their way down the lane. On a site and development of the scale of Heritage Acre, this will be a big problem and will ruin the lane for ever. This lane is part of the experience of getting to the beach and any widening would be very detrimental. The development of Bryn Cottage has caused enormous damage to the access road there.
Altogether the application is inappropriate in terms of size, materials of construction and design and will spoil the beauty of this world wide renowned area of Three Cliffs and surrounds. Gower is very dependent on tourism and people come to enjoy the traditional beauty and largely unobtrusive architecture.
The application claims that the proposed building has the same foot print as the existing. It does not. This is misleading and inaccurate.
The Community Council strongly urge that the same mistake is not made with this application as was made with Bryn Cottage (House), which is still causing aggravation In the area.
Please do not allow another precedent to be set for inappropriate and unwanted development in this part of Gower.
Gower Society: OBJECT for he following reasons:
o The existing relatively small bungalow does not intrude into the landscape and we can not condone the demolition of this and replacing with a much larger and Modern 'box type' building. o It is hardly sustainable to destroy and remove to tip an entire dwelling only 40 years old. o There is a statement that the proposed covers the same footprint as existing. This is not correct as it also covers an open space and two small wooden sheds. o We note that there are no elevations of the existing structure and no heights of same. o We refer you to a number of applications relating to an agricultural tenancy 2008/0193,0634,0825 and 0947. Was this resolved? o The drawings do not show key dimensions; this is surely essential? It makes it Almost impossible to appraise the proposals.
Page 81 TH AREA 2 DEVELOPMENT CONTROL COMMITTEE – 10 DECEMBER 2013
ITEM 4 (CONT’D) APPLICATION NO. 2013/1292
o The linear design is solely for the benefit of people living within the 'glass fronted box' with little concession to the manner in which it is viewed from without. That is from an iconic coastline and landscape i.e. Three Cliffs, Penmaen and Cefn Bryn. o We note a reference to Penmaen sandstone cladding. We assume that this must Refer to local Old Red Sandstone conglomerate that is found on Cefn Bryn. The only concession should be towards carboniferous limestone upon which the plot Is located. The white walls on the sea side will be highly conspicuous. o Various recent modem 'box type' buildings are quoted as accepted constructed Examples on the AONB but some of these have not been without contention. o A whole storey was removed from the 'as built' Bryn Cottage following complaints and many of us maintain that it is still out of character with the area. o The photographs in the report of Bryn Cottage show considerable light reflection. Other more acceptable modern buildings are either screened (72 Pennard Road) or a long distance away from viewing points and semi buried within the landscape (Stormy Castle). o This site has the potential to damage the landscape. o We supported Stormy Castle because of its low elevation and the fact that much of it is below ground level. This proposal goes the opposite way and seeks to elevate itself out of the landscape. o We try to accept modern architecture within the AONB but we consider this to be wrong location for such a modern 'box' Design. o This example will be highly visible and overall taller than the existing (to gain Height for the view?) And will be seen from many locations. The existing Bungalow roof can be seen but it is not conspicuous due to its dark colour and Lack of windows. o We are concerned about the large expanses off South facing glazing that may reflect sunlight and lead to serious light pollution. The large window on the north elevation will also give off light pollution. o These modern, elevated box type dwellings do not have curtains and both lighting and large TVs project unwanted light outwards. o We also note reference to security lighting and this must comply with the Lighting Guide. o Finally the Design Guide must of course be adhered to.
Additional letter received from Gower Society
4 pictures sent.
We refer you to our letter dated 9 Oct 2013 relating to the above application for Heritage Acres Penmaen. The pictures attached were taken as part of our continuing aerial surveys that you have full copies of and which we have recently reviewed. We would be obliged if you would take note as to how low and in obtrusive this simple bungalow fits into the landscape. The addition of the elevated top heavy 'box like bunker type floor' as depicted in the application will certainly change the landscape in this location.
Please add to our original letter and take into account in your report to Committee .
Page 82 TH AREA 2 DEVELOPMENT CONTROL COMMITTEE – 10 DECEMBER 2013
ITEM 4 (CONT’D) APPLICATION NO. 2013/1292
National Trust – OBJECTS for the following reasons:
The National Trust objects to this application to replace the existing bungalow at Heritage Acres, one of a number of dwellings close to and visible from land in our protective ownership within the Gower AONB. We consider that the proposal would harm the natural beauty of the AONB. If allowed we consider that it would establish a precedent for further development that would cause serious harm to the landscape.
Background The National Trust’s charitable purpose is the permanent preservation of places of historic interest and natural beauty for the benefit of the nation. Although independent of government, we have been given the unique ability to declare our property inalienable, meaning that it cannot be sold and that it will be protected for ever, for everyone.
Our protective ownership close to the application site includes Northhill, a rocky hill covered with recovering heathland noted for its magnificent views over Three Cliffs Bay. The hill had been divided into building plots and was bought piece by piece by Mrs E R Lee who gave it to the Trust in 1955.
We also own Penmaen and Nicholaston Burrows, on the west side of Three Cliffs Bay, together with the cliffs and coastal strip between Southgate and the east side of the bay. Inland we own land at Penmaen Common, at the foot of Cefn Bryn, which includes an informal car park. Much of this land was acquired using funding raised through the Neptune Coastline Campaign. Launched in 1965, and the Trust's longest running campaign, its purpose is to save and look after coastline for its natural and cultural interest.
The application proposes the replacement of the existing dwelling with a striking two- storey building. While we appreciate the desire to depart from the mundane and the effort that has gone into the design, we are seriously concerned about the impact of the replacement dwelling on the landscape.
Heritage Acres is in a prominent location. It is alongside the main walking route between Penmaen and Three Cliffs Bay. It is in a skyline location when viewed from our land at Three Cliffs Bay. While the application notes that the height of the building would be no greater than ridge height of the existing bungalow, the modern flat-roofed design would create an entirely different massing that would significantly add to the visibility of the building in the landscape. We consider that this would be harmful to the natural beauty of the Gower AONB and that it should be refused on this basis.
We are also concerned at the potential for sunlight reflected from the large upper floor windows to add to the visual impact of the building. The application does not appear to suggest any measures to stop this.
A further concern, if this development is allowed, is the potential for a similar increase in the bulk and visibility of other houses in the area. This would seriously harm the natural beauty of the area.
Page 83 TH AREA 2 DEVELOPMENT CONTROL COMMITTEE – 10 DECEMBER 2013
ITEM 4 (CONT’D) APPLICATION NO. 2013/1292
Design Commission for Wales:
Summary of points raised:
"The large expanse of floor to ceiling windows, especially the unprotected south facing glazing which will be problematic in terms of controlling both heat loss and solar gain."
"The Panel highlighted the need to think further about the reflecting pool and the potential for it to become a stagnant, problematic feature rather than an enhancement."
"It was stated that the pool is intended to have a practical function, but the panel did not find this convincing. It is Important that the impact of the overhanging building be considered as this could create a very different atmosphere to that intended. The possibility of relocating the pool to the south of the house could be further explored - it might prove to be a more attractive option."
"The decision to place living accommodation on the first floor and not at ground level seems unnecessary given the unhindered access to the view, even at ground level, despite existing hedges. The benefits of direct access to the garden, not least the immediacy of the experience of the landscape, would appear to outweigh the minimal difference in the quality of view."
"Some of the rooms appear not to follow a natural sequence for example the relationship between living room, library snug, kitchen and dining area and in some cases their size and shape appear inappropriate to their intended use. The panel fully understands that this may be in accordance with the clients' specific brief, but the implications of the above are significant in terms of structural decisions, function and use of the rooms and spaces; comfort, heating, cooling and energy efficiency. "
APPLICANTS DESIGN RESPONSE
The glazing has been specified with solar reflective glass to reduce heat gain. Temperature within the building is to be controlled through a mixture of passive ventilation and whole house ventilation such as found within Passive House design.
Glare can be manually controlled through window blinds concealed within the ceiling soffit.
Landscaped water features are not stagnant and are pump cycled through PV powered water pumps.
Further discussions with the client have been taken to discuss the area, purpose and effect of the water pools. It is the client’s wishes that the pools remain as originally designed and did not over power the site.
The design proposal for an upside down house was agreed with the client at the outset of the design process. It was agreed that the best vantage point with views to the coast and Cefn Bryn be exploited to the enjoyment of the occupants of the house.
Page 84 TH AREA 2 DEVELOPMENT CONTROL COMMITTEE – 10 DECEMBER 2013
ITEM 4 (CONT’D) APPLICATION NO. 2013/1292
The design of the room layout, operation and maintenance of the building have been fully been developed with the client and although further design detail will be explored in detail during the development of the project a strategic appreciation of the building and its operation is understood and agreed.
Head of Transportation and Engineering:
This proposed replacement dwelling includes for the retention of three to four parking spaces within the site as currently. I recommend no highway objection.
APPRAISAL
This application is reported to Committee for decision and a Site Visit has been requested by Councillor Richard Lewis in order to assess the impact of the proposal upon the AONB.
Description
Full planning permission is sought for a replacement detached dwelling at Heritage Acres, Penmaen. Penmaen lies at the transition in landscape character from the open uplands of Cefn Bryn to the enclosed farmlands of South Gower. The village has a dispersed linear character comprising principally detached houses of varying size and varying architectural character set within a framework of mature trees. There are two focal points; St John the Baptist Church and the post office. Buildings in the immediate context of the site are typically set back with an area of hardstanding/landscaping and vehicular access.
The site has expansive views over Three Cliffs Bay and conversely development could be prominent in the landscape. Heritage Acres is located at the southern end of a lane shared with two other dwellings. The site is at the bottom of Heritage Woods which is a wooded rise to the north of Three Cliffs Bay. With the woods as backdrop the site is raised slightly in its setting making the existing bungalow distinguishable in the landscape and visible for the principle carriageway, surrounding public vantage points and from the top of Cefn Bryn. The position of the site is such that 360º degree views of the Penmaen Landscape are enjoyed. The application site boundary abuts the access lane which is the primary tourist and local access route down to the Three Cliffs Bay.
The site itself is occupied by a 1970’s style bungalow set centrally within the plot, parallel to the northern boundary, with two outbuildings sited to the east, close to the main vehicle and pedestrian access to the site.
Issues
The main issues for consideration during the determination of this application relates to the impact of the proposed dwelling on the character and appearance of its immediate context, the wider landscape and the Gower AONB, the residential amenities of the neighbouring dwellings, the ecology of the site and highway safety having regard to the provisions of the Unitary Development Plan. It is not considered that the Human Rights Act raises any additional issues
Page 85 TH AREA 2 DEVELOPMENT CONTROL COMMITTEE – 10 DECEMBER 2013
ITEM 4 (CONT’D) APPLICATION NO. 2013/1292
Policy Context
The site is situated within the Gower AONB and as such Policies EV22 and EV26 of the UDP require development to first and foremost preserve and enhance the character and appearance of this highly protected area. Penmaen is designated as a small village under Policy EV16 of the UDP, but given the dispersed settlement character in the vicinity of the site it is considered that the open countryside replacement dwellings policy which places a further test on the quality of the development should also be applied to this application. In that respect Policy EV16 sets out the following criteria for development within defined small villages:
(i) It is of a scale, density and layout compatible with the size and form of settlement. (ii) Design that in its form, elevational treatment, detailing and use of material is sympathetic to the architectural character of the village. - FORMAT (iii) It will not involve a loss of land of recreational, natural heritage or amenity value. (iv) It has an acceptable relationship with adjacent buildings, spaces and landscape, including coastal features. - FORMAT
Policy EV19 of the Swansea UDP requires that:
(i) The residential use has not been abandoned, (ii) The proposed new dwelling is similar in terms of its siting, scale, design and character with the dwelling it is to replace, and - FORMAT (iii) The development complements the character of the surrounding area.
The main aim of these polices is to prevent the replacement of rural dwellings with inappropriate new development that detracts from the character of villages and the countryside in which they are set.
Whilst Policy EV19 requires a replacement dwellings to be similar in terms of siting, scale, design and character to the dwelling it is to replace, it is not considered that it is intended to prevent appropriate development where it can be clearly demonstrated that there would be no harmful impact on the character of the area through the increased size of a dwelling or where there is an enhancement in the appearance of the existing dwelling. At the same time it is paramount that any new dwelling achieves a high quality design that responds to, protects and enhances the inherent qualities of the countryside and Gower AONB whilst also respecting the residential amenity of surrounding properties and the scale and massing of the existing dwelling.
The footprint of the proposed building matches that of the existing building albeit the upper floor will be canter levered above and overhang the ground floor; nevertheless a similar roof height is achieved. The proposed garage is set back from the boundary wall by some 2m providing sufficient area for the existing boundary hedgerow to flourish. The roof of the garage element is as low as practically possible (exceeding the roof height of the existing garden sheds slightly) but is of a comparable height to the neighbour garage. Whilst the footprint of the proposed welling is therefore retained, the LPA It is not contesting that the scale, form and design of the building is distinctly different to that which it is to replace, and therefore is not considered to comply with Criterion (ii) of Policy EV19 and has therefore been advertised as a Departure from the provisions of the Development Plan.
Page 86 TH AREA 2 DEVELOPMENT CONTROL COMMITTEE – 10 DECEMBER 2013
ITEM 4 (CONT’D) APPLICATION NO. 2013/1292
Whilst these policies are relevant during the determination of this application it is also important to note that Planning Policy Wales (PPW 2.9.12) states that Local Planning Authorities should encourage high quality design of buildings and spaces in their policies and guidance. They should not attempt to impose a particular architectural taste or style arbitrarily and should avoid inhibiting opportunities for innovative design solutions. Of note is a recent appeal decision at Byways in Lunnon. The decision notice (APP/B6855/A/09/2101915) included a statement about exceptions to the above policies:
"Some larger replacement dwellings have recently been permitted on the Gower. I understand that they were permitted in view of their outstanding contemporary design. It is not for me to determine whether the Council was correct to permit those developments, though it is clear that quality of design is a consideration that in some circumstances would justify an exception to the policies I have referred to above." (paragraph 11)
Policy EV1 of the Swansea UDP follows on from this and focuses upon the overall quality of the design and it is important to note that the amplification to this policy states:
"].In the majority of cases however, modern, innovative, sensitive designs are encouraged in preference to imitations of historical styles, so long as they are sympathetic and appropriate to their surroundings" (paragraph 1.3.2)
TAN12: Design sets out the requirements for contemporary design and specifically paragraph 5.8.3 states "].., parts of the countryside may offer unique opportunities for innovative design which maintains aesthetic quality]."
The recently adopted Supplementary Planning Guidance document entitled ‘A Gower Design Guide’ tries to provide additional clarification with respect proposals which depart from the provisions of Policy EV19 of the Swansea UDP. The Design Guide states that it is not the intention of the UDP to stifle appropriate modern or innovative designs which are sensitive to the AONB in accordance with Policy EV1 or to restrict proposals which would complement the character of the Gower in accordance with Policies EV19(iii) and EV26. It is acknowledged that it would be a missed opportunity not to replace an existing nondescript or poorly designed dwelling with a better designed dwelling that enhances the appearance and character of the locale and the AONB. Furthermore paragraph A1.29 of the Gower Design Guide states that proposals may be considered an exception to the policy where the scheme is considered to be high quality in terms of sustainability and design exhibiting due regard for its rural location in the countryside.
Visual Amenity
The design of the proposed dwelling is contemporary and relatively simple insofar as it consists of two elements the spine wall that creates the spine geometry connecting the length of the building from which the habitable rooms are framed and orientated. The feature glazing elements are positioned at critical points to frame the views. The architectural relationship between the walls and outside space allowing the garden area to connect with interior rooms is achieved through frameless/slim frame glass walling.
The footprint and ground floor accommodation proposed is comparable to the existing bungalow and is more subservient to the rest of the house and is overhung by the first floor accommodation. Page 87 TH AREA 2 DEVELOPMENT CONTROL COMMITTEE – 10 DECEMBER 2013
ITEM 4 (CONT’D) APPLICATION NO. 2013/1292
The stone spine wall divides the site into two and provides a sheltered south facing garden area. this area is split into a terraced kitchen garden in the sheltered south east aspect of the site; a wild flower grass garden facing south; an enclosed stone patio area linking the front entrance lobby with the garden; a timber sun deck area leading to guest bedrooms and sheltered by the over hanging first floor; and the under croft water pool which connects the north garden to the south as a pivotal point. The accommodation provided is “upside down” with the living accommodation focuses to the upper floor to take advantage of the views. On the first floor there is a private balcony from the master bedroom which is protected by the side wall of the dining room as well as the existing trees along the south east boundary; and the sun deck courtyard that is sandwiched between the dining room and living room. The first floor decks are recessed to protect from wind and also form being observed from surrounding areas.
The entrance courtyard is purely functional as the main vehicle and pedestrian access to the site and front door to the building. A local cut stone floor surface with provide a level access threshold to the dwelling and also link the proposed water feature at the perimeter base of the building. The north garden which is divided form the entrance courtyard by a proposed local stone wall will accommodate a water pool in the North West corner over which the living room will canter lever. The water pool will use the natural gradient falls to the west boundary to create an infinity pool feature visible form the main entrance.
The use of water within the design has several practical as well as aesthetic functions. Firstly the practical use of creating a rain water storage system while the northern shaded pool will draw cool air into the house during summer months. The visual connection between the north and south pool via slits in the wall will create water falls to air rate the water and provide acoustic interest. The south pool will reflect daylight into the potentially dark undercroft. Overall the water features aid in defining external spaces.
The proposal is considered to be a high quality contemporary design which responds positively to the unique site. The glazing maximises the views, the horizontal emphasis references the landscape, the stone vertical element anchors the building into the site and the green sedum roof which as indigenous flowers and fauna take hold will fix the building into the surrounding landscape. The vision and design concept are therefore considered to be strong and well founded in a sound appreciation of the site and its context within the landscape.
The stonework is a key element of the scheme to anchor the house into the site and to emphasise the solidity of the north element. The applicant has constructed a sample panel on site which proposes dressed blocks of differing sizes in rough coursings with very narrow joints. This is shown in the Design and Access Statement Addendum and uses the traditional local material in a well detailed and high quality manner appropriate to a contemporary building. The planning drawings add detail in terms of the punched window openings detailed with a metal surround and the coping detail along the top of the walls. Whilst these details are welcomed, a condition is still recommended to require a composite sample panel to allow the final details to be controlled.
Page 88 TH AREA 2 DEVELOPMENT CONTROL COMMITTEE – 10 DECEMBER 2013
ITEM 4 (CONT’D) APPLICATION NO. 2013/1292
The glazing will be specified with solar reflective glass to reduce heat gain. Glare can be controlled by a combination of hardwood screens which will be fitted as both fixed elements to walls as well as moveable sun screen louvers on large glass elements particularly during the summer months when the sun is positioned higher above the horizon. Both glare and night time light spill can be controlled through blinds concealed within the ceiling soffit.
The Design Commission for Wales were consulted on the schemes and were supportive of the principle of replacing the existing bungalow with a contemporary dwelling that captures the extensive views, and recognised and encourages the ambition of the project as a rare opportunity to create a tailored home in such a beautiful location. The Panel recommended more thought on the means by which solar gain would be controlled which the applicant has addressed within the roof in response to these comments. Conditions are however still recommended to control some details.
Landscape Character
The applicant has prepared a number of photomontages from key public view points which are set out in the Design and Access Statement and DAS Addendum. The topography of the site matches that of the agricultural landscape falling gradually to the south and eventually falling away to the coast and framed by the north eastern hill. The south east falls towards the beach affording the property an elevated position. The land south falls at the boundary with the neighbouring property, to the west the site aligns with the same contours of the agricultural land visually connecting the site and the landscape as a continuous plateau. North and north west the topography gradually slopes across Cefn Bryn Farm land, north east slopes up North Hill from Heritage Acre access lane.
The site benefits from various aspect values:
South East – down North Hills is a generally clear aspect from the elevated position of the site with a medium density tree line framing the site.
South - is unhindered towards Penmaen Burrows and the Sea. There are short minor boundary hedgerows but a mainly open aspect.
West – bounds onto the agricultural land Cefn Bryn Farm and follows the coast line towards Oxwich Bay. This is an exposed aspect of the site with little protection.
North/North West – has a mature boundary hedgerow that affords some shelter to the site. Beyond this the site faces agricultural land.
The site is visible from Three Cliffs Bay and a number of surrounding vantage points. The applicant has prepared photomontages taken form various surrounding vantage points as part of the Design and Access Statement and include the view northwards on the approach from Three Cliffs Bay, the view form the main site entrance on the lane, view form A4118 and the view form the adjoining farmland. Although the form of replacement building differs, the maximum height of the existing bungalow is maintained. It is considered that whilst of different appearance, the house will positively integrate with the established pattern of varied dwellings found in this very low density cluster. Furthermore it is considered that the innovative and contemporary design would add interest to the landscape and not appear out of scale or character. Page 89 TH AREA 2 DEVELOPMENT CONTROL COMMITTEE – 10 DECEMBER 2013
ITEM 4 (CONT’D) APPLICATION NO. 2013/1292
Looking south east from the surrounding farmland towards Three Cliffs Bay the house would be visible in the lower foreground (as is the existing bungalow) with the stone wall, and canter levered upper floor, creating subtle points of interest which are not considered to detract from the view.
To the east of the site is the main entrance to the plot and public access to Three Cliffs Bay. Whilst it will be possible to look directly westwards when passing towards the main forecourt area it is not considered that the building appears overly dominant, whist accepting that it varies significantly from the existing 1970’s bungalow, it is considered to add interest to the view point and is well integrated into the landscape.
From the South Gower Road (A4118) informal views south towards Three Cliffs Bay and the north the site are achieved. In this view the western side and rear elevations only will be visible and, as stated previously, although the living accommodation over sails the ground floor and the existing footprint, the proposed building maintains the same ridge height as the host dwelling and as such does not break the skyline.
The application has been accompanied by a landscape strategy for the site which includes both formal and informal terracing and planting and subject to a condition requiring the submission of a detailed landscaping scheme with a strong emphasis on the use of indigenous species and sustainable design this will further assist in integrating the proposal into its setting and enhancing its sustainability.
In terms of Policy EV16 therefore it is considered to be of a scale, density and layout which is compatible with the size and form of the settlement of Penmaen. It does not involve the loss of land of recreational heritage or amenity value, being an existing residential curtilage. It has an acceptable relationship with adjacent buildings, spaces and landscape. Its design is overtly contemporary in terms of its form, elevational treatment and detailing but the use of local stone acts to tie this contemporary design into the traditional architectural idiom. It does not attempt to copy or defer to the architectural character of the village but it is sympathetic to and respectful of it as required by Policy EV16. In terms of EV19 the residential use not has been abandoned and the development is considered to complement the character of the surrounding area for the reasons set out above. It does not however accord with criterion (ii) which requires a replacement dwelling to be similar in terms of scale, design and character with the dwelling it is to replace and on this basis the proposal is considered to represent a departure from the provisions of the City and County of Swansea UDP (2008).
It is considered however to accord with Policies EV1, EV22 and EV26 of the UDP, Planning Policy Wales and TAN12 (Design), and the Council's duty under the 2000 Countryside and Rights of Way Act to have regard to the purpose of conserving and enhancing the natural beauty of the AONB when discharging its planning and other functions.
Sustainability
The DAS indicates that the scheme will have 'strong environmental credentials'. Given the nature of this proposal, it is considered that this scheme should be an exemplar sustainable building. The site is not mains fed and therefore renewable technologies are required.
Page 90 TH AREA 2 DEVELOPMENT CONTROL COMMITTEE – 10 DECEMBER 2013
ITEM 4 (CONT’D) APPLICATION NO. 2013/1292
The general approach is to start from a fabric first approach, ventilating the space accordingly and the renewable technologies installed will help retain and regulate the heating of the building.
On the basis that all planning applications received after 1st September 2010 will be required to meet Code for Sustainable Homes level 3 plus 6 credits under Ene1, it is noted that the submitted Code for Sustainable Homes pre-assessment indicates that the dwelling will achieve a minimum Code for Sustainable Homes level 4. Whilst this is noted and welcomed it is nevertheless recommended that a condition should be attached requiring a minimum Code for Sustainable Homes Level 4 to ensure this standard is achieved and to secure a high quality development in sustainability terms to meet the requirements of the Gower AONB Design Guide in this respect.
Residential Amenity
Turning to residential amenities it is considered that given the separation distances between the proposed dwelling and the neighbouring properties that the proposal would not give rise to unacceptable overbearing or overshadowing issues. Furthermore whilst it is acknowledged that the living accommodation will be at first floor level and that the design of the dwelling incorporates significant area of glazing, it is not considered the dwelling would result in unacceptable levels of overlooking due to the distance and relationship between the proposed and the neighbouring property to the south-east. Furthermore the topography of the site and the neighbouring dwelling to the south-east being so significantly lower coupled with the existing mature screening mitigates against unacceptable levels of overlooking. The proposal is, therefore, considered to respect the residential amenities of the neighbouring occupiers.
Highway Safety
Having consulted the Head of Transportation and Engineering it has been acknowledged that the access and parking proposals are acceptable and therefore there are no objections to this scheme.
Ecology
The application was accompanied by a protected species survey and having consulted the Councils Ecologist it is considered that there would be no ecological implications for the demolition of the host building and construction of a replacement dwelling. Standard conditions relating to protected species are attached in any event.
Response to Consultations
Issues raised regarding residential amenity, visual amenity, landscaping, ecology highway safety and sustainability have been addressed above. The setting of a precedent is not considered to give rise to overriding concerns given that it is incumbent that every application is considered on its own individual merits, within the policy context provided by national and local planning policy and guidance. The length of time the applicants have lived in the village is of no consequence and not material to the consideration of this application.
Page 91 TH AREA 2 DEVELOPMENT CONTROL COMMITTEE – 10 DECEMBER 2013
ITEM 4 (CONT’D) APPLICATION NO. 2013/1292
Several points have been made regarding light pollution and solar glare. The glazing will be specified with solar reflective glass to reduce heat gain. Glare can be controlled by a combination of hardwood screens which will be fitted as both fixed elements to walls as well as moveable sun screen louvers on large glass elements particularly during the summer months when the sun is positioned higher above the horizon. Both glare and night time light spill can be controlled through blinds concealed within the ceiling soffit and an appropriately condition requiring the precise details of the external lighting scheme to be submitted to and approved in writing is also attached.
Conclusion
For the reasons set out above, it is considered that the development accords with Policies EV1, EV16, EV22 and EV26 of the UDP and will complement the character and natural beauty of the AONB. As such, it is also considered to accord with Planning Policy Wales and TAN 12 (Design) which supports high quality innovative and contemporary design when the vision and design concept are strong and well founded in a sound appreciation of the site and its context, and the final design and execution of the project are secured though appropriate detailed plans, specifications and conditions. The submitted scheme achieves this in the main, with only relatively minor matters conditioned. The scheme does not comply with criteria ii of EV19 as it is not similar in terms of its scale, design and character with the dwelling it replaces.
In overall design terms, however, the current application is considered to be high quality in terms of sustainability and design which demonstrates how well considered contemporary design can respond positively to the sensitive and cherished landscape of the Gower AONB.
Whilst the proposal is considered not to accord with one of the criteria of EV19, it is however considered to accord with Policies EV1, EV16, EV22 and EV26 of the UDP as well as National Planning Policy Guidance and Technical Advice and the provisions of the Gower AONB Design Guide.
On this basis therefore the proposal is regarded as an acceptable departure from the provisions of Policy EV19 of the City and County of Swansea UDP (2008).
RECOMMENDATION
The application be referred to DEVELOPMENT MANAGEMENT & CONTROL COMMITTEE with a recommendation that it be APPROVED as an acceptable DEPARTURE from the provisions of the DEVELOPMENT PLAN, subject to the following conditions:
1 The development hereby permitted shall begin not later than five years from the date of this decision. Reason: To comply with the provisions of Section 91 of the Town and Country Planning Act, 1990.
Page 92 TH AREA 2 DEVELOPMENT CONTROL COMMITTEE – 10 DECEMBER 2013
ITEM 4 (CONT’D) APPLICATION NO. 2013/1292
2 No development shall take place without the prior written approval of the Local Planning Authority of a scheme for the landscaping of the site. The landscaping scheme shall be carried out within 12 months from the completion of the development. Any trees or shrubs planted in accordance with this condition which are removed, die, become seriously diseased within two years of planting shall be replaced by trees or shrubs of similar size and species to those originally required to be planted. Reason: To ensure that the site is satisfactorily landscaped having regard to its location and the nature of the proposed development, and to accord with Section 197 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990.
3 Notwithstanding the provisions of the Town and Country Planning (General Permitted Development) Order 1995, (or any Order revoking or amending that Order), Classes A, B, C, D and E of Part 1 of Schedule 2 shall not apply. Reason: The development hereby approved is such that the Council wish to retain control over any future development being permitted in order to ensure that a satisfactory form of development is achieved at all times.
4 Samples of all external finishes and a sample panel showing the interfaces between all materials plus corner and reveal details shall be submitted to and/or constructed on site and approved by the Local Planning Authority in writing before the development is commenced. Reason: In the interests of visual amenity.
5 The roof of the dwelling hereby approved shall not be used as an amenity area or roof garden. Reason: In the interest of residential amenity.
6 The dwelling hereby permitted shall be constructed to achieve a minimum Code for Sustainable Homes Level 4 and achieve 8 credits under category Ene1 in accordance with the requirements of Code for Sustainable Homes: Technical Guide April 2009 unless otherwise approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. Reason: In the interests of sustainability.
7 The construction of the dwelling(s) hereby permitted and any external works shall not begin until an "Interim Certificate" has been submitted to the Local Planning Authority, certifying that a minimum Code for Sustainable Homes (Level 4) and a minimum of 1 credit under "Ene1 - Dwelling Emission Rate", has been achieved in accordance with the requirements of the Code for Sustainable Homes; Technical Advice Guide (November 2010 - Version 3). Reason: In the interests of sustainability.
Page 93 TH AREA 2 DEVELOPMENT CONTROL COMMITTEE – 10 DECEMBER 2013
ITEM 4 (CONT’D) APPLICATION NO. 2013/1292
8 Prior to the occupation of the dwelling(s) hereby permitted, a Code for Sustainable Homes "Final certificate" shall be submitted to the Local Planning Authority certifying that a minimum Code for Sustainable Homes (Level 4) and a minimum of 1 credit under "Ene1 - Dwelling Emission Rate", has been achieved in accordance with the requirements of the Code for Sustainable Homes; Technical Advice Guide (November 2010 - Version 3). Reason: In the interests of sustainability.
9 Details of all external lighting shall be submitted to and approved by the Local Planning Authority in writing before the development is commenced. The scheme shall be implemented in accordance with the approved details. Reason: In the interest of visual amenity
INFORMATIVES
1 The development plan covering the City and County of Swansea is the City and County of Swansea Unitary Development Plan. The following policies were relevant to the consideration of the application: Policies EV1, EV16 EV19, EV22 and EV26 of the Swansea Unitary Development Plan 2008.
2 Bats may be present. All British bat species are protected under Schedule 5 of the Wildlife & Countryside Act 1981 (as amended) and are listed in Schedule 2 of the Conservation of Habitats and Species Regulations 2010. This legislation implements the EC Habitats & Species Directive in the UK making it an offence to capture, kill or disturb a European Protected Species or to damage or destroy the breeding site or resting place of such an animal. It is also an offence to recklessly / intentionally to disturb such an animal. If evidence of bats is encountered during site clearance e.g. live or dead animals or droppings, work should cease immediately and the advice of the Natural Resources Wales sought before continuing with any work (01792 634960).
3 Birds may be present in this building and grounds please note it is an offence under the Wildlife & Countryside Act 1981 (as amended) to intentionally (intentionally or recklessly for Schedule 1 birds) to: - Kill, injure or take any wild bird - Take, damage or destroy the nest of any wild bird while that nest in use or being built - Take or destroy an egg of any wild bird Care should be taken when working on buildings particularly during the bird nesting season March-August.
4 If connection is required to the public sewerage system, the developer is advised to contact Dwr Cymru Welsh Water's Developer Services on 0800 917 2652.
5 This consent is issued without prejudice to any other consents or easements that may be required in connection with the proposed development.
Page 94 TH AREA 2 DEVELOPMENT CONTROL COMMITTEE – 10 DECEMBER 2013
ITEM 4 (CONT’D) APPLICATION NO. 2013/1292
PLANS
JK1302_A site plan, JK1302_B existing site plan, JK1302_04 proposed site plan, JK1302_02 proposed floor plans, JK1302_03 proposed roof plan, JK1302_05 proposed elevations, JK1302_06 proposed extensions received 23rd September 2013
Page 95 TH AREA 2 DEVELOPMENT CONTROL COMMITTEE – 10 DECEMBER 2013
ITEM 5 APPLICATION NO. 2013/1366 WARD: Newton Area 2
Location: 27 Slade Road, Newton, Swansea, SA3 4UE Proposal: Retention and completion of replacement dwelling (amendment to planning permission 2011/1339 granted 28th March 2013) Applicant: Mr Timothy Lillicrap
1 8
dy B
D
E 2
5 H
R
3 2
2 6
U n d
S 5
H 1
E
R
R
I N
G
H
A
1 M 1
T H
E O
R D C R H I A V
R E
D
5 1
1
4
1
1 1
a
11 5
2
1 1 27
E l S u b S ta
31
P a th
25
D A O R E D LA S
School House 13
Newton
Primary School
1 4
9
7
5a 8
NOT TO SCALE This material has been reproduced from Ordnance Survey digital map data with the permission of the controller of Her Majesty’s Stationery Office, © Crown Copyright. Page 96 TH AREA 2 DEVELOPMENT CONTROL COMMITTEE – 10 DECEMBER 2013
ITEM 5 (CONT’D) APPLICATION NO. 2013/1366
BACKGROUND INFORMATION
POLICIES
Policy Policy Description Policy EV1 New development shall accord with a defined set of criteria of good design. (City & County of Swansea Unitary Development Plan 2008).
Policy EV2 The siting of new development shall give preference to the use of previously developed land and have regard to the physical character and topography of the site and its surroundings. (City & County of Swansea Unitary Development Plan 2008).
Policy HC2 Housing development within the urban area will be supported where the site has been previously developed, its development does not conflict with other policies, does not result in ribbon development, and the coalescence of settlements, overintensive development, loss of residential amenity, adverse effect on the character and appearance of the area, loss of urban green space, harm to highway safety, adverse effects to landscape, natural heritage, security and personal safety, infrastructure capacity, and the overloading of community facilities and services. (City & County of Swansea Unitary Development Plan 2008)
SITE HISTORY
App No. Proposal 2010/0483 Construction of detached dwelling Decision: Refuse Decision Date: 13/06/2011
2001/0670 Conservatory extension on front elevation Decision: Grant Permission Conditional Decision Date: 08/06/2001
91/0190/03 REPLACEMENT GARAGE Decision: *HGPC - GRANT PERMISSION CONDITIONAL Decision Date: 19/03/1991
2004/2584 Detached dwelling (outline) Decision: Grant Permission Conditional Decision Date: 01/02/2005
90/0764/03 PROPOSED DINING/BEDROOM/ KITCHEN/BATHROOM EXTENSION Decision: *HGPC - GRANT PERMISSION CONDITIONAL Decision Date: 19/06/1990
Page 97 TH AREA 2 DEVELOPMENT CONTROL COMMITTEE – 10 DECEMBER 2013
ITEM 5 (CONT’D) APPLICATION NO. 2013/1366
90/1553/03 Dormer bedroom Decision: Appeal Allowed Decision Date: 18/09/1991
2011/1339 Replacement dwelling Decision: Grant Permission Conditional Decision Date: 28/03/2012
2004/2586 Single storey rear extension (Certificate of Proposed Lawful Development) Decision: Is Lawful Decision Date: 12/01/2005
RESPONSE TO CONSULTATIONS
The application was advertised on site and eighteen individual properties were consulted. EIGHT LETTERS OF OBJECTION and ONE LETTER OF COMMENT have been received which are summarised as follows:
1. Due to the elevated ground floor level the whole project is excessively tall. 2. What we have is a very tall building and we are not yet at roof level. My property has lost value as I am now overlooked on all the south facing rooms by this construction. It is invading my privacy the height it is now. If this remains all glazing on the north side should be obscured. 3. The rear first floor window is looking into our principal bedroom. 4. The measurements on the plan are wrong. 5. In our view the applicant has deliberately attempted to build a larger property than approved. 6. It will constitute an intensive form of development which will be detrimental to the residential amenity of neighbouring properties. 7. It overshadows our properties. 8. It is overbearing and will invade the privacy of 11a Slade Road. 9. A condition should be put on requiring the side elevation overlooking 21, 23 and 25 Slade Road to be made obscure. 10. The proposed (and half constructed) two story house has a huge (double door) size window that looks directly into the gardens and houses of number 21, 23 and 25 Slade Road. I am baffled how this ever got planning permission in the first place.
Dwr Cymru/Welsh Water – NO OBJECTION subject to standard conditions and informatives
Highway Observations – The amended layout of this consented replacement dwelling does not have any adverse affect on highway safety or parking. I recommend no highway objection.
APPRAISAL
This application is reported to Committee for decision and a site visit at the request of Councillor Miles Thomas due to concerns over residential amenity. Page 98 TH AREA 2 DEVELOPMENT CONTROL COMMITTEE – 10 DECEMBER 2013
ITEM 5 (CONT’D) APPLICATION NO. 2013/1366
Full planning permission is sought for the retention of the detached dwelling at 27 Slade Road, Newton, Swansea. Members will recall that the original planning permission was granted in March 2012 – 2011/1339 refers.
The application site is an irregular shaped plot that rises gently in a north-westerly direction and is currently occupied by a low-lying small detached bungalow which is to be demolished to facilitate the proposed development. The site is bound to the south, east and west by neighbouring residential properties and to the north by the outdoor area of Newton School.
The main issues for consideration in this instance relate to the impact of the amended proposal upon the character and appearance of the area, the effect upon residential amenity, and the impact upon existing highway conditions over and above those previously considered having regard to policies EV1, EV2, HC2 and AS6 of the Unitary Development Plan. There are in this instance no additional overriding issues for consideration under the provisions of the Human Rights Act.
Planning Policy Wales states that new housing developments should be well integrated within and connected to the existing pattern of settlements. Sensitive infilling of small gaps within small groups of houses, or minor extensions to groups, may be acceptable though much will depend on the character of the surroundings. Insensitive infilling or the cumulative effects of development or redevelopment, including conversion and adaptation, should not be allowed to damage an area’s character and amenity.
Policy HC2 of the Unitary Development Plan presumes in favour of residential development within urban areas unless there are overriding planning objections resulting from overdevelopment, significant loss of residential amenity, loss of urban green space, detrimental impact on the character and appearance of the area or satisfactory highway conditions. Policies EV1 and EV2 set objectives of good design and seek to ensure that generally developments should have proper regard to the local context in terms of scale, height and massing, integrate with adjacent spaces and protect the amenities of surrounding areas, in particular visual impact, loss of light or privacy, shared activity, traffic and parking implications.
The current scheme is not in compliance with the approved scheme in that the ridge height is higher by between 200mm at the rear of the dwelling and 710mm at the front, 4 roof lights instead of two are shown in each roof plane together with two sets of solar panels on the western roof slope. In addition, the glazed panels above the first floor patio doors are removed on the front and rear elevations. There are also front steps and a raised area to the front of the dwelling. As an established residential dwelling and curtilage, the principle of a replacement dwelling on this plot is supported, albeit the site is constrained somewhat by the number, proximity, and orientation of surrounding neighbouring residential dwellings and curtilages. The siting of the dwelling has not changed from that previously approved and is some 13m back from the front boundary and occupies an ‘L’ shaped footprint with a maximum width of 9.2m and a maximum depth of 16m. Sited in line with the site boundaries, a gap of 1m separates the side elevation of the dwelling from the western side boundary with No.11 Slade Road, and a minimum gap of between 1.5m and 2.5m is achieved off the eastern side common boundary with No’s 5 and 7 the Orchard. Page 99 TH AREA 2 DEVELOPMENT CONTROL COMMITTEE – 10 DECEMBER 2013
ITEM 5 (CONT’D) APPLICATION NO. 2013/1366
Access to the site is derived via the existing established access which is a single width track off Newton School Lane. These details are all as previously approved.
Although the dwelling occupies an ‘L’ shaped footprint, the footprint it is largely rectangular with a consistent width of 7m, however a small single storey annexe is sited to the eastern side taking the maximum width to 9.2m for a length of 6m.
The dwelling provides two floors of accommodation and features a design with shallow overhanging eaves and the first floor accommodation contained entirely within the roof void with the western side elevation featuring a catslide roof extending over the side addition.
The height and design of the dwelling and in particular it’s siting and proximity to site boundaries particularly the eastern side boundary was of paramount importance in the consideration of the previously approved scheme. The replacement dwelling is sited so as to still achieve a main wall to wall separation distance of approximately 15.5m (excluding the single storey side annexe which would be within approximately 13m+) with no.5 The Orchard. A wall to wall separation distance of approximately 18.2m is also still achieved between the proposed dwelling and No. 7, The Orchard as previously approved.
The height of the front part of the dwelling has increased by approximately 710mm. which has been caused by a mistake in land levels at the start of the build. The main consideration therefore is if the increase in the overall height of the dwelling as (partially) built over and above that which was previously approved is so unacceptable in residential amenity terms as to warrant a recommendation of refusal. The objectors maintain that the increase in height does make the scheme more physically overbearing and that the windows in the side elevation now allow views into their garden area. Whilst the latter concern is acknowledged, this is an issue that is not so insurmountable that it cannot be overcome by the imposition of a condition requiring the windows to be obscure glazed and unopenable.
The proposal as built maintains a relatively low eaves height of approximately between 4.1m as opposed to 3.8m previously approved, while still providing two floors of accommodation. As stated above , c oncern has been raised that the increase in height has resulted in overbearing physical impact for the occupiers of The Orchard, whose rear amenity space associated is well below the minimum standard set by modern-day development control criteria, and whilst it is accepted that this is an inherent situation and not the fault of the applicant, the residential amenities reasonably expected to be enjoyed by neighbouring occupiers is a material consideration. Notwithstanding this, and whilst this existing situation on site is noted, it is considered that as the increase in height is variable along the depth of the house, on balance, the increase in height is not significantly and demonstrably unacceptable over and above that which would have been experienced if the dwelling were built as originally approved.
The proposal is still within 1m of the western side boundary with No.11 Slade Road which is a substantial Victorian style detached property, and even though the proposal will be sited in close proximity to this neighbouring property, the increase in height dictates that the new dwelling remains subservient as previously approved.
Page 100 TH AREA 2 DEVELOPMENT CONTROL COMMITTEE – 10 DECEMBER 2013
ITEM 5 (CONT’D) APPLICATION NO. 2013/1366
It is neither considered that the nominal increase in the height of the dwelling to the rear would increase any loss of privacy to the property to the rear of the site at no.11a Slade Road as an angular distance of approximately 25m remains between facing elevations.
The area is characterised by a wide variety of house types, styles and sizes, and the principle of this development is accepted. Overall regard must be given to the varied local context, and it is considered that the amended scale of the dwelling now proposed is still appropriate in this context and would have a limited impact upon the visual qualities of the area.
With regard to highway safety issues, The Head of Transportation and Engineering raises no highway objection to this amended proposal.
The issues raised by the objectors in terms of impact upon residential amenity have been addressed above in the main body of the report. The comment regarding the wrong measurements has been addressed with the objector concerned who measured the plans at the incorrect scale. The Local Planning Authority cannot comment on whether or not the applicant did not in accordance with the approved plans deliberately but this would not be a material planning consideration.
In conclusion and having regard to all material considerations including the Human Rights Act, on balance, the proposal still represents an appropriate form of development that has a limited impact upon the visual and residential amenities of the area over and above those previously considered within the original planning permission and does not compromise current highway safety standards. The proposal therefore accords with Policies EV1, EV2, AS6 and HC2 of the Unitary Development Plan. Approval is recommended.
RECOMMENDATION
APPROVE, subject to the following conditions:
1 The development hereby permitted shall be completed in accordance with the submitted plans and details. Reason: To comply with the provisions of Section 91 of the Town and Country Planning Act, 1990.
2 The construction of the dwelling(s) hereby permitted and any external works shall not begin until an "Interim Certificate" has been submitted to the Local Planning Authority, certifying that a minimum Code for Sustainable Homes (Level 3) and a minimum of 1 credit under "Ene1 - Dwelling Emission Rate", has been achieved in accordance with the requirements of the Code for Sustainable Homes; Technical Advice Guide (November 2010 - Version 3). Reason: In the interests of sustainability.
Page 101 TH AREA 2 DEVELOPMENT CONTROL COMMITTEE – 10 DECEMBER 2013
ITEM 5 (CONT’D) APPLICATION NO. 2013/1366
3 Prior to the occupation of the dwelling(s) hereby permitted, a Code for Sustainable Homes "Final certificate" shall be submitted to the Local Planning Authority certifying that a minimum Code for Sustainable Homes (Level 3) and a minimum of 1 credit under "Ene1 - Dwelling Emission Rate", has been achieved in accordance with the requirements of the Code for Sustainable Homes; Technical Advice Guide (November 2010 - Version 3). Reason: In the interests of sustainability.
4 Notwithstanding the provisions of the Town and Country Planning (General Permitted Development) Order 1995, (or any Order revoking or amending that Order), Classes A, B and C of Part 1 of Schedule 2 of Article 3 shall not apply. Reason: The development hereby approved is such that the Council wish to retain control over any future development being permitted in order to ensure that a satisfactory form of development is achieved at all times.
5 Foul water and surface water discharges shall be drained separately from the site. Reason: To protect the integrity of the Public Sewerage System.
6 No surface water shall be allowed to connect (either directly or indirectly) to the public sewerage system unless otherwise approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. Reason: To prevent hydraulic overloading of the public sewerage system, to protect the health and safety of existing residents and ensure no detriment to the environment.
7 Land drainage run-off shall not be permitted to discharge, either directly or indirectly, into the public sewerage system. Reason: To prevent hydraulic overload of the public sewerage system and pollution of the environment.
8 Prior to the occupation of the dwelling hereby permitted, further details of the sustainable drainage (SUDS) measures including permeable paving for the driveway access and car parking areas, shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The approved details shall be retained and maintained as such, unless otherwise agreed in writing by the Local Planning Authority. Reason: In the interests of sustainability
9 All roof lights set below 1.8 metres above internal floor level. shall be fixed and obscurely glazed. Reason: To protect the privacy of the occupiers of neighbouring properties.
10 The windows in the north eastern elevation facing The Orchard shall be obscure glazed and unopenable and shall be retained as such at all times unless otherwise agreed in writing with the Local Planning Authority. Reason: To safeguard the privacy of the occupiers of neighbouring residential properties. Page 102 TH AREA 2 DEVELOPMENT CONTROL COMMITTEE – 10 DECEMBER 2013
ITEM 5 (CONT’D) APPLICATION NO. 2013/1366
INFORMATIVES
1 The development plan covering the City and County of Swansea is the City and County of Swansea Unitary Development Plan. The following policies were relevant to the consideration of the application: EV1, EV2, HC2, AS6
2 This consent is issued without prejudice to any other consents or easements that may be required in connection with the proposed development.
PLANS
Site location plan with existing & proposed block plan, floor plans, elevations, existing & proposed section received 8th October 2013
Page 103 TH AREA 2 DEVELOPMENT CONTROL COMMITTEE – 10 DECEMBER 2013
ITEM 6 APPLICATION NO. 2013/0467 WARD: Sketty Area 2
Location: Former Bible College Derwen Fawr Road Swansea Proposal: Residential development consisting of up to 24 dwellings (outline) including the demolition of existing buildings Applicant: Global Horizons Trust
D
A O R
K
C I
W
R
A 1
W 4
6
5
1 1 0 1
29.6m
3 2
12
6 4 1
9
2 2
8 6
1
1 1
YNYS NEWYD
D ROAD 7
27.2m
2
7 7
3
1
5
5
1
4
1
1 3
Car Park
6
7
1 3
h Pat
Playground
25.9m
r
e t l
e
h
S The Bible College
of Wales Pond
22
Pond
Play Area
6
25.9m
0 3 Sketty Isha 69 60 (missionary home)
E
M
M 5 6 A N
U
E L
G
A
R
D
E N
S
5 D
0 El Sub Sta E 24.7m R W
1 E N
F 1 1 A W
R
R O A D
5
5
8
0
2
7 6
3 6 ASH LEIG H R
OAD
5
6 4
2
0
1
4
3
1 8
5
4
6
1
2
7
2 G
W
1
E
4
R 7 N
E
I
N
O
N
R
O
A
3 D
0
1 0
2 24.7m
2 2
2
1
5 3
1
2
1
5 1
Miniature
Railway 1
1
R
O
Y A
2 L
0
O 1
A 5 T
K 5 N E C S E R C
NOT TO SCALE This material has been reproduced from Ordnance Survey digital map data with the permission of the controller of Her Majesty’s StationeryPage 104 Office, © Crown Copyright. TH AREA 2 DEVELOPMENT CONTROL COMMITTEE – 10 DECEMBER 2013
ITEM 6 (CONT’D) APPLICATION NO. 2013/0467
BACKGROUND INFORMATION
POLICIES Policy Policy Description Policy EV1 New development shall accord with a defined set of criteria of good design. (City & County of Swansea Unitary Development Plan 2008).
Policy EV2 The siting of new development shall give preference to the use of previously developed land and have regard to the physical character and topography of the site and its surroundings. (City & County of Swansea Unitary Development Plan 2008).
Policy EV3 Proposals for new development and alterations to and change of use of existing buildings will be required to meet defined standards of access. (City & County of Swansea Unitary Development Plan 2008)
Policy EV30 Protection and improved management of woodlands, trees and hedgerows which are important for their visual amenity, historic environment, natural heritage, and/or recreation value will be encouraged. (City & County of Swansea Unitary Development Plan 2008)
Policy EV33 Planning permission will normally only be granted where development can be served by the public mains sewer or, where this system is inadequate, satisfactory improvements can be provided prior to the development becoming operational. (City & County of Swansea Unitary Development Plan 2008)
Policy EV34 Development proposals that may impact upon the water environment will only be permitted where it can be demonstrated that they would not pose a significant risk to the quality and or quantity of controlled waters. (City & County of Swansea Unitary Development Plan 2008)
Policy EV35 Development that would have an adverse impact on the water environment due to: i) Additional surface water run off leading to a significant risk of flooding on site or an increase in flood risk elsewhere; and/or, ii) A reduction in the quality of surface water run-off. Will only be permitted where it can be demonstrated that appropriate alleviating measures can be implemented. (City & County of Swansea Unitary Development Plan 2008)
Policy HC2 Housing development within the urban area will be supported where the site has been previously developed, its development does not conflict with other policies, does not result in ribbon development, and the coalescence of settlements, overintensive development, loss of residential amenity, adverse effect on the character and appearance of the area, loss of urban green space, harm to highway safety, adverse effects to landscape, natural heritage, security and personal safety, infrastructure capacity, and the overloading of community facilities and services. (City & CountyPage of Swansea105 Unitary Development Plan 2008) TH AREA 2 DEVELOPMENT CONTROL COMMITTEE – 10 DECEMBER 2013
ITEM 6 (CONT’D) APPLICATION NO. 2013/0467
Policy HC3 Provision of affordable housing in areas where a demonstrable lack of affordable housing exists. (City & County of Swansea Unitary Development Plan 2008)
Policy HC17 The Council will negotiate with developers to secure improvements to infrastructure, services, and community facilities; and to mitigate against deleterious effects of the development and to secure other social economic or environmental investment to meet identified needs, via Section 106 of the Act. (City & County of Swansea Unitary Development Plan 2008)
SITE HISTORY
App No. Proposal 90/0847/01 RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT Decision: *HRP - REFUSE PERMISSION Decision Date: 01/08/1990
75/1007/04 PERMISSION FOR THE PARKING OF TWO CARAVANS Decision: *HGPC - GRANT PERMISSION CONDITIONAL Decision Date: 25/03/1976
RESPONSE TO CONSULTATIONS
The application was advertised by way of site notices and a press notice and 15 adjacent properties were directly consulted.
SIX LETTERS OF OBJECTION have been received which raise the following concerns:
• The area has flooding problems. No buildings should be built on this land. • This area is identified as being open space and should be left as such. • Access problems would occur if it is allowed to be developed. • To allow the significant increase in traffic that would be generated by the development to join Derwen Fawr Road at this notorious ‘pinch point’ without widening the road to the standard to the north would boarder on culpable negligence. Please do not repeat the mistake made when allowing the Emmanuel Grammar School site to be developed. Regular users of Derwen Fawr Road know full well the argument that the ‘pinch point’ slows traffic down and induces greater care is pious ambition and not reality. • I am concerned about the high levels of noise that will be produced by the construction e.g. laying of foundations assuming the proposal is acceptable. I would object to noise volumes early in the day (before 8am). • I am concerned about the fragmentation of parkland landscape. There are many species of birds regularly seen in Emmanuel Gardens over the last 10 years. Some species would be lost owing to the loss of trees and lawns between the eastern Bible College site and Clyne woods. • Increased pressure on demands for water, electricity, public drainage and roads.
Page 106 TH AREA 2 DEVELOPMENT CONTROL COMMITTEE – 10 DECEMBER 2013
ITEM 6 (CONT’D) APPLICATION NO. 2013/0467
• I have some serious objections and concerns over the plans to develop the site for housing particularly on any intensive scale, as evident on the Bellways site at the bottom of Derwen Fawr Road. These objections/concerns relate to the fact that the land in question is part of a protected woodland area and includes a number of high profile trees some of which are covered by Tree Preservation Orders. This wooded area provides a connection from the Green belt of the Clyne Valley in the direction of the sea and is very significant to the preservation of the environmental features of this area and adds to its attractiveness and no doubt contributes to the richness of its fauna and flora. • It is relevant to note in this connection that many of the protected trees ( over 40) in the woodland were felled by the Bible College owners allegedly in error some year ago. Whilst I understand some replacement planting was agreed, this has not been ensured through regular maintenance of the land, and to date very little of trees have grown to any size to offer replacement value in place of those that were felled. Therefore this would lead one to question whether the felling was somewhat designed to undermine the value of the woodland. • I also have concerns about the proposed access arrangements for the development from the highway, given that the road is narrow with a significant blind bend. It is the site of many collisions including one to my daughter arising from a driver who took the bend too fast and did not anticipate a car coming the other way. Any additional traffic entering or exiting the development at the proposed access point would increase the potential for further collisions and accidents to pedestrians arising from the increased footfall along a road where there is no adequate provision for pedestrians. • Therefore, I would expressively request that if any development is to be approved, that it is curtailed to areas outside of the woodland and that the particular high profile trees are preserved in tact to ensure that the essential character of this area is maintained. Further that in depth traffic modelling is undertaken to ensure that satisfactory provision is made for safe access and egress to the site both by vehicles and pedestrians
Gower Society
1 We are concerned about the possible loss of yet more ‘green’ spaces in this area. 2 It is important that there is minimal tree loss 3 We question how much more traffic this area can take 4 Any buildings worthy of restoration and conversion should be identified for saving for posterity and ambience of the area 5 We are minded of the quantity of documents in this application and confess that because of its urban location we have decided not to study these in any great details.
Glamorgan Gwent Archaeological Trust (GGAT)
No objections subject to conditions to 1) to provide a record of the structures by the means of a descriptive, drawn and photographic records should be made prior to works being undertaken, and 2) an archaeological watching brief be conducted during the removal of the slab in order that all archaeological features are identified and recorded.
Page 107 TH AREA 2 DEVELOPMENT CONTROL COMMITTEE – 10 DECEMBER 2013
ITEM 6 (CONT’D) APPLICATION NO. 2013/0467
Dwr Cymru / Welsh Water
Upon assessing the information in the Drainage Strategy, we are willing to permit connection of the surface water flows in to the public surface water sewer located in the road at the east of the proposed development. The flows will have to be attenuated to 10 litres per second using a suitable flow control device.
Conditions are required covering land drainage; surface water flow rates; integrated drainage system for foul and surface water and standard advisory notes.
Sewerage treatment – no problems are envisaged with the waste water treatment works for the treatment of domestic discharges from this site.
Water Supply – A water supply can be made available to serve this proposed development
Natural Resources Wales (NRW)
Initial Comments NRW would OBJECT to issue of consent for this proposal unless additional information can show it not have adverse effects with regard to:
• Foul and surface water drainage – ideally, a full drainage scheme should be submitted in writing for approval prior to determination. We would also advise that the site layout should be designed around a suitable SUDS scheme. A drainage scheme should include diagrams as well as narrative on what is proposed. • Contaminated Land – Records held indicate the western boundary of the development area sits on top of and old landfill (Clyne Valley). It appears that this was operational from the 1960’s-80’s and we believe there may be land contamination issues associated with it. It is suspected that the capping for the site may not meet current standards and that infiltration of rainfall falling through the landfill is impacting on water quality. The controlled waters at this site are considered to be of high environmental sensitivity. The site is also underlain by a secondary aquifer, which is overlain by drift material and is likely to be hydraulically connected to the River Clyne. We have reviewed the Phase 1 Geo Environmental Desk Study submitted and agree with the conclusions that further investigation is required. • Pollution Prevention – Given the nature of the site with regard to controlled waters – a Construction Environmental Management Plan should be produced and secured via condition. • European Protected Species (Bats) – The Applicant needs to submit additional information to demonstrate that there will not be a detriment to the maintenance of the favourable conservation status of bats at this site, prior to outline permission being granted. We recommend that the current and additional information requested is presented in the form of an overall Mitigation and Management Strategy. If this is deemed suitable, it can be conditioned along with any other reserved matters, but it needs to expand on the current information submitted.
Page 108 TH AREA 2 DEVELOPMENT CONTROL COMMITTEE – 10 DECEMBER 2013
ITEM 6 (CONT’D) APPLICATION NO. 2013/0467
The details that we require to be confirmed in writing should address the following:
• An overall Mitigation and Management Plan which should include details on habitat management, landscaping and the provision and retention of flight lines for bats. Confirmation of the ownership of proposed Bat House and woodland parcel. • The Landscaping information should include proposals for the woodland area to the west of the site, along with any additional planting in this area. • A lighting scheme, illustrating how fight lines, the replacement bat house and bat boxes will not be illuminated by the proposals. • Fully annotated architectural drawings clearly showing the bat mitigation to be provided • The submission of a post development monitoring programme.
In addition we recommend
• A full drainage scheme should be submitted in writing for approval prior to determination. We would also advise that the site layout be designed around a suitable SUDS scheme. The drainage scheme should include diagrams as well as narrative on what is proposed.
To conclude, we can give further views when provided with the information indicated above. NRW would object to the issue of consent for this proposal in the meantime.
ADDITIONAL COMMENTS We welcome the submission Bat Mitigation and Management Plan (BMMP) which provides us with an adequate basis on which to make an informed assessment of the likely impact of the proposals on the favourable conservation status of bats.
Natural Resources Wales has NO OBJECTION to this proposal providing the following issues are addressed through the implementation of appropriate planning conditions.
• Bats – conditions relating to the implementation in accordance with the BMMP; a method statement detailing bat conservation during construction; a monitoring scheme; a lighting scheme; and a mitigation planting / landscape plan.
• Drainage o Foul drainage – we note the intention to connect to the main public sewer, pending hydraulic modelling of the existing network to determine capacity. Further consideration with Dwr Cymru / Welsh Water will be required on this matter and we would defer to any recommended conditions they may have in this regard. There have been historic misconnections from the private sewers in this locality. Therefore we strongly recommend that dye testing is undertaken, prior to the occupation of any of the homes to ensure no misconnections and any resulting impact on receiving waters. A report should be produced on the completion of construction to show appropriate checks / testing has been undertaken. This could form a condition on any permission granted.
Page 109 TH AREA 2 DEVELOPMENT CONTROL COMMITTEE – 10 DECEMBER 2013
ITEM 6 (CONT’D) APPLICATION NO. 2013/0467
o Surface Water – Infiltration tests have now been undertaken and conclude that the ground conditions are generally unsuitable for infiltration drainage. It is therefore proposed to provide some on-site storage prior to discharge to the surface sewer network, which ultimately discharges to a watercourse. We have no objection to the discharge of clean surface water entering nearby watercourses subject to the appropriate discharge rate to be agreed by the appropriate authorities. A condition is required for surface water.
• Water Quality – The Groundsure Report for the River Clyne records a biological grade of B (good) in 2008 and a chemical quality data of C (fairly good) in 2007. Under the Water Framework Directive (WFD), water bodies are monitored on a range of parameters and the data used to classify them according to their ecological and chemical status. Both the River CLyne and the Cwm Stream are considered to be of ‘poor’ status under WFD. It is therefore essential to minimise the risk of further deterioration in water quality, measures are taken to prevent pollutants entering surface water drains. This is important during both the construction phase and upon completion of the works.
• Contaminated Land – We agree with the conclusions set out in the submitted Phase 1 Geo-Environmental Desk Study report. As such we would ask that conditions are added with regard to a remediation strategy; a verification report; long term monitoring; and non-previously identified contamination. We would ask to be consulted on the details submitted for approval to your Authority to discharge these conditions and on any subsequent amendments / alterations.
• Pollution Prevention – We would again recommend that a Construction Environment Management Plan be produced and implemented for the development which can be secured by condition.
In summary, Natural Resources Wales does not object to the above application, providing appropriately worded conditions requiring the implementation of mitigation measures for bats, and the conditions requested above in relation to drainage and water issues are attached to any planning permission you are minded to grant.
Highway Observations
The Bible College is split either side of the road and whilst initially consideration was being given to redevelopment of both sites, the eastern portion is to remain for educational use. The Bible College has been out of use for some time and therefore more recently has not attracted any vehicular use however in the past this would have not been the case and the site could be brought back into educational use at any time. The proposal is in outline form and is for the erection of 24 residential units in a mixture of 3 and 4 bedroom properties.
Access is intended from a new junction onto Derwen Fawr Road approximately 20m south of the wider section. The access road will include standard footway provision and this is intended to link onto footways beyond the site so that a safe route for pedestrians is provided where currently pedestrians have to walk on the carriageway past the site. Normally, transport assessments are not required for residential development proposals of less than 100 units, however, due to the traffic sensitivities in the area, a full transport assessment has been submitted in support of the application. The transport assessment has considered the traffic impact and accessibilityPage 110 of the proposal. TH AREA 2 DEVELOPMENT CONTROL COMMITTEE – 10 DECEMBER 2013
ITEM 6 (CONT’D) APPLICATION NO. 2013/0467
• Pedestrian and Cycle Accessibility - Derwen Fawr Road north of the site has good pedestrian footways on both sides of the road. There is no footway along the site frontage and slightly beyond until approximately 42m past the Ashley Road junction. The development is to include a footway through the site along side the site access road and this will connect directly to the footway to the north. The footway will emerge at the corner of the site opposite the Ashley Road junction and from there pedestrians will have to continue to walk on the carriageway as currently, or alternatively use the lesser trafficked route past 208 to 222 Derwen Fawr Road, which is on a side lane separate from the main carriageway. From that point, a continuous footway is available down to Mumbles Road and this part of the proposal therefore will establish a much needed pedestrian facility in that part of Derwen Fawr Road. A footpath connection to Clyne Valley to the north west of the site is also indicated. There is no dedicated cycle facility in the immediate vicinity however Ashley Road gives connection to a shared use path along Mumbles Road and connections to the National Cycle Network along the foreshore path. The proposed footpath connecting the site to Clyne Valley will also allow onward connection to the Clyne Valley cycle path.
• Public Transport Accessibility - There is a bus service that runs past the site. This operates on an hourly frequency in each direction so therefore only offers a two hourly frequency both ways. The next nearest bus route is along Mumbles Road which is approximately 500m from the site. The current service past the site was cut by the bus company to the present frequency for viability reasons.
• Traffic Movements - The number of traffic movements associated with the development have been estimated with reference to national data and this has been added to local surveys of traffic flow and committed development of the former Emmanuel School site at the southern end of Derwen Fawr Road. Development traffic flows are assessed for both Am and PM peak hours and the assessment predicts 15 two-way movements in the AM peak and 18 two-way movements in the PM peak. This is against surveyed flows of 576 and 455 movements past the site in respective peaks. The development therefore adds a relatively small additional number of movements to current traffic levels. In terms of distribution, traffic movements at the junction of The Ridge with Derwen Fawr Road were surveyed and this indicated a predominance of movements to and from the north with a split of approximately 70%/30% north south respectively. It is expected therefore that development traffic movements will follow this established pattern and generate the majority of movements in a northerly direction.
• Site Access and Layout - Site access is to be in the form of a priority junction. A speed table is to be constructed at the junction which will further reinforce the 20 mph speed limit in that area. Visibility at the junction will conform to recommended standards and modelling of the traffic movements indicates that the junction will operate satisfactory with no capacity issues, as is expected with a development of this size. Whilst the layout plan is indicative as the application is in outline form, it does confirm that internal access roads will be in accordance with modern standards giving a carriageway of 5.5m wide and two footways of 1.8m wide each side of the internal road. As previously outlined, the internal footways will connect to the existing footway on Derwen Fawr Road to the north of the site and allow for a safer pedestrian route in the vicinity. Page 111 TH AREA 2 DEVELOPMENT CONTROL COMMITTEE – 10 DECEMBER 2013
ITEM 6 (CONT’D) APPLICATION NO. 2013/0467
• Currently there is no pedestrian facility in this part of Derwen Fawr Road and this part of the proposal therefore will be of wider safety benefit. Additional connection from the site to the Clyne Country Park is also indicated.
• Highway Safety and Local Concerns - Other developments in the area have been required to supplement traffic calming along Derwen Fawr Road and the same applies to this development. The small increase in traffic movements however must be reflected in the level of contribution required and to that end this has been calculated as £56,470. This will be allocated against identified issues of speeding along Derwen Fawr Road at the wider section and also consideration of improved cyclist facilities in the area to improve accessibility for all modes of transport. Derwen Fawr Road at the point of site access is approximately 6m wide. This is wider than most housing estate roads and therefore will easily accommodate the turning movements generated by the development. The lack of pedestrian facilities will be addressed by a footway through the site thus providing a safer alternative for pedestrian movements in that vicinity. Whilst traffic movements will increase as a result of the development, these will be relatively small and will not add significantly to current flows. Any affect on safety by the small increase in movements will be addressed through a contribution towards local traffic calming initiatives and where appropriate and feasible, supplementing cycle facilities.
I recommend no highway objection subject to the following;
i. The site shall not be brought into beneficial use until a contribution of £56,470 has been made towards local highway safety improvements in accordance with details to be agreed.
ii. Prior to beneficial occupation of any dwelling within the site, the site access and internal site roads shall be completed in accordance with details to be submitted and agreed. Such details shall include for a traffic calming table at the access junction and the provision of continuous footways within the site connecting to existing footway provision outside the site.
Drainage Observations
Initial Comments We have no objection in principle to the redevelopment of the site, in the absence of an acceptable Drainage Strategy, it is recommended that the application be withdrawn or deferred pending its submission. Concern is that the development itself may create a pluvial (surface water) flood risk to existing properties as a viable sustainable means of drainage has not been identified. It is not expecting to see detailed design at this stage as it is an outline application, but it is expected to see an appropriate level of evidence to support their claims, if infiltration drainage is going to be used it must be supported by soakaway tests. The development is in the Derwen Fawr area which is having problems with respect to flood risk and drainage, and also there are reports regarding flooding all along the Cwm Stream, all of which do not affect this site directly, but they do help to picture the issues of the area.
Additional Comments No Objection – the comments & conditions recommended by NRW and DCWW are acceptable. Page 112 TH AREA 2 DEVELOPMENT CONTROL COMMITTEE – 10 DECEMBER 2013
ITEM 6 (CONT’D) APPLICATION NO. 2013/0467
Aboricultural Observations
The submitted BS5837 Arboricultural Survey Report produced by Hyder Consulting (UK) Limited (Report Number – C1535-GLLE-Arb-R02) provides clear accurate details regarding the quality, condition and constraints of the trees on this site.
A site meeting was arranged with the consulting Arboriculturist from Hyder Consulting (UK) limited where concerns from the indicative layout were discussed. From the discussion the position of the new access into the site was altered to ensure no adverse impact occurred onto the road side pine tree (T63).
Some selected tree loss is expected to allow this site to be developed as supported for sound arboricultural reasons. Further to this any impact onto the surrounding landscape from this tree loss could be mitigated for by suitable replacement tree/shrub planting.
To achieve 24 dwellings on this site without having a significant adverse impact onto the future health of the higher quality trees to be retained may be problematic. To ensure this does not occur a tree protection scheme is requested as a planning condition. Only when this tree protection scheme is accessed to be acceptable will this condition be discharged. Further to this other conditions are included to ensure the tree protection methods are correctly installed prior to any demolition or construction work on site.
I therefore have no objection to this application subject to the inclusion of planning conditions and informatives relating to retention and protection of trees; implementation of tree protection measures; no damaged to retained trees; and landscaping.
Ecology Observations
Initial Comments Due to the level of bat interest (pipistrelle and lesser horseshoe bats) on the Bible College site consultation with Natural Resources Wales (NRW) is required. The developer will need a licence to disturb protected species and as part of this, developers will need a mitigation plan. The bat situation in the Derwen Fawr area is complex. The Council has a legal obligation to ensure that any proposed mitigation will ensure that the conservation status of the affected will be maintained. Some of the trees on the site have been identified as having potential bat interest if any of these are to be felled or to have tree surgery they should be surveyed prior to any work taking place
Additional Comments The Bat the bat mitigation scheme is generally fine although there are some details to be agree e.g. the design of the bat house. There are two important bat crossing points over the Derwen Fawr Road. It is important that these are maintained. The bat roosts on the southern side of the road depend on them being effective and safe. Following further discussions, the mitigation plan has been updated and is acceptable.
Pollution Control Observations
No Objection - the response from NRW requires contaminated land conditions.
Page 113 TH AREA 2 DEVELOPMENT CONTROL COMMITTEE – 10 DECEMBER 2013
ITEM 6 (CONT’D) APPLICATION NO. 2013/0467
Education Observations
The catchment area for this development is Olchfa and the catchment schools are:
English Medium Primary Parkland Primary English Medium Secondary Olchfa Comprehensive Welsh Medium Primary YGG Llwynderw Welsh Medium Secondary YG Y Gwyr
The development will generate, in accordance with the agreed Supplementary Planning Guidance (SPG) policy, the following pupils with the associated cost: Primary: 7.44 (£77,168) Secondary: 5.28 (£83,677)
Currently both Parklands and Olchfa are full and any extra housing within their catchment area will result in additional demand for places. In summary, in order to accommodate any pupils from this development Parkland Primary school and Olchfa Comp. School will both require a developer’s contribution. The Authority would consider internal remodelling at Parkland Primary which would seek a Developer’s contribution of £50,159 plus inflation (i.e. based on 65% of the generated figure being requested for refurbishment). However, for Olchfa Comp. the Authority would be seeking the full £83,677 plus inflation as a new extension would be required with the removal of one double demountable (2 temporary classrooms).
Total Education Contribution £133,836 (secured via S106)
Housing Enabling Observations
Initial Comments The Housing Market assessment shows a very high need for affordable housing in the area, which is unlikely to be satisfied in the future. The Housing Service would be seeking the provision of 30% Affordable Housing, which should be pepper potted throughout the site. The scheme should include a range of house types and mix of affordable housing to include social rent (DQR compliant) and intermediate rent (preferably DQR compliant)) and sale such as low cost home ownership and shall not be used other than for affordable housing in accordance with a phasing scheme to be agreed with the Local Planning Authority. The design and specification should be of equivalent quality to those used in the Open Market Units. We can be flexible on the type of units provided in order to assist with viability.
Additional Comments (following negotiations with the applicant) As the application is in outline form, the applicant has agreed that 6 units which equates to 25% affordable housing provision be provided on the site. The affordable units will be at 70% of Acceptable Cost Guidance (ACG). All the units shall be disposed via a registered social landlord (RSL) and be secured via a Section 106 Agreement.
APPRAISAL
The application is reported to Committee for decision and a Site Visit requested by Councillor Mike Day due to the considerable public interest, potential highways issues and over-intensification.
Page 114 TH AREA 2 DEVELOPMENT CONTROL COMMITTEE – 10 DECEMBER 2013
ITEM 6 (CONT’D) APPLICATION NO. 2013/0467
Outline planning permission is sought (including details of the means of access) for the demolition of the existing buildings and the redevelopment of the site for up to 24 dwellings. Other matters relating to appearance, landscaping, layout and scale would be considered at reserved matters stage.
The site is approximately 1.2ha in size and currently consists of a large 3-4 storey building, single storey outbuildings and gardens formerly used as a Bible College. The building is currently vacant and is in a poor state of repair. The gardens surrounding the building contain numerous trees, many of which are protected under Tree Preservation Orders (TPO). The site is bound to the north by residential dwellings fronting Derwen Fawr Road and Ynys Newydd Road, to the east by Derwen Fawr Road, to the south by residential dwellings fronting Derwen Fawr Road and to the west by Clyne Woods and residential dwellings in Gwern Einon Road. The site is relatively flat, however there is a steep drop between the western boundary of the site down to the car parking area for Clyne Woods.
The section of Derwen Fawr Road adjacent to the site is single track and contains a sharp bend with no footways and is bounded by a mix of stone walls and hedgerows. There is an existing bus stop adjacent to the site which does not have any footways leading to it.
The site was formerly associated with the site on the opposite site of Derwen Fawr Road, and initial pre-application discussions were held on the basis that both the western and eastern sites would be put forwards for residential development. However, the applicant has stated that it became clear to the that the retention of Derwen Fawr House on the eastern site was of importance, particularly to the local community, and as a result the applicant sold the eastern site to the Singapore Church who are continuing to use the site for religious training and education purposes. As such the western site, which is subject to this application was retained by the applicant, and the applicant has advised that there is no prospect of the application site being brought back in to use as a religious training / education centre by the applicant or the Singapore Church.
Principle of Development The main issues for consideration with regard to this application relate to the acceptability of residential development on this site in terms of the impacts of the development on the character and appearance of the area, residential amenity impacts on neighbouring occupiers, the impact of the development on access, parking and highway safety, and impacts on environmental interests with regard to the provisions of the prevailing policies highlighted above of the City & County of Swansea Unitary Development Plan 2008. There are no overriding issues for consideration under the provisions of the Human Rights Act.
The application site is located within the urban area of west Swansea and is shown to be ‘white land’ within the Unitary Development Plan. The site lies adjacent to the Clyne Valley Green Wedge, but it does not encroach into the green wedge area – the site is separated from the boundary of the green wedge by a wooded sloping area immediately to the west of the site. The site is not within any areas with ‘protected designation’ and is considered to be ‘previously developed land’ by virtue of the existing building, outbuildings and garden area, as such is considered to be suitable for development when assessed against the provisions of Policy HC2 – Urban Infill Housing. The site is located in a predominantly residential area and it is therefore considered that the use of the site for residential development is appropriate for this location. Page 115 TH AREA 2 DEVELOPMENT CONTROL COMMITTEE – 10 DECEMBER 2013
ITEM 6 (CONT’D) APPLICATION NO. 2013/0467
An indicative plan has been submitted with the application which demonstrates that the site is capable of accommodating up to 24 dwellings. It is therefore considered that the site is suitable for development and as such the principle of residential development is acceptable having regard to Policies EV1, EV2 and HC2 of the Unitary Development Plan.
Visual Amenity With regard to the impact on the visual appearance of the area, it is noted that the application is in outline form only and as such full consideration to the design of the proposed dwellings and their impact upon the streetscene will be considered when the scale and appearance details are submitted as part of the reserved matters application. The site is bound to the east by Derwen Fawr Road which contains stone walls which are considered to be characterful features within the locality. It is considered that the walls are worthy of retention in order to preserve the local character and distinctiveness of the area. As such a condition is added to ensure that the existing boundary walls are retained.
Residential Amenity With regard to the impact upon the residential amenities of existing occupiers adjoining the site, it is considered that the use of the site for residential purposes would not cause an undue harmful impact on the amenities of the existing residents. As the application is in outline form only, no details of the layout (other than an indicative plan) has been submitted. The indicative layout plan shows that up to 24 dwellings can be accommodated on the site without harming the residential amenity of the surrounding residential dwellings. Full consideration of the impacts upon the amenities of surrounding houses with regard to overbearance, overshadowing and overlooking will be considered fully at the reserved matters stage.
Highways Impacts With regard to access, parking and highway safety, only details of the access to the site have been submitted as part of this application. The new access is proposed to be located approximately 20m south of the wider section of Derwen Fawr Road and the submitted plans show that full visibility splays of 2.4m x 45m can be achieved, which is 2m longer than the recommended splay for a 30mph zone. The proposed access would be within an existing 20mph zone and a speed table is proposed to be located on Derwen Fawr Road to ensure compliance with the speed limit. The visibility splays shown are considered to be acceptable for the proposed access. The access road within the site will include standard footway provision and this is intended to link onto footways beyond the site so that a safe route for pedestrians is provided where currently pedestrians have to walk on the carriageway past the site and have to negotiate the sharp bend. It is considered that the inclusion of a new pedestrian footpath through the site will improve the pedestrian routes along Derwen Fawr Road and will improve accessibility to Clyne Woods. Full consideration of the internal layout of the site will be undertaken during the reserved matters stage.
There is an existing bus stop adjacent to the site which will remain unaffected by the new access. At present, there are no footways serving the bus stop. It is considered that there will be scope for the existing bus stop to be served by a new footpath from within the site which will improve the accessibility of the bus stop to pedestrians in the area as well as the new residents of the proposed development as a new footpath connecting the north and south of the site will be included within the residential layout. A condition can be added to secure this.
Page 116 TH AREA 2 DEVELOPMENT CONTROL COMMITTEE – 10 DECEMBER 2013
ITEM 6 (CONT’D) APPLICATION NO. 2013/0467
With regard to pedestrian and cycle accessibility, public transport accessibility, traffic movements, site access and layout, highway safety and local concerns, full details and assessments are given in the Highway Observations paragraphs above.
With regard to the potential highway impacts during the course of construction, the introduction of the raised speed table at this stage is not considered to be appropriate as the construction vehicles can cause deterioration to a speed table and this could result in the possible need for additional maintenance and disruption on the completion of the development. All works on the highway during construction will need to include a traffic management plan, and it is likely that traffic signals or similar will need to be used whilst the access junction and speed table are being constructed. In relation to the already constructed development further along Derwen Fawr Road at the former Emmanuel School, the situation there was considered to be different to this site as that involved a long section of wall removal and kerb line installation along the ‘narrows’ and therefore required more long term traffic management. The management of traffic during the course of construction is addressed under separate legislation – The New Roads and Street- Works Act 1991 and an informative is proposed alerting the applicant to this legislation.
The Head of Transport and Engineering has confirmed that no highway objections are raised subject to conditions, and the payment of £56,470 to supplement traffic calming in the area and towards improved cyclist facilities in the area to improve accessibility for all modes of transport.
Trees With regard to trees, there are many Tree Preservation Orders on the trees within the site. A full detailed tree survey has been submitted and the site has been inspected by the Council’s TPO Officer. As the application is in outline form, the actual layout of the site has not yet been drawn up and as such the reserved matters application will fully consider the proposed layout in relation to the existing trees. It is noted however that some selected tree loss is expected to allow this site to be developed and is supported for sound arboricultural reasons. Further to this any impact onto the surrounding landscape from this tree loss could be mitigated for by suitable replacement tree/shrub planting. To achieve 24 dwellings on this site without having a significant adverse impact onto the future health of the higher quality trees to be retained may be problematic. As such the application description is ‘up-to 24 dwellings’ to allow for a reduction in the number of dwellings at reserved matters stage, should it be found that the layout would be harmful to the existing protected trees. A full and detailed tree protection scheme will be a requirement of a condition. Only when this tree protection scheme is accessed to be acceptable will this condition be discharged. Further to this other conditions are included to ensure the tree protection methods are correctly installed prior to any demolition or construction work on site.
It is therefore considered that the development of this site can be undertaken without harming the important protected trees, and as such the Council’s TPO Officer has no objection to this application subject to the inclusion of planning conditions and informatives relating to retention and protection of trees; implementation of tree protection measures; no damaged to retained trees; and landscaping.
Page 117 TH AREA 2 DEVELOPMENT CONTROL COMMITTEE – 10 DECEMBER 2013
ITEM 6 (CONT’D) APPLICATION NO. 2013/0467
Ecology The site currently provides habitat for protected species, in particular pipistrelle and lesser horseshoe bats. The developer will need a licence from the Welsh Government to disturb protected species. A Bat Mitigation scheme has been submitted (BMMP) which provides an adequate basis on which to make an informed assessment of the likely impact of the proposals on the favourable conservation status of bats. Natural Resources Wales and the Council’s Ecologist have no objection to this proposal providing the issues relating to the implementation of the development in accordance with the BMMP, a method statement detailing bat conservation during construction, a monitoring scheme, a lighting scheme, and a mitigation planting / landscape plan are addressed through the implementation of planning conditions.
Drainage The application has been supported by a Drainage Strategy. With regard to foul drainage it is noted that the intention is to connect to the main public sewer and DCWW have advised that no problems are envisaged with the waste water treatment works for the treatment of domestic discharges from this site.
With regard to surface water drainage, infiltration tests have been undertaken which conclude that the ground conditions are generally unsuitable for infiltration drainage. As such, it is proposed to that the development will provide on-site storage prior to discharge to the surface sewer network, which will ultimately discharge to a watercourse. NRW, DCWW and the Council’s Drainage Officer have no objection to the discharge of clean surface water entering nearby watercourses subject to the appropriate discharge rate to which has been agreed by DCWW to be a rate of 10 litres per second using a suitable flow control device. A condition is recommended to this effect.
DCWW have advised that a water supply can be made available to serve this proposed development
Water Quality The applicant has submitted a Groundsure Report for the River Clyne which recorded a biological grade of B (good) in 2008 and a chemical quality data of C (fairly good) in 2007. Under the Water Framework Directive (WFD), water bodies are monitored on a range of parameters and the data used to classify them according to their ecological and chemical status. Both the River Clyne and the Cwm Stream are considered to be of ‘poor’ status under WFD. NRW have advised that it is therefore essential to minimise the risk of further deterioration in water quality, that measures are taken to prevent pollutants entering surface water drains. As such appropriate conditions are recommended for both the construction phase and upon completion of the works.
Contamination and Pollution Control The site is located close to an old landfill site and as such, Natural Resources Wales and the Council’s Pollution Control Officer have stated that they agree with the conclusions set out in the submitted Phase 1 Geo-Environmental Desk Study report. As such conditions are recommended with regard to a remediation strategy; a verification report; long term monitoring; and non-previously identified contamination. In addition, a Construction Environment Management Plan can be secured by condition.
Page 118 TH AREA 2 DEVELOPMENT CONTROL COMMITTEE – 10 DECEMBER 2013
ITEM 6 (CONT’D) APPLICATION NO. 2013/0467
Section 106 Contributions In line with Policy HC17 and the SPG – Planning Obligations, the applicant has agreed to make an education contribution £133,836 for the following schools : English Medium - Parkland Primary and Olchfa Comprehensive, and Welsh Medium - YGG Llwynderw and YG Y Gwyr
As the site is located in the Swansea West Strategic Housing Policy Zone, Policy HC3 (Affordable Housing) requires that due to the opportunities for housing development being more constrained, negotiations for the inclusion of a percentage of affordable housing in new housing schemes will be sought on new housing development for 10 or more dwellings. As such after a period of negotiation, the applicants have agreed that 6 units which equates to 25% affordable housing provision be provided on the site. The affordable units will be at 70% of Acceptable Cost Guidance (ACG). All the units shall be disposed of via a registered social landlord (RSL).
Response to Objections Raised. Issues relating to flooding, open space, access, increase in traffic, impact on protected species, demands for water, public drainage, trees, preservation of the environmental features are addressed in the report above.
With regard to noise during construction and electricity supply, these are controlled under separate legislation
With regard the removal of protected trees in 2008, action was taken against the Bible College. At the time it was found that 39 trees within the protected woodland area had been felled. Of those trees, 6 were found to have had serious decay and 1 oak tree on the south west boundary had been partially uprooted naturally. The remaining 33 trees were felled without the consent of the Local Planning Authority which constituted an offence under Section 210 (1) (a) of the Town & Country Planning Act 1990. Following the action taken, replacement planting has taken place within the woodland and along the eastern boundary of the woodland. It is noted that a couple of the replacement trees may need to be removed to facilitate the development proposed, however, the Council’s TPO Officer has commented that the removal of some of the re-planted trees would not adversely impact on the future health of the remaining area of woodland or the amenity of the area. Overall the woodland now appears to be in good health and as little maintenance within the woodland has occurred this has allowed beneficial natural regeneration to occur.
It is also noted that the woodland is outside the boundaries of the planning application.
Conclusion Having regard to all material planning considerations, including the provisions of the Human Rights Act, the principle of the development of this plot of land for up to 24 residential units and the access proposed is considered to be acceptable subject to conditions and an S106 Agreement. As the application is in outline form only, further consideration will be given to the appearance, landscaping, layout and scale will be dealt with at the reserved matters stage. The proposed development is considered to be acceptable with regard to the impacts of the development upon visual amenity, residential amenity, traffic and highway safety, drainage, trees and protected species and comply with the provisions of Policies EV1, EV2, EV3, EV30, EV33, EV34, EV35, HC2, HC3, and HC17 of the Unitary Development Plan 2008.
Page 119 TH AREA 2 DEVELOPMENT CONTROL COMMITTEE – 10 DECEMBER 2013
ITEM 6 (CONT’D) APPLICATION NO. 2013/0467
RECOMMENDATION
APPROVE, subject to the following conditions and the applicant entering into a Section 106 Planning Obligation Agreement to provide: Six affordable housing units on the site, an education contribution of £133,836 and a highways contribution of £56,470. The details regarding the phased payments (trigger points) are to be agreed with the developer.
1 Details of the, appearance, landscaping, layout, and scale, (hereinafter called "the reserved matters") shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the local planning authority before any development begins and the development shall be carried out as approved. Reason: To ensure that the development is carried out in an orderly and satisfactory manner.
2 Detailed plans and drawings with respect to the matters reserved in condition (01) shall be submitted for approval by the Local Planning Authority not later than the expiration of three years from the date of this permission. Reason: To comply with the provisions of Section 92 of the Town and Country Planning Act, 1990 and to ensure that the development is determined within a reasonable period.
3 The development to which this permission relates shall be begun either before the expiration of 5 years from the date of this outline permission, or before the expiration of 2 years from the date of approval of the last of the reserved matters to be approved, whichever is the later. Reason: To comply with the provisions of Section 92 of the Town and Country Planning Act, 1990 and to ensure that development is begun within a reasonable period.
4 Unless otherwise agreed in writing by the Local Planning Authority, the proposed parking spaces and driveways shown on the layout plan within the subsequent reserved matters application shall be: (i) porous or permeable; or (ii) constructed to direct run-off water from the hard surface to a porous or permeable area or surface within the curtilage of the dwellinghouse; and (iii) be permanently maintained so that it continues to comply with the requirements of paragraph (i) and (ii). Reason: In the interests of sustainability.
5 Notwithstanding the provision of the Town and Country Planning (General Permitted Development) Order 1995 (or any order revoking and re-enacting that Order with or without modification) no fences, gates or walls shall be erected within the curtilage of any dwelling house forward of any wall of that dwelling house which fronts onto a road unless otherwise agreed in writing by the Local Planning Authority. Reason: To ensure that the overall open plan housing layout is not prejudiced by uncontrolled development. Page 120 TH AREA 2 DEVELOPMENT CONTROL COMMITTEE – 10 DECEMBER 2013
ITEM 6 (CONT’D) APPLICATION NO. 2013/0467
6 Notwithstanding the provisions of the Town and Country Planning (General Permitted Development) Order 1995, (or any Order revoking or amending that Order), Class A, B, C, D, F of Schedule 2 shall not apply. Reason: The development hereby approved is such that the Council wish to retain control over any future development being permitted in order to ensure that a satisfactory form of development is achieved at all times.
7 Before the development hereby approved is occupied the means of enclosing the boundaries of the site and individual curtilages of all dwellings shall be completed in accordance with details to be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. Reason: In the interests of visual amenity and general amenity.
8 A landscaping scheme for the site shall be submitted as part of the reserved matters, and the scheme as approved shall be carried out within 12 months from the completion or occupation of the development, whichever is sooner. Any trees, shrubs or plant material which are part of the scheme, which die, become seriously damaged or diseased within two years of planting shall be replaced by trees or shrubs of a similar size and species to those originally required to be planted. Reason: In the interests of the visual amenity of the site as a whole, and to accord with Section 197 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990.
9 A detailed scheme for the eradication of Japanese Knotweed shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority, and shall be implemented prior to the commencement of work on site. Reason: In the interests of the ecology and amenity of the area.
10 Samples of all external finishes shall be submitted to and approved by the Local Planning Authority in writing before the development is commenced. The scheme shall be implemented in accordance with the approved details. Reason: In the interests of visual amenity.
11 The dwelling(s) shall be constructed to achieve a minimum of Code for Sustainable Homes Level 3 and achieve a minimum of 1 credit under category "Ene1 - Dwelling Emission Rate" in accordance with the requirements of the Code for Sustainable Homes: Technical Guide (November 2010 - Version 3). The development shall be carried out entirely in accordance with the approved assessment and certification. Reason: In the interests of sustainability.
12 The construction of the dwelling(s) hereby permitted and any external works shall not begin until an "Interim Certificate" has been submitted to the Local Planning Authority, certifying that a minimum Code for Sustainable Homes (Level 3) and a minimum of 1 credit under "Ene1 - Dwelling Emission Rate", has been achieved in accordance with the requirements of the Code for Sustainable Homes; Technical Advice Guide (November 2010 - Version 3). Reason: In the interests of sustainability.Page 121 TH AREA 2 DEVELOPMENT CONTROL COMMITTEE – 10 DECEMBER 2013
ITEM 6 (CONT’D) APPLICATION NO. 2013/0467
13 Prior to the occupation of the dwelling(s) hereby permitted, a Code for Sustainable Homes "Final certificate" shall be submitted to the Local Planning Authority certifying that a minimum Code for Sustainable Homes (Level 3) and a minimum of 1 credit under "Ene1 - Dwelling Emission Rate", has been achieved in accordance with the requirements of the Code for Sustainable Homes; Technical Advice Guide (November 2010 - Version 3). Reason: In the interests of sustainability.
14 No part of the development hereby permitted shall be occupied until street lighting including lighting to the internal footpaths has been installed in accordance with a detailed scheme to be submitted to and agreed in writing by the Local Planning Authority. Reason: To ensure a convenient and safe form of development.
15 A minimum of two parking spaces per dwelling shall be provided within the curtilage of the site and shall be used only for the purposed specified Reason: To ensure that the proposed development does not prejudice the free flow of traffic or conditions of general safety along the neighbouring highway.
16 No part of the development hereby approved shall be occupied until the access shown on the deposited plan has been constructed in accordance with details to be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. Reason: In the interests of highway safety.
17 Road layout details including longitudinal road sections and surface water drainage details shall be submitted for the approval of the Local Planning Authority as part of the submission of details. Reason: To allow the proper consideration of all highway details.
18 The garage(s) indicated in the submitted plans shall be retained for the parking of vehicles and purposes incidental to that use and shall not be used as or converted to domestic living accommodation. Reason: To ensure adequate on site car parking provision in the interests of highway safety, and residential and visual amenity.
19 Prior to the commencement of development a method statement shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority detailing how invasive plants including Himalayan balsam will be treated so as to control their spread during construction. The development shall be undertaken in accordance with the approved method statement. It is an offence under section 14(2) of the Wildlife and Countryside Act 1981 to plant or otherwise cause to grow in the wild any plant listed in Schedule 9 Part II. Reason: In the interests of the ecology and amenity of the area
Page 122 TH AREA 2 DEVELOPMENT CONTROL COMMITTEE – 10 DECEMBER 2013
ITEM 6 (CONT’D) APPLICATION NO. 2013/0467
20 Prior to the commencement of any work on site, a "Bat Licence" shall be obtained from the Welsh Assembly Government and a copy submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The mitigation measures proposed in the accompanying mitigation/method statement should form part of the "licence to disturb" application. The approved details shall be retained as such unless otherwise agreed in writing by the Local Planning Authority Reason: In order to ensure that the development complies with the Conservation (Natural Habitats & c) Regulations 1994, and to secure the protection of Listed European Protected Species on site.
21 No site works shall be undertaken until the implementation of an appropriate programme of building recording and analysis has been agreed with the local planning authority, to be carried out by a specialist acceptable to the local planning authority and in accordance with an agreed specification Reason: As the buildings are of archaeological and cultural significance the specified records are required to mitigate the impact of the development
22 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 constructed. 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 lease 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.
23 The development hereby approved shall be implemented in accordance with the Bat Mitigation Management Plan, entitled: 'Bible College, Swansea. Mitigation and Management Plan for Bats', received on 18 September 2013 by Cresswell (a Hyder Consulting Group Company) - received 18 September 2013. Reason: In order to ensure the protection of a European Protected Species
24 Prior to the commencement of development on site, a method statement to detail how bats will be conserved during the works, shall be submitted to and agreed in writing with the Local Planning Authority. This must include, but not exclusively, details of methods of works; timing and duration of works; action to be taken in the event a bat is found and shall be implemented in accordance with the details thereby approved. Reason: In order to ensure the protection of a European Protected Species
Page 123 TH AREA 2 DEVELOPMENT CONTROL COMMITTEE – 10 DECEMBER 2013
ITEM 6 (CONT’D) APPLICATION NO. 2013/0467
25 Prior to the commencement of development on site, the preparation, agreement and implementation of a monitoring scheme for bats shall be submitted to and agreed in writing by the Local Planning Authority and the scheme shall be implemented in accordance with the details thereby approved. Monitoring should include monitoring of the bat population itself and assess the ongoing suitability of the compensation roosts and flight lines to support them. Monitoring reports should be submitted to the Local Planning Authority. and a final monitoring report agreed at the end of the monitoring period. Should the monitoring show a decline in population numbers, remedial measures should be agreed in writing and implemented to the satisfaction of the Local Planning Authority. Reason: In order to ensure the protection of a European Protected Species
26 Prior to the commencement of development on site, a lighting scheme to ensure lighting measures do not conflict with bat use of the site, shall be submitted to and agreed in writing by Local Planning Authority and the scheme shall be implemented in accordance with the details thereby approved. The scheme shall include low level lighting and, appropriate siting of lights (to ensure that bat roost access points and flight paths are not illuminated and demonstrate that disturbance to bat flight paths will be avoided) and measures to monitor lux levels. The scheme should address construction activities and the operational phase and include remedial action to be undertaken where problems are identified by the above monitoring scheme. Reason: In order to ensure the protection of a European Protected Species
27 Prior to the commencement of development on site, a mitigation planting/landscaping plan shall be to be submitted to, and agreed in writing by the Local Planning Authority and shall be implemented in accordance with the details thereby approved. It must include details of planting and management which will maintain flight lines across the site, ensure connectivity to foraging habitats, and maintain vegetation cover. Reason: In order to ensure the protection of a European Protected Species
28 Prior to the occupation of any of the dwellings, dye testing of the public sewer system shall be undertaken to ensure no misconnections and impact on receiving waters. Full details of the testing shall be presented in a report and shall be submitted to and agreed in writing by the Local Planning Authority to show appropriate checks /testing has been undertaken. Reason: To protect the integrity of the pubic sewer systems and other water courses.
29 No development shall take place until a remediation strategy that includes the following components to deal with the risks associated with contamination of the site shall each be submitted to, and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority: 1. A preliminary risk assessment which has identified: - all previous uses - potential contaminants associated with those uses - Continued - Page 124 TH AREA 2 DEVELOPMENT CONTROL COMMITTEE – 10 DECEMBER 2013
ITEM 6 (CONT’D) APPLICATION NO. 2013/0467
- a conceptual model of the site indicating sources, pathways and receptors - potentially unacceptable risks arising from contamination at the site. 2. A site investigation scheme, based on (1) to provide information for a detailed assessment of the risk to all receptors that may be affected, including those off site. 3. The results of the site investigation and the detailed risk assessment referred to in (2) and, based on these, an options appraisal and remediation strategy giving full details of the remediation measures required and how they are to be undertaken. 4. A verification plan providing details of the data that will be collected in order to demonstrate that the works set out in the remediation strategy in (3) are complete and identifying any requirements for longer-term monitoring of pollutant linkages, maintenance and arrangements for contingency action. Any changes to these components require the express written consent of the local planning authority. The scheme shall be implemented as approved. Reason: To ensure the risks to controlled waters from contamination have been identified and an appropriate remediation scheme agreed.
30 No occupation of any part of the permitted development shall take place until a verification report demonstrating completion of works set out in the approved remediation strategy and the effectiveness of the remediation shall be submitted to and approved, in writing, by the local planning authority. The report shall include results of sampling and monitoring carried out in accordance with the approved verification plan to demonstrate that the site remediation criteria have been met. It shall also include any plan (a "long-term monitoring and maintenance plan") for longer-term monitoring of pollutant linkages, maintenance and arrangements for contingency action, as identified in the verification plan. The long-term monitoring and maintenance plan shall be implemented as approved. Reason: To demonstrate that the remediation criteria relating to controlled waters have been met and (if necessary) to secure longer-term monitoring of groundwater quality.
31 No development should take place until a long-term monitoring and maintenance plan in respect of contamination including a timetable of monitoring and submission of reports to the Local Planning Authority, shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. Reports as specified in the approved plan, including details of any necessary contingency action arising from the monitoring, shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. Any necessary contingency measures shall be carried out in accordance with the details in the approved reports. On completion of the monitoring specified in the plan a final report demonstrating that all long-term remediation works have been carried out and confirming that remedial targets have been achieved shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. Reason: To ensure that longer term remediation criteria relating to controlled waters have been met. This will ensure that there are no longer remaining unacceptable risks to controlled waters following remediation of the site.
Page 125 TH AREA 2 DEVELOPMENT CONTROL COMMITTEE – 10 DECEMBER 2013
ITEM 6 (CONT’D) APPLICATION NO. 2013/0467
32 If, during development, contamination not previously identified is found to be present at the site then no further development (unless otherwise agreed in writing with the local planning authority) shall be carried out until the developer has submitted a remediation strategy to the local planning authority detailing how this unsuspected contamination shall be dealt with and obtained written approval from the local planning authority. The remediation strategy shall be implemented as approved. Reason: It is considered possible that there may be unidentified areas of contamination at the site that could pose a risk to controlled waters if they are not remediated.
33 Prior to the commencement of development on site, a Construction Environmental Management Plan (CEMP) shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority and the construction shall be implemented in accordance with the details thereby approved. The CEMP shall include as a minimum full details of the following: · storage facilities for all fuels, oils and chemicals · construction compounds, car parks, offices etc · details of surface water drainage arrangements to be installed to intercept and treat contaminated surface water run-off · details of measures to ensure no polluting discharge from haul roads/disturbed areas · details of the nature, type and quantity of materials to be imported on to the site · measures for dealing with any contaminated material (demolition waste or excavated waste) · identification of any buried services, such as foul sewers, so that they are protected · details of emergency contacts, for example Natural Resources Wales Pollution hotline 0800 807 060 The details of the CEMP must also be efficiently communicated to all contractors and sub-contractors (for example, via toolbox talks) and any deficiencies rectified immediately. Reason: In order to minimise the risk of pollution during the course of construction.
34 Land drainage run-off shall not be permitted to discharge, either directly or indirectly, into the public sewerage system. Reason: To prevent hydraulic overload of the public sewerage system and pollution of the environment.
35 Surface water discharges shall only be permitted to discharge to the public surface water sewerage system at a rate of 10 litres per second using a suitable flow control device. Reason: To prevent hydraulic overloading of the public sewerage system, to protect the health and safety of existing residents and ensure no detriment to the environment
Page 126 TH AREA 2 DEVELOPMENT CONTROL COMMITTEE – 10 DECEMBER 2013
ITEM 6 (CONT’D) APPLICATION NO. 2013/0467
36 Foul water and surface water discharges shall be drained separatel y from the site. Reason: To protect the integrity of the public sewerage system.
37 No development shall commence until the developer has prepared a scheme for the comprehensive and integrated drainage of the site showing how foul water, surface water and land drainage will be dealt with and this has been approved by the Local Planning Authority. Reason: To ensure that effective drainage facilities are provided for the proposed development, and that no adverse impact occurs to the environment or the existing public sewerage system
38 No development including demolition work shall commence on site until a scheme for the retention and protection of trees to British Standard 5837:2012 - Trees in relation to design, demolition and construction has been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. This shall include full details on all works that impact on the original ground conditions within the root protection areas, as detailed in BS5837:2012 and in particular details of protective fencing, ground protection & construction method, required tree surgery operations, service trenching position and any changes in ground level within the root protection areas of all retained trees. No development shall take place except in complete accordance with the approved scheme, and the works required by that scheme are in place. All protective fencing, ground protection etc shall be retained intact for the full duration of the development hereby approved, and shall only be removed, or altered in that time with the prior written approval of the Local Planning Authority. Reason: To ensure the protection of retained trees on site during construction works
39 No development including demolition work shall commence on site until all tree protection measures as detailed in the approved scheme have been implemented, inspected and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority Reason: To ensure the protection of retained trees on site during construction works
40 No retained trees or hedgerows shall be cut down, uprooted, destroyed, pruned, cut or damaged during the construction phase other than in accordance with the approved plans and particulars, without the prior written approval of the Local Planning Authority. Reason: To ensure the protection of the trees and hedgerows
41 If any retained trees or hedgerows are cut down, uprooted, destroyed or die during the construction phase another tree/hedgerow shall be planted at the same location and that tree/hedgerow shall be of a size, species as specified in writing by the Local Planning Authority. Reason: To ensure the protection of the trees and hedgerows
Page 127 TH AREA 2 DEVELOPMENT CONTROL COMMITTEE – 10 DECEMBER 2013
ITEM 6 (CONT’D) APPLICATION NO. 2013/0467
42 No development including demolition work shall commence on site until a meeting with the site manager and the Local Planning Authority Tree Officer has been under taken and confirmed in writing by the Local Planning Authority. Reason: To ensure the protection of retained trees on site during construction works
43 Prior to beneficial occupation of any dwelling within the site, the site access and internal site roads shall be completed in accordance with details to be submitted to and agreed in writing by the Local Planning Authority. Such details shall include for a traffic calming table at the access junction and the provision of continuous footways within the site connecting to existing footway provision outside the site. The development shall be completed in accordance with the details thereby approved. Reason: In the interests of highway safety
44 All the existing stone boundary walls which abut Derwen Fawr Road shall be retained in situ unless otherwise agreed in writing by the Local Planning Authority. Should any part of the boundary walls be damaged during the course of construction it shall be re-built using matching materials. Reason: In the interests of protecting the character and appearance of the area.
45 Notwithstanding the details shown on the approved plans, the pedestrian route as shown on plan 103 issue 2 received on 28th June 2013 shall include footpath links to Clyne Woods and the existing bus stop and all the paths shall be completed prior to the first occupation of the dwellings in accordance with details to be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. Reason: In the interest of pedestrian safety and accessibility
INFORMATIVES
1 The applicant is advised that the development must be carried out in accordance with the approved plans. If, prior to or during the implementation of this permission, any particulars are found to be inaccurate then the Local Planning Authority must be informed and works shall not commence or be continued until the matter has been resolved. Failure to do so could lead to the serving of an enforcement or stop notice.
2 Birds may be present in this building and grounds please note it is an offence under the Wildlife & Countryside Act 1981 (as amended) to intentionally (intentionally or recklessly for Schedule 1 birds) to: - Kill, injure or take any wild bird - Take, damage or destroy the nest of any wild bird while that nest in use or being built - Take or destroy an egg of any wild bird Care should be taken when working on buildings particularly during the bird nesting season March-August.
Page 128 TH AREA 2 DEVELOPMENT CONTROL COMMITTEE – 10 DECEMBER 2013
ITEM 6 (CONT’D) APPLICATION NO. 2013/0467
3 It is an offence under the Wildlife & Countryside Act 1981 (as amended) to intentionally (intentionally or recklessly for Schedule 1 birds) to: - Kill, injure or take any wild bird - Take, damage or destroy the nest of any wild bird while that nest is in use or being built - Take or destroy an egg of any wild bird You are advised that any clearance of trees, shrubs, scrub (including gorse and bramble) or empty buildings should not be undertaken during the bird nesting season, 1st March - 31st August and that such action may result in an offence being committed.
4 This consent is issued without prejudice to any other consents or easements that may be required in connection with the proposed development.
5 The development plan covering the City and County of Swansea is the City and County of Swansea Unitary Development Plan. The following policies were relevant to the consideration of the application: EV1, EV2, EV3, EV30, EV33, EV34, EV35, HC2, HC3 and HC17
6 The Developers is advised to note the following : 1. Follow the risk management framework provided in CLR11, Model Procedures for the Management of Land Contamination, when dealing with land affected by contamination. 2. Refer to the Environment Agency 'Guiding principles for land contamination' for the type of information we required in order to assess risks to controlled waters from the site. This is available from www.environment-agency.gov.
7 Some public sewers and lateral drains may not be recorded on our 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 prop osal. In order to assist us in dealing with the proposal we request the applicant contacts our Operations Contact Centre on 0800 085 3968 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. The Welsh Government have introduced new legislation that will make it mandatory for all developers who wish to communicate with the public sewerage system to obtain and adoption agreement for their sewerage with Dwr Cymru Welsh Water (DCWW). The Welsh Ministers Standards for the construction of sewerage apparatus and an agreement under Section 104 of the Water Industry Act (WIA) 1991 will need to be completed in advance of any authorisation to communicate with the public sewerage system under Section 106 WIA 1991 being granted by DCWW. Welsh Government introduced the Welsh Ministers Standards on the 1st October 2012 and we would welcome your support in informing applicants who wish to communicate with the public sewerage system to engage with us at the earliest opportunity. Further information on the Welsh Ministers Standards is available for viewing on our Developer Services Section of our website - www.dwrcymru.com Further information on the Welsh Ministers Standards can be found on the Welsh Government website - www.wales.gov.uk
Page 129 TH AREA 2 DEVELOPMENT CONTROL COMMITTEE – 10 DECEMBER 2013
ITEM 6 (CONT’D) APPLICATION NO. 2013/0467
If a connection is required to the public sewerage system, the developer is advised to contact Dwr Cymru Welsh Water's Developer Services on 0800 917 2652.
A water supply can be made available to serve this proposed development. The developer may be required to contribute, under Sections 40 - 41 of the Water Industry Act 1991, t
8 It is an offence under the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 to: Cut down, uproot, top, lop, wilfully destroy or wilfully damage a tree protected by a Tree Preservation Order. Wilful damage to a protected tree includes damage to its surrounding rooting area by: excavation work, storage of materials or machinery, parking of vehicles, deposit of soil or rubble, disposal of liquids, or the mixing of cement.
9 A Woodland Tree Preservation Order protects all trees within the defined area, including natural regeneration - seedlings and saplings It is an offence under the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 to: Cut down, uproot, top, lop, wilfully destroy or wilfully damage a tree protected by a Tree Preservation Order. Wilful damage to a protected tree includes damage to its surrounding rooting area by: excavation work, storage of materials or machinery, parking of vehicles, deposit of soil or rubble, disposal of liquids, or the mixing of cement.
10 The Developer must contact the Highway Management Group , The City and County of Swansea , Penllergaer Offices, c/o The Civic Centre , Swansea SA1 3SN before carrying out any work . Please contact the Senior Engineer (Development) , e-mails to : [email protected] or the Team Leader , e-mails to [email protected] , tel. no. 01792 636091
11 The applicant is advised to note the details of the New Roads and Streetworks Act 1991
12 i. The applicant is requested to contact the Head of Environmental Health Services prior to the commencement of any works on site in order to identify any statutory controls which may be required in relation to the specific works being carried out and the hours of working on the site.
ii. The applicant's attention is drawn to the requirements of the Highways Act not to cause obstruction to the users of the public highway nor to allow soil, and or other materials to be deposited onto the street, and to obtain consent for the storage of building materials on the public highway. The applicant should contact the Director of Technical Services to advise on the requirements of the Act and the penalties for non-compliance.
13 The Developer must contact the Team Leader, Highways Management, City & County of Swansea (Highways), Penllergaer Offices, c/o Civic Centre, Swansea, SA1 3SN (Tel: 01792 636091) before carrying out any work.
Page 130 TH AREA 2 DEVELOPMENT CONTROL COMMITTEE – 10 DECEMBER 2013
ITEM 6 (CONT’D) APPLICATION NO. 2013/0467
14 The proposed development lies within coal mining area which may contain unrecorded mining related hazards. If any coal mining feature is encountered during development, this should be reported to The Coal Authority.
Any intrusive activities which disturb or enter any coal seams, coal mine workings or coal mine entries (shafts and adits) requires the prior written permission of The Coal Authority.
Property specific summary information on coal mining can be obtained from The Coal Authority's Property Search Service on 0845 762 6848 or at www.groundstability.com
15 The applicant is advised to note that tree T74 is a large native oak of considerable age with an expected long life remaining. It has a wide root protection area of some 14.4m radius around the tree. It also has a large canopy area. The indicative layout plan shows plot 15 in close proximity of the tree. This would result in severe impact upon this tree. You are advised to ensure that this tree is fully considered & protected when designing the layout of the site for a future reserved matters application.
16 Reptiles may be present. All British reptiles are protected under Schedule 5 of the Wildlife and Country Act 1981 (as amended). It making it an offence to intentionally kill or injure adder, slow worm and common lizard. If the reptiles listed above are encountered work must cease immediately and the advice of Natural Resources Wales sought before continuing with any work. (01792 634960).
PLANS
Site location plan, site plan, hyder consultation, Phase 1 Geo environmental desk study, planning statement, transport assessment, drainage strategy, valuation advisory - project viability report, statement of community involvement, ecological appraisal received 10th April 2013, Amend plan 113b revised indicative layout received 6th June 2013, Amended Arboricultural Survey Report received 28 May 2013; Amended plan 103 issue 02 proposed junction & pedestrian route received 28th June 2013. Additional management plan for bats received 30th August, 2013
Page 131 TH AREA 2 DEVELOPMENT CONTROL COMMITTEE – 10 DECEMBER 2013
ITEM 7 APPLICATION NO. 2013/1121 WARD: Cockett Area 2
Location: 18 Lon Teify, Cockett Swansea SA2 0YB Proposal: Single storey side/rear extension, rear & side roof extension incorporating one rear dormer, one side dormer on the south west elevation and 2 side dormers on the north east elevation. Applicant: Mr and Mrs Leon Gruneberg
3 6
2
1
6 4 2 2
5 2 15
9 27
19
39 LON
COTHI
3
4
4
4 1
2 2
24
2 6
19
Y
8 1 IF 29 E 6 T 3 N È L
2
T N E C S
E
0 R 2 C
1 IN H P
L
E
2
2
1 4 6 4 7
1
4 1
2
N 5 O 1 F R I
N 1 151.8m È 1 8
L 9
4
5
1 5
1
3
7
5
9
5
5 4 7 6
El 3 Sub CR Sta E D B
dy 2
124
C TCB R
122
LB
31 GRA IGLW 112 YD R OAD
ED Bdy
34 102
NOT TO SCALE This material has been reproduced from Ordnance Survey digital map data with the permission of the controller of Her Majesty’s StationeryPage 132 Office, © Crown Copyright. AREA 2 DEVELOPMENT CONTROL COMMITTEE – 10 TH DECEMBER 2013
ITEM 7 (CONT’D) APPLICATION NO. 2013/1121
BACKGROUND INFORMATION
POLICIES
Policy Policy Description Policy EV1 New development shall accord with a defined set of criteria of good design. (City & County of Swansea Unitary Development Plan 2008).
Policy HC7 Proposals for extensions and alterations to existing residential dwellings will be assessed in terms of; relationship to the existing dwelling, impact on the character and appearance of the streetscene, effect on neighbouring properties, and impact on car parking. (City & County of Swansea Unitary Development Plan 2008)
RESPONSE TO CONSULTATIONS
The neighbouring occupants of Nos. 16 and 20 Lon Teify and Nos. 48 and 50 Elphin Crescent were individually consulted.
THREE LETTERS OF OBJECTION has been received. The objections raised are summarised as follows:
• The development will result in a detrimental loss of light, overshadowing and overlooking impact upon the residential amenity of Nos. 16 and 20 Lon Teify. • The character of the property will be altered significantly to the other properties on this side of the road.
Following concerns raised by officers, amended plans have been received and reconsultation was undertaken.
TWO FURTHER LETTERS OF OBJECTION have been received. The objections raised are summarised as follows:
• The proposed changes will still intrude on our privacy, will cut out daylight and the roof will come close to our fence. • It will be out of keeping with all the other bungalows in the street.
Highway Observations - No objection.
APPRAISAL
The application is reported to Committee for decision at the request of Councillor Anne Cook to assess the impact upon visual amenity and neighbours residential amenity.
Full planning permission is sought for a single storey side/rear extension, rear and side roof extension incorporating one rear dormer, one side dormer on the south west elevation and 2 side dormers on the north east elevation.
Page 133 AREA 2 DEVELOPMENT CONTROL COMMITTEE – 10 TH DECEMBER 2013
ITEM 7 (CONT’D) APPLICATION NO. 2013/1121
Initially, officers raised concern regarding the scale of the dormers, roof extension and potential impact on the residential amenities of neighbours. Amended plans have been submitted by the applicant reducing the size of the roof extension, and repositioning and reducing the size of the dormers.
The main issues for consideration with regard to this application relate to the impact of the proposed development on visual and residential amenities and highway safety with regard to the provisions of Policies EV1 and HC7 of the City and County of Swansea Unitary Development Plan (UDP) 2008 and the Supplementary Planning Guidance (SPG) ‘A Design Guide for Householder Development’.
The roof extension has been reduced in height so that it would be set down from the main roof ridgeline by 0.5m. Although the extension to the roof is substantial, it is mainly confined to the sides and rear of the bungalow and as such, although visible from the front at street level, the size of the roof extension is not considered to harm the visual appearance of the dwelling.
The four dormers have all been reduced in size and as a result are not considered to detract from the visual appearance of the host dwelling as they are all now set down from the ridgeline, up from the eaves and have a modest width that doesn’t dominate the roof plane. In addition they are located on both side elevations and the rear elevation and as such are not highly visible from the public realm.
The extension to the side is at single storey only, replaces an existing flat roof garage and would be set back from the main front elevation by approx 3.7m. As such the proposed single storey side extension is considered to be acceptable.
It is noted that the objectors raise concerns regarding the impact upon the streetscene and that the proposals would result in the property being out of keeping with the other bungalows in the street. It is noted that the bungalow will be different from the other un- extended properties, however, the scale and design of the proposed alterations are considered to be an acceptable change that would not cause unacceptable harm the visual amenity of the wider streetscene. As such the proposals are considered to comply with the provisions of Policies EV1 and HC7 of the UDP as well the SPG – A Design Guide for Householder Development.
It is not considered that the roof extension and single storey side extension would cause any harm to the amenities of the neighbours as the side and rear roof extension would be raked away from the mutual boundaries and would not be sufficiently overbearing to warrant a refusal of planning permission on this ground alone.
With regard to the two dormer facing towards the boundary of No. 20, the internal layout has been amended such that the front side dormer now serves a bedroom whilst the rear side dormer serves a bathroom. This has served to prevent overlooking of the rear garden space of No 20, as the bathroom dormer will be obscurely glazed. The bedroom dormer will overlook the front garden of No 20, which is already overlooked from the public realm. As such it is considered that the proposed dormers would not introduce an unacceptable overlooking impact with regard to No. 20.
Page 134 AREA 2 DEVELOPMENT CONTROL COMMITTEE – 10 TH DECEMBER 2013
ITEM 7 (CONT’D) APPLICATION NO. 2013/1121
With regard to No 16, one side dormer window serving a bedroom would face towards the side of this property. This room is also served by a further window to the rear and in order to mitigate against any overlooking impacts, this window is proposed to be obscurely glazed.
The rear dormer proposed would be clear glazed and as it would serve to over look the rear garden of the host property and would maintain a distance in excess of 10m to the rear boundary fence, it is considered that no undue overlooking impacts would occur that would warrant a refusal of planning permission. As such, the proposals are considered to comply with the provisions of policies EV1 and HC7 of the UDP as well the SPG – A Design Guide for Householder Development.
The Head of Transportation and Engineering Services no highway objection to the proposal and the scheme is regarded as acceptable in highway safety terms in this respect.
In conclusion, having regard to all material planning considerations including the provisions of the Human Rights Act, the application is considered to be acceptable and would not have a detrimental impact on the visual amenity of the area, highway safety or on the amenity of adjacent residential occupiers. The proposals are considered to comply with the provisions of policies EV1 and HC7 of the UDP as well the SPG – A Design Guide for Householder Development.
RECOMMENDATION
APPROVE, subject to the following conditions:
1 The development hereby permitted shall begin not later than five years from the date of this decision. Reason: To comply with the provisions of Section 91 of the Town and Country Planning Act, 1990.
2 The first floor side dormer windows in the south west elevation serving bedroom 1 and the first floor rear side dormer window in the north east elevation serving the bathroom, as indicated on Plan No: 05.13.18LT.D1. Rev G received on 17 Oct 2013 shall be obscure glazed, and unopenable except for a fan light and shall be retained as such unless otherwise agreed in writing with the Local Planning Authority. Reason: To safeguard the privacy of the occupiers of neighbouring residential properties.
INFORMATIVES
1 The applicant is advised that the development must be carried out in accordance with the approved plans. If, prior to or during the implementation of this permission, any particulars are found to be inaccurate then the Local Planning Authority must be informed and works shall not commence or be continued until the matter has been resolved. Failure to do so could lead to the serving of an enforcement or stop notice. Page 135 AREA 2 DEVELOPMENT CONTROL COMMITTEE – 10 TH DECEMBER 2013
ITEM 7 (CONT’D) APPLICATION NO. 2013/1121
2 This consent is issued without prejudice to any other consents or easements that may be required in connection with the proposed development.
3 The development plan covering the City and County of Swansea is the City and County of Swansea Unitary Development Plan. The following policies were relevant to the consideration of the application: HC7 and EV1
PLANS
05.13.18LT.D2 site plan and block plan received 23rd July 2013. Amended plan 05.13.18LT.D1 Rev G existing and proposed floor plans and elevations, 05.13.18.LT.D3 rev A existing and proposed roof plans received 17th October 2013
Page 136 AREA 2 DEVELOPMENT CONTROL COMMITTEE – 10 TH DECEMBER 2013
ITEM 8 APPLICATION NO. 2013/1300 WARD: West Cross Area 2
Location: 79 Mumbles Road West Cross Swansea SA3 4BL Proposal: Two detached dwellings (variation of condition 01 of planning permission 2005/1908 granted at appeal 12/02/2009 to extend the period of time for a further 5 years to commence works) Applicant: Mrs Anna-Christine Scott- Brown
4 0
3
2
1
3 6 7
D
A
O
R
4
1 S
3 E L
B
M
U
M
8.8m
7 5
6
2
3
e
d
a n
e
5 m o r
P
e
h
T
1a
1
8 1
BETHAN
Y LANE
2 1 Yny s y Plant
r 6 1 e
t
a 1
W
h
g i
H
n
a
e
M
8
5
4 1
e l
d g
u n i
h M
6 S &
d d
n n a a
d S
n
a
S
2 Post
3
3
1
PA LM YR A
CO URT
NOT TO SCALE This material has been reproduced from Ordnance Survey digital map data with the permission of the controller of Her Majesty’sPage 137 Stationery Office, © Crown Copyright. AREA 2 DEVELOPMENT CONTROL COMMITTEE – 10 TH DECEMBER 2013
ITEM 8 (CONT’D) APPLICATION NO. 2013/1300
BACKGROUND INFORMATION
This application was DEFERRED at the Area 2 Development Control Committee on the 12 th November 2013 to enable the applicant to submit further information concerning the reasoning behind the application for the extension of time. My report has been updated to include a statement from the applicant’s agent and my recommendation of APPROVAL remains unchanged.
POLICIES
Policy Policy Description Policy EV1 New development shall accord with a defined set of criteria of good design. (City & County of Swansea Unitary Development Plan 2008).
Policy EV2 The siting of new development shall give preference to the use of previously developed land and have regard to the physical character and topography of the site and its surroundings. (City & County of Swansea Unitary Development Plan 2008).
Policy EV3 Proposals for new development and alterations to and change of use of existing buildings will be required to meet defined standards of access. (City & County of Swansea Unitary Development Plan 2008)
Policy AS6 Provision of car parking in accordance with adopted standards. (City & County of Swansea Unitary Development Plan 2008)
Policy EV33 Planning permission will normally only be granted where development can be served by the public mains sewer or, where this system is inadequate, satisfactory improvements can be provided prior to the development becoming operational. (City & County of Swansea Unitary Development Plan 2008)
Policy EV35 Development that would have an adverse impact on the water environment due to: i) Additional surface water run off leading to a significant risk of flooding on site or an increase in flood risk elsewhere; and/or, ii) A reduction in the quality of surface water run-off. Will only be permitted where it can be demonstrated that appropriate alleviating measures can be implemented. (City & County of Swansea Unitary Development Plan 2008)
Policy EC16 New or improved recreational tourism facilities at specific destinations around Swansea Bay are proposed which capitalise on the seafront aspect and contribute towards the regeneration of the Bay. Between these areas of appropriate development, the emphasis is on safeguarding and enhancing the environment of the Bay and other waterfront areas. (City & County of Swansea Unitary Development Plan 2008)
Page 138 AREA 2 DEVELOPMENT CONTROL COMMITTEE – 10 TH DECEMBER 2013
ITEM 8 (CONT’D) APPLICATION NO. 2013/1300
Policy HC2 Housing development within the urban area will be supported where the site has been previously developed, its development does not conflict with other policies, does not result in ribbon development, and the coalescence of settlements, overintensive development, loss of residential amenity, adverse effect on the character and appearance of the area, loss of urban green space, harm to highway safety, adverse effects to landscape, natural heritage, security and personal safety, infrastructure capacity, and the overloading of community facilities and services. (City & County of Swansea Unitary Development Plan 2008)
SITE HISTORY
App No. Proposal 2006/1789 Two detached dwellings Decision: Withdrawn Decision Date: 18/08/2006
2005/1908 Two detached dwellings Decision: Refuse Decision Date: 26/06/2008
2004/0836 Construction of one pair of semi detached dwelling houses Decision: Appeal Allowed Decision Date: 23/06/2005
2006/0568 To cut back 3 branches from 1 pine tree covered by TPO No. 29 Decision: Grant Tree Pres Order Consent (C) Decision Date: 03/05/2006
89/1672/10 TRIMMING + LOPPING OF BRANCH OF PINE TREE IN FRONT GARDEN Decision: *HGPC - GRANT PERMISSION CONDITIONAL Decision Date: 15/12/1989
2003/1609 Part two storey, part single storey side extension incorporating double garage, single storey front extension, two single storey rear extensions and alterations to vehicular access. Decision: Grant Permission Conditional Decision Date: 15/01/2004
RESPONSE TO CONSULTATION
The application was advertised on site and thirteen individual properties were consulted. TWO LETTERS OF OBJECTION have been received, which are summarised as follows:
1. The plot is not large enough for two detached dwellings and would not be in keeping with the other houses nearby which are currently semi detached and good sized houses on good sized plots. Page 139 AREA 2 DEVELOPMENT CONTROL COMMITTEE – 10 TH DECEMBER 2013
ITEM 8 (CONT’D) APPLICATION NO. 2013/1300
2. The development will cause severe disruption and stress to the elderly occupier of no.81. 3. We fail to agree or understand how 81 will be restored. 4. The original property (79 and 81) was three fishermen cottages dating back to the middle of the 19 th century and should be preserved for its historical value. 5. Any modern development will not be in keeping with the existing environment. 6. Access to the main road is on a blind bend and is difficult and will add to this dangerous situation. 7. Car parking is not adequate. 8. The tree in the front garden is on a TPO.
Dwr Cymru Welsh Water – No objection subject to conditions.
Highways Observations - I recommend no highway objection to the extension of time applied for.
APPLICANT’S STATEMENT
“In discussing the issue with the client he outlined that his rationale for applying for an extension of time centred on his elderly mother, who is 101 and still lives at 79 Mumbles Road. To have implemented the extant consent would have meant uprooting her from her current location. Our client has outlined that due to his mother’s age (she is very ill, her sight is severely impaired and she is virtually deaf) she could never settle anywhere else - hence he desperately wants to avoid moving her as long as she lives.
As you can appreciate from the above, the application for the extension of time was made on grounds of sincerity and as such it is requested that the application be allowed. However, if further weight is needed, the client would be willing to reduce the extension of time from 5 years to 3 years.”
APPRAISAL
This application is reported to Committee for decision at the request of Councillor Des Thomas due to concerns over the impact upon residential amenity.
An appeal was allowed in February 2009 for the erection of two new dwellings to replace the existing semi detached house on this land at 79 Mumbles Road, West Cross (Appeal ref. APP/B6855/A/08/2087159, application number 2005/1908). This current Section 73 application seeks to vary Condition 1 to extend the period of time for a further 5 years to commence works.
Paragraph 60 of Circular 11/95 advises that an application to renew an existing planning permission should be refused only where:
a) there has been a material change in planning circumstances since the original permission was granted; b) continued failure to commence the development would contribute unacceptably to uncertainty about the future pattern of development in the area; c) the application is premature because the permission still has a reasonable time to run.
Page 140 AREA 2 DEVELOPMENT CONTROL COMMITTEE – 10 TH DECEMBER 2013
ITEM 8 (CONT’D) APPLICATION NO. 2013/1300
This application relates to the same proposal as that allowed at Appeal in February 2009 as stated above. The proposed two dwellings would have a footprint of approximately 95 sq. metres. Both dwellings will be two storeys in height with additional accommodation in the roof space with a ridge height of approximately 8.6m and an eaves height of 5.1m, and incorporate feature rear elevations with windows providing views over the bay. The dwellings will be finished in a white painted render with slate (or a slate replica) roof covering.
The front building line of the dwellings will have a slight stagger with House 1 set back a minimum of 8.6m, and House 2 set back a maximum of 11.7m from the back edge of the highway. The rear gardens would extend 15m and 16.5m in length respectively to a rear boundary wall abutting the promenade. Set comparatively centrally within the width of site area available, the two new dwellings will be sited 2m apart with an intervening 1.8m high boundary wall. House 1 will be sited approximately 2.3m from the southern side elevation of No. 77 Mumbles Road, with an intervening 1.3m stone wall remaining. House 2 will be set at a slight angle with its side elevation sited a minimum separation distance of 1m and maximum distance of 1.5m from the northern side elevation of No. 81 Mumbles Road.
The site access involves a proposed shared driveway system with one way entry and exit that includes three off street parking spaces per dwelling within the front curtilage of the site.
The main issues for consideration are the impact of the proposed development on the character and appearance of the area and on the residential amenities presently enjoyed by the occupiers of the neighbouring properties, and highway safety at this location, having regard to the prevailing relevant policies of the Unitary Development Plan 2008 and National Planning policy guidance. It is not considered that the Human Rights Act raises any other overriding material considerations in this case.
The Council wishes to foster high standards of design in all new development, and this is reinforced by Planning Policy Wales (Edition 5 November 2012), which states that proposed development needs to respect, and enhance where possible, the environment through location, scale, and design. In addition Technical Advice Note (Wales) 12: Design, 2009, emphasises that “the visual appearance of proposed development, its scale and its relationship to its surroundings are material planning considerations in determining planning applications.” For the purpose of this advice, design is taken to mean the relationship between all elements of the built and natural environment, including its relationship between different buildings and between buildings and the streets. Key design issues include height and massing, relationship to site boundaries and adjoining properties, etc.
In line with this guidance, the following policies of the Unitary Development Plan 2008 apply- EV1, EV2, EV3, AS6, EC16, EV33, EV35 and HC2.
This part of Mumbles Road is characterised by relatively low-density development. When taken as a plot ratio the proposed buildings will cover less than a third of the site area available, which is comparable in proportion to the plot ratios of the surrounding residential dwellings. Moreover, the site layout plan demonstrates that the two dwellings can be accommodated within the plot, with satisfactory levels of amenity space and car parking whilst also providing a sufficient gap for pedestrian side access to both properties.
Page 141 AREA 2 DEVELOPMENT CONTROL COMMITTEE – 10 TH DECEMBER 2013
ITEM 8 (CONT’D) APPLICATION NO. 2013/1300
In terms of the overall design and appearance of the proposed dwellings, consideration has been given to the character and form of neighbouring dwellings which are characterised by a mix of styles and design. In this respect, whilst the overall built form of the proposed dwellings is typical of a 1930s suburban dwelling, the revised details of both front and rear elevations, including design changes to the front windows and porches, provide a more contemporary appearance (albeit with a 1930s Art Deco feel) that not only strengthens the design, but is, it is considered, visually acceptable in the context of the surrounding street scene and sea front location. This is enhanced by the set back to the front elevations which helps to break up the massing of each dwelling and adds visual richness to the design.
To the rear, the semi-circular and rectangular projections on the rear elevations of the respective dwellings adds to the character of these new dwellings; essentially using modern materials such as aluminium and glass to maximise the southerly aspect. As a result both dwellings maximise views of the bay and access to natural light (affording some solar gain); this is particularly important for House 2 which has a deep room plan. This design also provides each dwelling with its own identity whilst adding to the variety of dwellings found on the bay side of Mumbles Road.
The principle of a small dormer window to the rear of each dwelling is considered acceptable. With materials to include aluminium coated windows and gutters in blue grey, white Upvc fascias and soffits, it is recommended that the roof is finished in slate and the walls are rendered, with the colour of the render possibly being different for each dwelling.
Turning to matters of residential amenity, it is not considered that the proposed houses would result in any adverse overlooking upon the existing and proposed properties. Whilst the rear projections to both houses would increase the views, the rear gardens of both existing neighbouring gardens have very limited privacy at present due to the low rear boundary walls and comparatively open aspect with to the east over the promenade and bay. With regard to the side windows, these will accommodate non-habitable rooms and can be controlled by way of an obscure glazing and screening condition.
In terms of the physical impact of the dwellings on the neighbouring properties, the proposed dwellings will be set off the boundaries with the neighbouring houses at an acceptable separation distance, and would not extend substantially beyond the main back walls of these adjacent dwellings. Whilst it is noted that the northernmost dwelling (House 1) would be sited closer to no.77 Mumbles Road than the existing dwelling, it is not considered that an unacceptable overbearing impact would be created.
The Head of Transportation and Engineering raises no objection to the application. The application is considered to acceptable in highway safety terms, subject to the front boundary wall not exceeding one metre in height.
The proposed scheme has been designed to ensure the protection of the large pine tree (protected by Tree Preservation Order P18/1/2/029), which is sited in the rear garden of House 1, approximately 9m from the nearest rear elevation of this proposed new dwelling. The Department’s Tree Officer has considered the proposal and is satisfied that there is a satisfactory separation distance from this tree and root disturbance would therefore be minimal.
Page 142 AREA 2 DEVELOPMENT CONTROL COMMITTEE – 10 TH DECEMBER 2013
ITEM 8 (CONT’D) APPLICATION NO. 2013/1300
In addition, due to its location to the rear of the plot it is considered that soil compaction during construction is unlikely. However some protection of the tree is required and it is considered reasonable to apply tree protection and landscaping conditions.
The concerns raised by neighbouring residents relate primarily to highway safety, impact upon the character and appearance of the area and over-development of the site. In addition, whilst it is noted that concerns have been raised in public consultation from the owner of No. 81 Mumbles Road regarding the removal of the existing semi detached house at No. 79, and the subsequent structural/physical effect on their property, these are matters controlled by building regulations and party wall act legislation, and are not material to the consideration of this application.
In conclusion, therefore, it is not considered that there has been a material change in planning circumstances since the original application as approved or that the application is premature or given its scale the failure to commence development would result in uncertainty about the future pattern of development in the area. The proposed infill development of this site with two new detached dwellings is satisfactory, in line with the criteria for small scale infill development, and will meet the overarching aims to provide sustainable development within the established urban area whist ensuring a satisfactory design and layout at this prominent Swansea Bay location. As such the proposal continues to meets the prevailing criteria of Policies HC2, EV1, EV2, EV3, AS6, EV33, EV35 and EC16 and approval is recommended, subject to conditions.
RECOMMENDATION:
APPROVE, subject to the following conditions:
1 The development hereby permitted shall begin not later than five years from the date of this decision. Reason: To comply with the provisions of Section 91 of the Town and Country Planning Act, 1990.
2 Notwithstanding the provisions of the Town and Country Planning (General Permitted Development) Order 1995, (or any Order revoking or amending that Order), Classes A, B, C, D, E and F of Part 1 of Schedule 2 shall not apply. Reason: The development hereby approved is such that the Council wish to retain control over any future development being permitted in order to ensure that a satisfactory form of development is achieved at all times.
3 Samples of all external finishes shall be submitted to and approved by the Local Planning Authority in writing before the development is commenced. The scheme shall be implemented in accordance with the approved details. Reason: In the interests of visual amenity.
4 Before the development hereby approved is occupied the means of enclosing the boundaries of the site shall be completed in accordance with details to be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. Reason: In the interests of visual amenity and general amenity. Page 143 AREA 2 DEVELOPMENT CONTROL COMMITTEE – 10 TH DECEMBER 2013
ITEM 8 (CONT’D) APPLICATION NO. 2013/1300
5 The boundary enclosure fronting Mumbles Road shall not exceed 1metre in height. Reason: In the interests of highway safety
6 The dwelling(s) shall be constructed to achieve a minimum of Code for Sustainable Homes Level 3 and achieve a minimum of 1 credit under category "Ene1 - Dwelling Emission Rate" in accordance with the requirements of the Code for Sustainable Homes: Technical Guide (November 2010 - Version 3). The development shall be carried out entirely in accordance with the approved assessment and certification. Reason: In the interests of sustainability.
7 The construction of the dwelling(s) hereby permitted and any external works shall not begin until an "Interim Certificate" has been submitted to the Local Planning Authority, certifying that a minimum Code for Sustainable Homes (Level 3) and a minimum of 1 credit under "Ene1 - Dwelling Emission Rate", has been achieved in accordance with the requirements of the Code for Sustainable Homes; Technical Advice Guide (November 2010 - Version 3). Reason: In the interests of sustainability.
8 Prior to the occupation of the dwelling(s) hereby permitted, a Code for Sustainable Homes "Final certificate" shall be submitted to the Local Planning Authority certifying that a minimum Code for Sustainable Homes (Level 3) and a minimum of 1 credit under "Ene1 - Dwelling Emission Rate", has been achieved in accordance with the requirements of the Code for Sustainable Homes; Technical Advice Guide (November 2010 - Version 3). Reason: In the interests of sustainability.
9 No development shall take place until a scheme for the landscaping of the site has been submitted to and approved in writing by the local planning authority. Details of the scheme shall be carried out within 12 months of the completion of development and any trees or shrubs planted in accordance with the scheme that are removed, die, or become seriously diseased within two years of planting shall be replaced by trees or shrubs of a similar size and species to those originally planted. Reason: To ensure that the site is satisfactorily landscaped having regard to its location and the nature of the proposed development, and to accord with Section 197 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990.
10 No development shall take place until a scheme for the protection of existing trees, shrubs and hedges on the site has been submitted to and approved in writing by the local planning authority. No development or other operations shall take place other than in accordance with details of the approved scheme. Reason: To ensure that the site is satisfactorily landscaped having regard to its location and the nature of the proposed development, and to accord with Section 197 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990.
Page 144 AREA 2 DEVELOPMENT CONTROL COMMITTEE – 10 TH DECEMBER 2013
ITEM 8 (CONT’D) APPLICATION NO. 2013/1300
11 No development shall take place until a ground conditions survey of the site has been undertaken in accordance with details to be submitted and approved in writing by the local planning authority. Reason: To assess the nature of the soil and any the impact the development could have on party wall with No 81.
12 No part of the development hereby approved shall be occupied until the access, shared driveway and car parking spaces shown on the approved plans has been constructed in accordance with details to be submitted to and approved in writing by the local planning authority, such details to include hard surfacing and the application of SUDS methodology. Reason: In the interests of sustainability.
13 The ground and first floor windows in the side elevations facing Nos. 77 and 81 Mumbles Road shall be obscure glazed and unopenable except for a fan light and shall be retained as such unless otherwise agreed in writing by the local planning authority. Reason: To safeguard the privacy of the occupiers of neighbouring residential properties.
14 Foul water and surface water discharges shall be drained separately from the site. Reason: To protect the integrity of the Public Sewerage System.
15 No surface water shall be allowed to connect (either directly or indirectly) to the public sewerage system unless otherwise approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. Reason: To prevent hydraulic overloading of the public sewerage system, to protect the health and safety of existing residents and ensure no detriment to the environment.
16 Land drainage run-off shall not be permitted to discharge, either directly or indirectly, into the public sewerage system. Reason: To prevent hydraulic overload of the public sewerage system and pollution of the environment.
INFORMATIVES
1 The development plan covering the City and County of Swansea is the City and County of Swansea Unitary Development Plan. The following policies were relevant to the consideration of the application: EV1, EV2, EV3, AS6, EV33, EV35, EC16, HC2.
2 This consent is issued without prejudice to any other consents or easements that may be required in connection with the proposed development.
Page 145 AREA 2 DEVELOPMENT CONTROL COMMITTEE – 10 TH DECEMBER 2013
ITEM 8 (CONT’D) APPLICATION NO. 2013/1300
PLANS
Site location plan received 3rd September 2013
Page 146 AREA 2 DEVELOPMENT CONTROL COMMITTEE – 10 TH DECEMBER 2013
ITEM 9 APPLICATION NO. 2013/1460 WARD: Gower Area 2
Location: Land opposite 9 Applegrove, Reynoldston, Swansea, SA3 1BZ Proposal: Detached dwelling (outline) Applicant: Mr R McCarthy
Stonewold
118.0m
Cefn Bryn
Fern Bank Belvedere
Beaufort Cottage
Ottershaw
1
E A OV P R P G L LE E PP G A R O V
E 9
3
2
2 6
12
k c ra T 14 n to se gh u u Ho 1 ta 3 5 S El Su b S ta
Edenlea
Apple
NOT TO SCALE This material has been reproduced from Ordnance Survey digital map data with the permission of the controller of Her Majesty’s Stationery Office, © Crown Copyright.
Page 147 AREA 2 DEVELOPMENT CONTROL COMMITTEE – 10 TH DECEMBER 2013
ITEM 9 (CONT’D) APPLICATION NO. 2013/1460
BACKGROUND INFORMATION
POLICIES
Policy Policy Description Policy EV1 New development shall accord with a defined set of criteria of good design. (City & County of Swansea Unitary Development Plan 2008).
Policy EV2 The siting of new development shall give preference to the use of previously developed land and have regard to the physical character and topography of the site and its surroundings. (City & County of Swansea Unitary Development Plan 2008).
Policy EV20 In the countryside new dwellings will only be permitted where justification is proved in terms of agriculture, forestry or the rural economy; there is no alternative existing dwelling in nearby settlements; and the proposed dwelling is located close to existing farm buildings etc. (City & County of Swansea Unitary Development Plan 2008)
Policy EV22 The countryside throughout the County will be conserved and enhanced for the sake of its natural heritage, natural resources, historic and cultural environment and agricultural and recreational value through: i) The control of development, and ii) Practical management and improvement measures. (City & County of Swansea Unitary Development Plan 2008)
Policy EV26 Within the Gower AONB, the primary objective is the conservation and enhancement of the area's natural beauty. Development that would have a material adverse effect on the natural beauty, wildlife and cultural heritage of the AONB will not be permitted. (City & County of Swansea Unitary Development Plan 2008)
Policy EV16 Within the small villages identified on the Proposals Map, small-scale development will be approved only where it is appropriate to the location in terms of the defined criteria. (City & County of Swansea Unitary Development Plan 2008)
SITE HISTORY
App No. Proposal 2005/1099 Two storey side/front extension, single storey rear extension and detached double garage Decision: Grant Permission Conditional Decision Date: 01/12/2005
RESPONSE TO CONSULTATIONS
The application was advertised on site and four individual neighbouring properties consulted. EIGHT LETTER OF OBJECTION received which are summarised as follows: Page 148 AREA 2 DEVELOPMENT CONTROL COMMITTEE – 10 TH DECEMBER 2013
ITEM 9 (CONT’D) APPLICATION NO. 2013/1460
• The proposed dwelling would be outside the settlement limits • The proposal represents an unjustified form of development in the open countryside. • Approval of the application would set a dangerous and undesirable precedent. • The proposal dwelling is on agricultural land. • The proposal dictates the need for a new access to be formed off Applegrove crossing a bridle path. • There is not a shortage of available housing of a similar type to that proposed by y in and around Applegrove. • Over the last 6 years, there has constantly been between one and five houses of a similar type - detached 4 bedroom properties - for sale in Applegrove. As there are only 20 houses in Applegrove, this means that up to 25% of properties have been on the market at any one time. • Building yet more houses here when they are clearly not needed, there being in fact too many already, would result in further devaluation of existing properties. • There are also many houses for sale in the immediate vicinity in Reynoldston. • The planned dwelling would involve developing a drive immediately opposite 9 Applegrove. There are currently 3 children living in 9 Applegrove, and having two driveways opposite each other in such close proximity would increase the risk of a road traffic accident. • The additional dwelling will also encourage parking on both sides of the road on the Applegrove hill. This road is currently quiet, and used by many children having cars parked on both sides of the road and/or having more cars parked on the hill will increase the risk of accidents. • The planned access to the proposed dwelling crosses a well-used public footpath that runs parallel to Applegrove from the top road down on the right hand-side of the hill. This footpath is shown on O/S maps and signed at the top and bottom of the path and does not belong to the proposer. The proposed access would cut across the public footpath effectively stopping access. • The proposed dwelling will have an impact of the view from neighbouring dwelling resulting in loss of value. • The proposed dwelling would impact upon natural light into neighbouring properties. • The proposal will overlook neighbouring properties. • The proposed dwelling would increase the extent of the built-up area around Reynoldston and add to the sprawl of new buildings around the AONB. • The common sewer system in Applegrove is prone to flooding and blockage, occasionally resulting in sewage blockages backing up into existing dwellings. Additional properties in or around Applegrove would put additional strain on the sewage system. • The planned access to the proposed dwelling would cut through mature hedgerow that has been alongside Applegrove for many years and provides a natural habitat for wildlife, as well as adding to the beauty of the surrounding area. This hedgerow also acts as a natural barrier excluding sheep and other animals that graze on the common from entering Applegrove. Removing part of this barrier to provide an access to the proposed dwelling would risk grazing animals entering Applegrove, resulting in inconvenience to owners (of the animals and existing properties) and sanitary hazards.
Page 149 AREA 2 DEVELOPMENT CONTROL COMMITTEE – 10 TH DECEMBER 2013
ITEM 9 (CONT’D) APPLICATION NO. 2013/1460
• Reynoldston is set in an area of outstanding natural beauty which should not be blighted by yet more overdevelopment for the sake of money making ventures. Its open green spaces should be retained • The council claims, on its environment page “We are committed to our environment and aim to protect and improve it by protecting and promoting the well being of the people living, working and visiting the area.” In which case unnecessary building which blights open green space should not be allowed. • The application scheme does not recognise the established natural boundaries of Reynoldston or pattern of development. • The proposal purports to include part of neighbouring land (the line of Leylandii trees referred to in 2.3 of the DAS) and will certainly impact on this adjoining land due to the excavation shown on the boundary. • the Applicant's Agent's claims (in 6.3.5 of the DAS) that the scheme will act as a "discrete form of rounding-off" is entirely bogus and it’s difficult to see how the paddocks apparent "under-use" is relevant nor understand what is meant by a "prevailing street scene" in AONB countryside or what is meant by "a healthy degree of separation" or "a very healthy degree of garden space" • The proposal seeks to open up the village of Reynoldston to development in a whole new direction. There is no residential development on this side of Applegrove in this direction nor should there be • The small villages of Gower are particularly vulnerable to the precedent of allowing these sorts of interventions which is recognised in policy and previous decisions which have successfully preserved the AONB. • The outline proposal is not appropriate to its location and -as the applicant recognises by trying to manipulate the topography -has an unacceptable relationship with adjacent buildings, spaces and landscape. • The Application does not address the detail but raises concerns wherever indications of detail are given. It is hard to see how outline consent can be sought when the indicative drawings suggest that a successful detailed scheme answering Policy criteria will not be achievable on this site irrespective of principle. • the Design & Access Statement submitted by Owen Banks Planning and Development Limited has misleading and inaccurate statements • The existing hedgerow and long established apple trees will have to be removed as part of this development • It is. Incorrect to say that. The Applegrove estate consists "of a range of bungalows". Of the twenty plus dwellings in the Applegrove estate, only three are bungalows. • In Policy EV16, it seems clear that a line has to be drawn around a small village for the purposes of deciding whether a proposed development falls "within". Or "outside" the existing village. If it is "outside", then it will constitute development in the "countryside" (in this case, within an Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty), and will be subject to a different Policy • The south west facing frontages of the neighbouring houses, Fern Bank, Beaufort Cottage and Ottershaw, are all more or less in a neat straight line. If the proposed new house is built, it would constitute an intrusive visual excrescence in the existing view.
Page 150 AREA 2 DEVELOPMENT CONTROL COMMITTEE – 10 TH DECEMBER 2013
ITEM 9 (CONT’D) APPLICATION NO. 2013/1460
The Gower Society – make the following observations.
1. We have to accept that this plot being at the rear of existing houses and opposite those in Applegrove does not appear to be at odds with the UDP and previous decisions in the vicinity. 2. We are concerned that if allowed the precedent will be set for further development along Applegrove which in our opinion this should be resisted. 3. There are a number of mature trees on the plot and it is our experience that trees are 'felled for the view' in the course of development and this should not be permitted. 4. The plot is elevated above Applegrove and any building must be kept as low as is possible.
Glamorgan Gwent Archaeological Trust - the proposals will require archaeological mitigation. Standard condition and advisory notes recommended.
Dwr Cymru Welsh Water – NO OBJECTION subject to standard conditions and advisory notes.
Highways - This proposal is for a new dwelling off Applegrove, Reynoldston. Adequate access and on site turning facilities are indicated on the submitted plans and it is unlikely therefore that any adverse affect will result on the adjoining highway. Should consent be granted and for the avoidance of any doubt, I would recommend that the standard Gower Setback condition be imposed on the access proposal.
No highway objection on condition that the Developer;
1. Sets back the entrance gateway 5 metres from the edge of the existing carriageway and realigns the property boundaries to form 45 degree vision splays. 2. Ensures that the recessed area is not obstructed by any chain or other barrier and is kept open at all times. 3. Surfaces the recessed area to Highway Authority Satisfaction.
APPRAISAL
The application is reported to Committee for decision at the request of Councillor Richard Lewis in order to assess the impact of the proposal upon the AONB.
The application site is a roughly rectangular parcel of land situated to the south west of properties known as Fern Bank; Beaufort Cottage and Ottershaw, themselves accessed off a lane leading from the main Reynoldston to Fairyhill Road. The application site rises in a westerly direction form Applegrove and is currently overgrown. The site has a maximum depth of some 35m and maximum width of some 33m. The site is bound to the North and North West by neighbouring residential curtilages; to the east by an existing embankment which falls to the back edge of the footpath at Applegrove, and to the south by adjoining undeveloped agricultural open countryside.
The application site is also currently agricultural land and is sited on the periphery of the urban/rural fringe of Reynoldston. Reynoldston is the largest village within the AONB and sits at the centre of the peninsula. The settlement has evolved over time and expanded significantly in the 20 th Century with the development at the adjacent Applegrove. Page 151 AREA 2 DEVELOPMENT CONTROL COMMITTEE – 10 TH DECEMBER 2013
ITEM 9 (CONT’D) APPLICATION NO. 2013/1460
The main issues for consideration in this instance relate to the principle of development at this location, the visual impact of the proposal upon the character and appearance of the immediate street-scene, the village of Reynoldston and the wider Gower AONB, the impact of the proposal upon the residential amenities of the neighbouring occupiers, and highway safety having regard for National and Local Planning Policies, the recently adopted Supplementary Planning Guidance document entitled “A Gower Design Guide”.
Reynoldston is recognised as a small village under the provisions of Policy EV16 of the Swansea UDP. Policy EV16 allows for the principle of small scale residential development such as this provided:
(i) It is of a scale, density and layout compatible with the size and form of the settlement, (ii) It has a design that in its form, elevational treatment, detailing and use of materials is sympathetic to the architectural character of the village, (iii) It will not involve a loss of land of recreational, natural heritage or amenity value, (iv) It has an acceptable relationship with adjacent buildings, spaces and landscape, including coastal features, (v) It would not harm the amenity of neighbouring residents, and (vi) It can be accessed without prejudicing highway safety and without detriment to the character of the village.
The amplification of this policy defines the term ‘within’ as what could reasonably be incorporated into the existing village form without detracting from its character and amenity. Whilst the site is on the periphery of the village, the north western side of Applegrove is clearly distinct from the built form of Reynoldston and the road acts as a defensible boundary from further suburban encroachment into the wider countryside and Gower AONB. Therefore whilst a design could be agreed which would complement its setting the release of this land for residential development is not compatible with the size and form of the settlement and the proposal is therefore considered contrary to the provisions of Policy EV16 of the Swansea UDP.
Given that the site is not identified as falling within the village of Reynoldston any subsequent application for residential development at this location would be assessed against Policies EV20 and EV22 of the Swansea UDP. These policies restrict new residential development in the countryside to that where the dwellings are required to accommodate full-time workers solely or primarily employed in agriculture, forestry or an appropriate use to serve the rural economy who needs to live on the premises rather than in a nearby settlement, or there is no alternative existing dwelling available in nearby settlements. It also needs to be demonstrated that there are no existing buildings suitable for conversion to residential use and that the proposed dwelling is located as close as possible to the place of work. This is to restrict development in the countryside, thus protecting the character, appearance, landscape and ecological features of remaining countryside from new further urbanising development.
Applications for dwellings for agricultural purposes are therefore required to be accompanied by objective information assessing:
(i) The functional need for the dwelling, and (ii) Demonstrating the financial sustainability of the enterprise, and (iii) The genuineness of the need for accommodation to serve the enterprise. Page 152 AREA 2 DEVELOPMENT CONTROL COMMITTEE – 10 TH DECEMBER 2013
ITEM 9 (CONT’D) APPLICATION NO. 2013/1460
No such information has been submitted as part of this application therefore it is considered on the basis of the information submitted and in light of the relevant policies aforementioned, without the demonstration of a justifiable need for a dwelling on this protected land.
Notwithstanding the fundamental overriding objections to the proposal in terms of principle, it is considered that the design of the proposal would require alternation in order to achieve an development that would complement the character and appearance of the countryside and Gower AONB. However given the principle issue, the proposal as submitted would result in unacceptable visual intrusion into the Gower AONB and fail to protect the character of the countryside for its own sake. Furthermore it is considered that the proposed siting and layout would lead to an unsatisfactory relationship between the proposed dwellings and the surrounding properties, insofar as it represents a departure from the established character and layout of the built form in the vicinity.
In terms of residential amenity it is considered that the proposal respects the residential amenities of the neighbouring properties and will not give rise to unacceptable overlooking, overbearing or overshadowing in compliance with Policy EV1 of the Swansea UDP.
Having consulted the Head of Transportation and Engineering, it is considered that adequate access and on site turning facilities are indicated on the submitted plans and it is unlikely therefore that any adverse affect will result on the adjoining highway. Should consent be granted and for the avoidance of any doubt, the Head of Transportation and Engineering would recommend that the standard “Gower Setback” condition be imposed on the access proposal. In this respect no highway objection is raised subject a condition requiring the developer to set back the entrance gateway 5 metres from the edge of the existing carriageway and to realign the property boundaries to form 45 degree vision splays; to ensure that the recessed area is not obstructed by any chain or other barrier, is kept open at all times and surfaced to Highway Authority Satisfaction.
Eight letters of objection were received which raised concerns in relation to the principle of development and highway safety, the impact upon the character of area, the issues pertaining to which have been addressed above. Further points relating to the obstruction of a bridleway/right of way have been raised and whilst noted, this is not a registered right of way, its obstruction/diversion, therefore, is a matter addressed by separate legislation.
Precedent of further development has also been raised and in this respect it is considered that the proposal could set an undesirable precedent for the consideration the similar residential development in the countryside the cumulative impact of which would have a significant impact upon the character and appearance of the area and the Gower AONB.
In conclusion, therefore and having regard to the above considerations, including the Human Rights Act, it is considered that the release of this land for a new dwelling house would result in an unacceptable urbanising and visually intrusive form of development within the countryside and Gower AONB, with no satisfactory rural justification or need, to the detriment of the rural character and status of this site and its landscape quality. As such the proposal would not only detract significantly from the character and appearance of the immediate surrounding vicinity, but would unacceptably harm the visual amenities and quality of this sensitive landscape and countryside.
Page 153 AREA 2 DEVELOPMENT CONTROL COMMITTEE – 10 TH DECEMBER 2013
ITEM 9 (CONT’D) APPLICATION NO. 2013/1460
Therefore the proposed development is considered to be contrary to Policies EV1, EV2, EV16, EV20, EV26 and EV22 of the Swansea UDP. On this basis it is not considered that there is any justification to warrant a departure from the Development Plan at this location. Refusal is therefore recommended.
RECOMMENDATION
REFUSE, for the following reason;
1 The proposal represents an unjustified and visually intrusive form of urbanising development in the countryside for which no overriding need has been demonstrated and would have an unacceptable impact upon the character and appearance of the area and Gower AONB contrary to Policies EV1, EV2, EV16, EV20, EV26 and EV22 of the City and County of Swansea Unitary Development Plan (2008).
2 Approval of the application would set an undesirable precedent for the consideration of other similar applications in the locality in future, the cumulative effect of which would erode the established character and appearance of the area contrary to the provision of Policies EV1, EV2, EV20, EV22, EV26 and EV16 of the Swansea Unitary Development Plan 2008.
INFORMATIVES
1 The development plan covering the City and County of Swansea is the City and County of Swansea Unitary Development Plan. The following policies were relevant to the consideration of the application: Policies EV1, EV2, EV20, EV22, EV16 and EV26 of the Swansea Unitary Development Plan 2008.
PLANS
Site plan, block plan, South West elevation, South East elevation, floor plans received 17th October 2013
Page 154 AREA 2 DEVELOPMENT CONTROL COMMITTEE (37)
Councillors
Labour Councillors: 25 John C Bayliss Andrew J Jones Nicholas S Bradley David J Lewis June E Burtonshaw Paul Lloyd Mark C Child Geraint Owens Bob A Clay Jennifer A Raynor David W Cole J Christine Richards Ann M Cook Robert V Smith Jan P Curtice R C Stewart William Evans Mitchell Theaker Robert Francis-Davies Gloria J Tanner Terry J Hennegan Des W W Thomas David H Hopkins Mark Thomas Yvonne V Jardine
Liberal Democrat Councillors: 6 Mary H Jones Cheryl L Philpott Richard D Lewis T Huw Rees John Newbury R June Stanton
Independent Councillors: 4 E Wendy Fitzgerald Susan M Jones Lynda James Keith E Marsh
Conservative Councillors: 2 Anthony C S Colburn C Miles R W D Thomas
Page 155