Code No. and Name and Address of Description and Location of Date Received Applicant Proposed Development

19/0536/RET Mr R Jones Retain and complete change 15.07.2019 Land At Former Station of use of land to 5 no. Gypsy House Traveller pitches and associated works including, 5 NP22 5QG no. mobile home, 5 no. touring caravan, and hardstanding Land At Former Station House Merthyr Road Rhymney Bridge Llechryd

APPLICATION TYPE: Retain Development Already Carried Out

SITE AND DEVELOPMENT

Location: The application site is at Rhymney Bridge, Llechryd, and occupies a field immediately to the east of the Twisted Chimney roundabout. It is sandwiched between the slip road from the A465 to the north, and the B4527 to the south.

Site description: The site was formerly a lozenge shaped field, with a small copse in the south-eastern part. It sits in a bowl created by the embankments of the surrounding roads, with a significant number of trees along the northern side screening it from the Heads of the Valleys road. It was occupied earlier this year by the applicant who has parked a number of caravans on the site, installed a portable building overlooking the B4527, and built a shed on the northern boundary. He has also erected a 1.8m high timber fence along the eastern and southern sides of the site. There is an existing access from the B4527 at the eastern end of the site.

Development: It is proposed to regularise the occupation of the site for Gypsy Traveller accommodation by the provision of five pitches on the land. Each pitch would accommodate a mobile home, a touring caravan and two parking spaces. The pitches would be surfaced with stone, as would the access through the site from the road. The existing trees would be retained. The portacabin, which is currently used as a day room would also be retained in its existing position, as would a timber store which has been erected along the northern boundary. A supporting letter from Travelling Ahead: Gypsy, Roma and Traveller Advice & Advocacy Service, states that there are to be 5 family units consisting of 8 adults and 10 children to be accommodated on the proposed site.

Cont…. Application No.19/0536/RET Continued

Supporting information has been submitted, which in summary addresses, amongst other things the following points.

• The access is satisfactory. • Landscaping if necessary can be dealt with by condition. • Policy CW21 of the LDP is relevant. • Community facilities are no more than a 19-minute walk away from the site. • No primary business use is proposed. Any such activities will be ancillary to the residential use. • Utilities including waste disposal and recovery can be resolved by condition. • The Special Landscape Area policy does not preclude development. • The wider landscape setting will not be harmed. • Circular 005/2018 Planning for Gypsy, Traveller and Showpeople Sites should be taken into account. • On the basis of case law: • the absence of an alternative site has to be afforded considerable weight • the likelihood of a roadside existence resulting from a refusal should be considered • the personal circumstances of the applicant - a Romany Gypsy - are able to be taken into account and can potentially outweigh any planning harm • the best interests of the children must be treated as a primary concern based on the UN Convention on the Rights of the Child • the Local Planning Authority must carry out an article 8 structured proportionality decision in order to properly assess human rights considerations • there is a public sector equality duty because the applicant and his family are Romany Gypsies

Dimensions: The site has an area of 0.35 hectares. The mobile homes would be approximately 12m long and 6m wide, whilst the touring caravans would be approximately 7.5m long and 2.5m wide. The portacabin is approximately 7.5m long and 3m wide.

PLANNING HISTORY 2005 TO PRESENT

10/0040/ADV - Install interpretation panels - Granted - 09.04.2010.

Cont…. Application No.19/0536/RET Continued

POLICY

LOCAL DEVELOPMENT PLAN

Site Allocation: The site is within a special landscape area (SLA NH1.1 Upper Rhymney Valley). The Appendix to the LDP sets out the following features of the SLA.

Need - The area represents one of the most open upland areas within the County Borough, abutting the Brecon Beacons National Park. - The dualling of the A465 Heads of the Valleys has changed part of the character of the area, and will increase development pressures with increased accessibility. - Whilst this has certain negative effects upon the quality of the landscape it reinforces the need to ensure the quality of the remainder of the area is maintained. - In terms of landscape structure it forms the northern edge of the coalfield and shows evidence of historic mine workings.

Coherence - The area covers the northern part of the Upper Rhymney Valley, primarily to the north of the A465 corridor. - It provides a distinctive upland landscape unit, formed primarily by the boundaries of adjacent local authorities. - It abuts the Brecon Beacons National Park and forms a natural buffer zone to further protect the Park's nationally important landscape character and quality.

Consensus - It relates very closely to an existing SLA designated under the Rhymney Valley Landscape Strategy. - Professional stakeholders have supported the designation.

Primary Landscape Qualities and Features Cultural Landscapes - It is a simple, open landscape with a number of recent regeneration projects in the area, primarily in the form of the improved A465 corridor, which has both increased in scale and size. - An important example of industrial heritage, with areas of reclaimed land and spoil tips. - There are examples of various historic and contemporary human occupation and exploitation in the form of prehistoric monuments, redundant industrial workings and transport systems.

Cont…. Application No.19/0536/RET Continued

Landscape Habitats - Despite largish areas of improved grassland being present there are also large areas of valuable grassland present. There is a good mixture of marshy, neutral and acid grasslands. Areas of semi-improved and unimproved grassland are fragmented within the wider improved grassland landscape. Uniform improved grassland is present resulting from reclamation of former mine workings. - Upland river corridor and enclosed upland pasture. Also riparian woodland / scrub.

Geological Landscape - It exhibits the results of glaciation and forms the northern edge of the pennant sandstone outcrop that underpins the South coalfield. With broad, moderately steep-sidedvalleys controlled by south-dipping muddominated coal measures (upper carboniferous). Valley floor contains alluvium and glacial sand / gravel. - Numerous derelict mine workings, shafts, adits, colliery waste tips and partially reclaimed opencast workings present within and immediatley adjoining the landscape, which gives it a particularly industrial feel and character.

Visual and Sensory -Strong visual links with the Brecon Beacons. - Views of the upland area are extensive and very open with minimal field boundaries and patterns. Adjacent upland areas dominate views into the landscape. - Strong underlying feel of industrial past. Industrial remnants include old railway sidings and earthworks. - Overhead pylons are visual detractors, and the A465 has both noise and movement impacts. - Area is currently predominantly used as rough grazing and agriculture.

Historical Landscapes - An extensive area of unenclosed open moorland, forming the easternmost outline of Merthyr Common, which has remained relatively, unchanged since the 19th Century, in spite of encroachment by industrial extraction activity, in particular lime and ironstone quarries. - The area contains numerous water management features that form part of the extensive remains of Free Drainage System. There are also quarries associated with the Dowlais Ironworks, which together with the water management features represent a significant concentration of 19th Century industrial water-management features of considerable historical importance.

Cont…. Application No.19/0536/RET Continued

Key Policy, Management and Development Control Issues Long Term - Future development proposals should not see the loss of any historic environment or geological or geomorphological features present within the landscape. - Undertake mine spoil and post-industrial land reclamation schemes where necessary and in circumstances where it will benefit the overall landscape. The significant historic and cultural aspects of the landscape should not be lost as a result of a reclamation scheme. - Encourage appropriate management of notable habitats - ensure areas of semi- improved, acid and marshy grassland are not degraded to improved grassland. -Encourage sympathetic landscape management practice including removing Japanese Knotweed - implement a Japanese knotweed strategy. - Protect elements of Dowlais Free Drainage water management system.

Medium Term - Prevent further loss of overall landscape quality and character on the settlement edge as a result of development. The settlement edges are sensitive and due care and consideration needs to be given to the wider landscape setting and character when making these development decisions. - Minimise the visual and noise detractors in the landscape, including light pollution from the introduction of road lighting and additional large scale features such as pylons and wind turbines. - Encourage reduced grazing - stock grazing will prevent the grassland from reaching higher levels of ecological value. Possibly introduce the Tir Gofal scheme or current equivalent to the area. Prevent the further fragmentation of grasslands within the wider improved grassland landscape. - Restore to natural landscape, maximising natural regeneration and removing industrial debris.

Immediate Prevent continued degradation of habitats and landscape features through appropriate management and development decisions. -Minimise and remove visual landscape degradation including fly tipping, burnt / dumped cars, littering and illegal off roading.

The western end of the application site is within a Coal Safeguarding Area. To the south of the site is the safeguarded route TR1.2 (Completion and Extension of Cycle Route NCN 46), which links with TR1.1 Rhymney Valley Linear Cycle Route - Heads of the Valleys to Bedwas/.

Cont…. Application No.19/0536/RET Continued

Policies: SP1 (Development Strategy in the HOV Regeneration Area), SP4 (Settlement Strategy), SP5 (Settlement Boundaries), SP8 (Minerals Safeguarding), SP10 (Conservation of Natural Heritage), CW2 (Amenity), CW3 (Design Considerations: Highways), CW4 (Natural Heritage Protection) CW5 (Protection of the Water Environment), CW6 (Trees, Woodlands and Hedgerow Protection), CW15 (General Locational Constraints), CW21 (Locational Constraints: Gypsy and Traveller Caravan Sites), and CW22 (Locational Constraints: Minerals).

NATIONAL POLICY Planning Policy Wales 10 (December 2018) contains the following.

"4.2.35 Local authorities are required to assess the accommodation needs of Gypsy and Traveller families and to allocate sites to meet the identified need. Where a Gypsy and Traveller Accommodation Assessment (GTAA) identifies an unmet need, a planning authority should allocate sufficient sites in their development plan to ensure that the identified pitch requirements for residential and/or transit use can be met."

Welsh Government Circular 5/2018 Planning for Gypsy, Traveller and Showpeople Sites emphasises, amongst other things, the importance of considering potential site sustainability, including access to suitable community facilities for occupiers, and including a criteria-based policy in development plans that will provide a clear and fair rationale for the determining of Gypsy and Traveller site planning applications. It also states as follows.

"12. Some Gypsies and Travellers may wish to find and buy their own sites to develop and manage. An increase in the number of approved private sites may also release pitches on local authority sites for Gypsies and Travellers most in need of public provision."

Paragraph 63 addresses the need for pre-aplication discussions and identifies some of the issues that need to be addressed. "Pre-application discussions are particularly important to avoid misunderstanding and subsequent problems over planning permission. Constructive and positive engagement on all sides will promote trust and may help to avoid breaches of planning control. The aim should be as far as possible to help Gypsies and Travellers to provide for themselves, to allow them to secure the kind of sites they need, but in locations that are appropriate in planning policy terms. This will help to avoid breaches of planning control, and enable firm enforcement against such breaches. In particular, questions of road access, the availability of services, potential conflict with statutory undertakers or agricultural interests, and any significant environmental impacts should be resolved at the earliest opportunity. In line with guidance in TAN 15, planning authorities should consult Natural Resources Wales about flood risk."

Cont…. Application No.19/0536/RET Continued

"65. Planning authorities should not refuse applications because the applicant has no local connection. But they are entitled to refuse applications in locations that do not comply with planning policies, especially where the authority has complied with this guidance and proceeded properly to ensure needs identified by accommodation assessments are being met."

"66. Planning authorities should consider how they could overcome planning objections to particular proposals using planning conditions or planning obligations, including: a) Limiting which parts of a site may be used for any hazardous activity, in order to minimise the visual impact and limit the effect of noise b) Specifying the number of days the site can be occupied by more than the allowed number of caravans (which permits visitors and allows attendance at family or community events)."

ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ASSESSMENT

Did the application have to be screened for an EIA? No.

COAL MINING LEGACY

Is the site within an area where there are mining legacy issues? The majority of the site is within a high risk area in respect of coal mining legacy. However, the proposed development is not of a type that requires the advice of The Coal Authority as it does not involve significant groundworks.

CONSULTATION

CCBC Housing Enabling Officer - In accordance with Policy CW11 of the adopted LDP a contribution should be sought towards the provision of affordable housing in the locality.

Natural Resources Wales - We have significant concerns with the proposed development as submitted. We recommend that you should only grant planning permission if the scheme can meet the following requirement. Otherwise, we would object to this planning application.

Requirement - Foul drainage - site to be connected to the mains sewerage system or satisfactory evidence to be provided to demonstrate that it is not reasonable to connect to mains.

Cont…. Application No.19/0536/RET Continued

Further details are provided below: We note that the intention is to dispose of foul drainage to a private sewerage system, i.e. a new PTP. According to our records, the proposed development is located within a publicly sewered area. The installation of private sewage treatment facilities within publicly sewered areas is not normally considered environmentally acceptable because of the greater risk of failures leading to pollution of the water environment compared to public sewerage systems.

Section 6.6.21 of Planning Policy Wales states 'Development proposals in sewered areas must connect to the main sewer, and it will be necessary for developers to demonstrate to local planning authorities that their proposal site can connect to the nearest main sewer...'

Government guidance on private sewerage in WG Circular 008/2018 stresses that the first presumption must be to provide a system of foul drainage discharging into a public sewer. Only where having taken into account the cost and/or practicability it can be shown to the satisfaction of the local planning authority that connection to a public sewer is not feasible, should non-mains foul sewage disposal solutions be considered. We therefore require the Applicant to either amend their proposals to ensure that the foul drainage is connected to the mains sewerage system or provide detailed evidence to demonstrate that it is not reasonable to connect.

The Applicant should thoroughly investigate the possibility of connecting to the foul sewer by taking the following steps:

• Formally approach the sewerage undertaker regarding a connection under Section 106 or a requisition under Section 98 of the Water Industry Act (WIA) 1991. • Serve notice for connection under Section 106 of the WIA 1991 if the sewerage undertaker has refused connection. • Provide details of the reasons given by the sewerage undertaker if it has refused connection under section 98 or section 106 of the WIA 1991 and confirmation that they have appealed against this decision. • Demonstrate that it is not reasonable to connect to the public foul sewer. • Where it is not reasonable to connect to the public foul sewer, demonstrate that they have considered requesting that the sewerage undertaker adopt their proposed system.

The Applicant should be aware that should a connection to the mains sewer not be feasible, they will also need to demonstrate that the proposal would not pose an unacceptable risk to the water environment. WG Circular 008/2018 advises that a full and detailed consideration be given to the environmental criteria listed under paragraph 2.6 of the Circular, in order to justify the use of private sewerage.

Cont…. Application No.19/0536/RET Continued

The Applicant should also be aware that should a connection to the mains sewer not be feasible, they will need to apply for an environmental permit or register an exemption with us. As stated above, we expect developers discharging domestic sewage to connect to the public foul sewer where it is reasonable to do so. We will not normally grant a discharge permit for a private sewage treatment system where it is reasonable to connect to the public foul sewer. We also expect discharges of trade effluent to connect to the public foul sewer where it is reasonable to do so and subject to the sewerage undertaker granting a trade effluent consent or entering into a trade effluent agreement.

Septic tanks and small sewage treatment works may be registered as exempt from the requirement to obtain an environmental permit if certain criteria are met. Please note, should a permit be required, further information may be required as part of that application and the Applicant is therefore advised to hold pre-application discussions with our Permitting Team on 0300 065 3000, at the earliest opportunity, to try to ensure that there is no conflict between any planning permission granted and the permit requirements. It is important to note that a grant of planning permission does not guarantee that a permit will be granted, should a proposal be deemed to be unacceptable (either because of environmental risk or because upon further investigation, a connection to mains sewer was feasible). The Applicant should ensure that they have all the required permissions, consents, permits and any other approvals in place prior to commencement of works on the site.

More information, including a step by step guide to registering and the relevant application forms are available on our website. Where private sewage treatment/disposal facilities are utilised, they must be installed and maintained in accordance with British Standards 6297 and Approved Document H of the Building Regulations. We also refer the Applicant to Guidance for Pollution Prevention 4 on the NetRegs website, which provides further information.

Please note, a lack of capacity, or plans to improve capacity in the sewer, is not a valid reason for a sewerage undertaker to refuse connection under Section 106 of the Water Industry Act 1991 and we may refuse to issue an environmental permit or exemption for private treatment facilities in such circumstances.

Transportation Engineering Manager - No objections subject to conditions concerning details of the parking areas, and the provision of turning facilities.

The Coal Authority - As you will be aware, the Coal Authority's general approach in cases where development is proposed within the Development High Risk Area is to recommend that the applicant obtains coal mining information for the application site and submits a Coal Mining Risk Assessment to support the planning application.

Cont…. Application No.19/0536/RET Continued

However, when considering the nature of this particular development proposal, it does not appear that the structures will require substantial foundations or earthworks. On this basis we do not consider that requiring a Coal Mining Risk Assessment would be proportionate to the scale and nature of the development proposed in this particular case and do not object to this planning application.

However, the Coal Authority does recommend that, should planning permission be granted for this proposal, the following wording is included as an Informative Note on any planning permission granted:

The proposed development lies within an area that has been defined by the Coal Authority as containing potential hazards arising from former coal mining activity. These hazards can include: mine entries (shafts and adits); shallow coal workings; geological features (fissures and break lines); mine gas and previous surface mining sites. Although such hazards are seldom readily visible, they can often be present and problems can occur in the future, particularly as a result of development taking place.

It is recommended that information outlining how the former mining activities affect the proposed development, along with any mitigation measures required (for example the need for gas protection measures within the foundations), be submitted alongside any subsequent application for Building Regulations approval (if relevant).

Any intrusive activities which disturb or enter any coal seams, coal mine workings or coal mine entries (shafts and adits) requires a Coal Authority Permit. Such activities could include site investigation boreholes, digging of foundations, piling activities, other ground works and any subsequent treatment of coal mine workings and coal mine entries for ground stability purposes. Failure to obtain a Coal Authority Permit for such activities is trespass, with the potential for court action.

Dwr Cymru - SEWERAGE

Since the proposal intends utilising an alternative to mains drainage we would advise that the applicant seek advice from Natural Resources Wales and or the Local Authority Building Control Department / Approved Building Inspector as both are responsible to regulate alternative methods of drainage. However, should circumstances change and a connection to the public sewerage system/public sewerage treatment works is preferred we must be re-consulted on this application.

WATER SUPPLY

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, towards the provision of new off-site and/or on-site watermains and associated infrastructure. The level of contribution can be calculated upon receipt of detailed site layout plans which should be sent to the address above.

Cont… Application No.19/0536/RET Continued

However, there are no public watermains in the vicinity of this proposed development. It may be feasible for services to be provided under formal requisition procedures by the use of Sections 41 - 44 of the Water Industry Act 1991.

Head Of Public Protection - Environmental Health have considered the above application to retain the change of use of land to a gypsy traveller site including 5 touring vans and 5 static vans and would make the following comments:

Given the very close proximity of the A465 road, we are concerned about noise from the road affecting the occupants of the site and whilst some mitigation may be possible, caravans / mobile homes are not easily adaptable to mitigate against noise like a property would be. I would highly recommend that a noise assessment is carried out to assess the suitability of the site for its proposed use given the close proximity to the road. This should ideally be a starting point and we would like to see this prior to making a decision as to whether to support the application or not.

Should the noise report be acceptable, Environmental Health would also recommend the site remediation conditions are attached to any permission granted.

Much of the land was made up in this area when the dualling of the Heads of the Valley took place and we have no idea what material the land was made up with. Should the applicant wish to discuss this requirement further, we would be happy to advise.

A scheme is required which details how waste will be deposited of from the site both in terms of rubbish and toilet waste.

The applicant should also be advised to take in to account the requirements of the Model Standards 2008 when designing the site layout. The layout should take in to account, but not be limited to, spacing between mobile homes / caravans, fire safety, boundary fencing and drainage.

In addition the applicant should be advised that if the site utilises a private water supply that he must comply with the requirements of the Private Water Supply (Wales) Regulations 2017 which may require the undertaking of a risk assessment and an agreed sampling regime.

Finally, we would strongly recommend that the Fire and Rescue Authority is consulted so that they can comment on fire risk and ensure adequate fire-fighting equipment is available on site.

Cont…. Application No.19/0536/RET Continued

Senior Engineer (Land Drainage) - Surface water and groundwater flooding, watercourse in vicinity (Approx. 25m) - possible SAB approval requirement. The applicant has not demonstrated they can viably dispose of surface water arising from the proposed development. We note via application form they have indicated disposal via infiltration methods (soakaway). 'The Statutory Standards for Sustainable drainage systems - designing, constructing, operating and maintaining surface water drainage systems 2018' (referred to as National Standards) presents a discharge hierarchy which needs to be addressed, as such the proposed discharge point may not represent a viable means of surface water disposal.

The Welsh Government Local Authority Guidance on Implementation of Schedule 3 highlights the following in relation to SAB/Planning: ''Developers should demonstrate compliance with the statutory standards and local policy when submitting planning applications''. Given the above we recommend the LPA request a statutory standards compliance statement, which indicates how the applicant intends to meet the requirements of the statutory standards within their development, including the allocation of sufficient space to such features. Should this not be forthcoming we recommend the application be refused.

Ecologist - The proposed site is a former species rich horse grazed paddock. The proposal is to retain and complete the change of use of land to 5 no. Gypsy Traveller pitches and associated works including, 5 no. mobile home, 5 no. touring caravan and hardstanding. The proposal is to cover the surface of the majority of the site with gravel/hardcore, which would cover and damage the existing grassland. The grassland next door is part of the Rhymney River SINC and I would not permit the storage or use of any caravans, etc. within this parcel of land. There is currently a pony grazing in this field parcel. This parcel of SINC would also need to be protected from any permission given for the above. Also the fence that they have currently erected will need softening in appearance. Therefore if you are minded to approve the above application then please can you ensure the following:-

• The grassland within the site is protected and retained and not completely covered in gravel/hardcore • No encroachment is permitted into the SINC

Landscape Architect - I note that the site is located outside of settlement boundary, adjacent to the A465 and is inside of the Upper Rhymney Special Landscape Area (SLA) NH1.1. One notable and relevant Key Policy, Management and Development Control Issue that relates to this application is the below medium term issue;

''Prevent further loss of overall landscape quality and character on the settlement edge as a result of development. The settlement edges are sensitive and due care and consideration needs to be given to the wider landscape setting and character when making these development decisions.''

Cont…. Application No.19/0536/RET Continued

Having visited publicly accessible areas adjacent to the site (along the B4257) that are afforded views, I am concerned that visual amenity is adversely affected. This is due to the location of the porta cabin and 1.8m high timber close board and concrete post fencing located along the southern perimeter. Both have a poor visual impact and currently undermine the soft urban edge of the adjacent settlement and the SLA.

Therefore, should you be minded to approve this application, I recommend in order to mitigate the visual impact and adverse effect on the landscape character, that a soft landscaping buffer in the form of a native hedgerow and tree planting in front of the fencing is required. A double staggered row hedgerow with a minimum of 5 plants per linear metre, with 7 native species in the mix, should be sufficient, which will need to be maintained and protected with post and wire shockproof fencing. The hedgerow once established, will assist to integrate the site into the SLA and soften the urban edge, with the intention of filtering and screening the views of the fencing and site.

Similarly due to the poor visually amenity the portacabin presents, I recommend that this is ideally located on an alternative part of the site or failing that screened with native tree and hedgerow planting as above.

Finally, I also recommend ideally that timber fencing and concrete posts would also require staining / painting to one unified very darker green or black colour to allow the fencing to sit back and recede.

Strategic & Development Plans - National Planning Guidance

The Proposal should be considered in line with National Planning Policy and Guidance and, in particular, the requirements of:

• Planning Policy Wales (Edition 10, December 2018); • Circular 005/2018: Planning for Gypsy, Traveller and Showpeople Sites (June 2018) • Designing Gypsy and Traveller sites (May 2015)

Circular 005/2018: Planning for Gypsy, Traveller and Showpeople Sites (June 2018)

The Circular contains the following definition of Gypsies and Travellers:

(a) Persons of a nomadic habit of life, whatever their race or origin, including - (i) Persons who, on grounds only of their own or their family's or dependant's educational or health needs or old age, have ceased to travel temporarily or permanently, and (ii) Members of an organised group of travelling show people or circus people (whether or not travelling together as such); and (b) All other persons with a cultural tradition of nomadism or of living in a mobile home.

Cont…. Application No.19/0536/RET Continued

The covering letter for the planning application indicates that the applicant considers himself to be a Romany Gypsy and wishes to use the site as a base for his extended family. However, further information is necessary to ascertain the Gypsy status of the proposed residents in respect of this planning definition, together with details of who will be living on the site, and whether the applicants have alternative accommodation options. I understand that the applicants have been asked to provide responses to a number of additional questions.

The Circular provides guidance on dealing with planning applications for Gypsy and Traveller sites. It indicates that considerations for Gypsy and Traveller site applications will usually include the impact on the surrounding area, the existing level of provision and need for sites, which is evidenced as part of the Gypsy and Traveller Accommodation Assessment for the area. This is discussed below.

Gypsy and Traveller Accommodation Assessment

Part 3 of the Housing (Wales) Act 2014 requires local authorities in Wales to undertake a Gypsy and Traveller Accommodation Assessment (GTAA) and, where an unmet need is identified, make provision for residential site pitches.

The latest GTAA for Caerphilly CBC was published in 2016. The study concludes that there is no identified requirement for permanent site provision within the county borough, and there is currently insufficient evidence to support the provision of a transit site within the county borough. The Assessment states that "should a planning application for a permanent or transit site be submitted in the future, this can be addressed through the existing planning policies."

It is therefore the position that, whilst there is no identified need for the allocation of a Gypsy and Traveller site within a development plan, there may still be unexpected demand identified through planning applications and in these circumstances these will need to be considered against the criteria based policy on Gypsies and Travellers (Policy CW21). This is discussed further below.

It should be noted that as the GTAA identified no need for a permanent site, there is no alternative provision within the County Borough that the applicants could be directed to.

Designing Gypsy and Traveller Sites (May 2015)

Welsh Government have prepared guidance aimed at ensuring that Local Authority owned Gypsy and Traveller sites are fit for purpose in design terms, including site layout.

Cont…. Application No.19/0536/RET Continued

Whilst it is aimed at LA sites, it sets out some key design principles that would also have relevance for privately owned sites. As Local Authority pitches may be occupied by multiple families, rather than a single extended family group, as in the case of this application, the requirements for privacy and individual facilities may be different.

Key points of relevance include the following:

• New sites should comprise 20 pitches or less; • A degree of privacy for site residents is essential; • Planting native species as screening around site perimeters is encouraged; • As a minimum, each pitch should be capable of accommodating an amenity block, a mobile home, touring caravan and parking for two vehicles; • In line with Model Standard for Caravan Site in Wales (2008), there should be a gap of 3m between a mobile home and pitch boundary, and each mobile home should be no less than 6m from any other mobile home, due to their highly flammable nature and to ensure privacy; • The minimum floor area of an amenity block should be 23m2.

The guidance does not specify any minimum requirements for the size of a pitch.

Caerphilly County Borough Local Development Plan up to 2021 (Adopted 2010)

Strategy Policies

The site is located within the Heads of the Valleys Regeneration Area (HOVRA). Policy SP1 Development Strategy - Development in the HOVRA requires proposals to promote the north of the County Borough as a tourist, employment and residential area at the heart of the valleys city region; provide appropriate forms of growth in response to the role and function of settlements; and serve to address existing problems of deprivation in order to sustain and develop communities in a manner that is consistent with the underlying principles of sustainable development.

SP5 Settlement Boundaries promotes resource efficient settlements, indicating where growth will be permitted through the delineation of settlement boundaries. Settlement boundaries define the area within which development would normally be allowed, taking into account all relevant planning policy and material planning considerations. The site is located outside the settlement boundary but adjacent to the settlement boundary for Llechryd. Criterion C of Policy CW15 on General Locational Constraints identifies that outside of settlement boundaries proposals will not be permitted unless the proposed development falls within one of a number of identified uses. Whilst Gypsy and Traveller sites are not explicitly referenced, it should be read in conjunction with Policy CW21, which considers this to be a use that could be accommodated outside of the settlement boundary.

Cont…. Application No.19/0536/RET Continued

Countywide Policies

Policy CW2 Amenity indicates that development proposals must ensure that the proposal would not result in over-development of the site and/or its surroundings. Furthermore, the policy indicates that the proposed use would need to be compatible with the surrounding land uses. The surrounding area is residential in character, comprising a number of detached dwellings within large curtilages. The proposal for 5 pitches would significantly increase the number of people living within the Llechryd/Rhymney Bridge area.

It is noted that reference is made in the covering letter to each pitch having 1 mobile home, 1 touring caravan and 1 dayroom. However, I understand that the site layout has been revised and dayrooms are no longer proposed on each pitch. It is not clear whether the portacabin at the entrance to the site will serve as a dayroom/amenity block in the long term. If this is the case then the site boundary for the application should be amended to include this part of the site.

As stated above, the WG Guidance on Designing Gypsy Sites does not specify minimum pitches sizes. We would consider that the number of caravans proposed for the site (1 touring caravan and 1 mobile home per pitch) is appropriate for the size of site. However, any intensification of this use through the siting of additional caravans on the site is likely to be considered to be over-development. The layout of the mobile homes meet the standards of being over 6m away from each other, although some appear to be closer than 3m to pitch boundaries.

A further consideration is the proximity of the A465 to the site and the potential noise impact of this on the amenity of those living on the site. The views of Environmental Health should be considered in relation to this.

Policy CW4 Natural Heritage Protection

The site is also designated as part of NH1.1 Upper Rhymney Valley Special Landscape Area. Special Landscape Areas (SLAs) are local non-statutory designations that seek to protect areas that exhibit distinctive landscape, historical, cultural, biodiversity and geological features and characteristic within the County Borough.

Policy CW4 states "Development proposals that affect locally designated natural heritage features, will only be permitted: A Where they conserve and where appropriate enhance the distinctive or characteristic features of the Special Landscape Area (SLA) or Visually Important Local Landscape (VILL)."

Cont…. Application No.19/0536/RET Continued

The supporting text for Policy NH1 identifies that the policy is not designed to preclude development. However, an applicant will need to demonstrate that any development proposal will not have an unacceptable impact on the specific distinctive features or characteristics associated with the SLA. The views of the Council's Landscape Architect on the impact of this development on the Special Landscape Area will be important in determining this.

This part of the SLA is dominated by the main A465 Heads of the Valleys Road and junction infrastructure including a roundabout and slip road. The site itself is located between the A465 and the B4257 to the south and this road infrastructure does limit its wider landscape value. There is vegetation on the edge of the site adjacent to the slip road and roundabout and it is understood that this will be retained as part of the development. There is also a belt of trees adjoining the B4257 that are not included within the site boundary, but are within the ownership of the applicant and it is important that these are retained for the purposes of screening the caravans beyond in order to reduce the wider visual impact. As mentioned above, the closeboard fencing is visually intrusive and is out of character with other boundary treatments in the Rhymney Bridge/Llechryd area, which are predominately vegetation, low level walls and low level highway barriers and the appropriate screening of this fencing should be required.

Policy CW6 Trees, Woodland and Hedgerow Protection

As stated above, there is a belt of trees adjacent to the B4257, which are not part of the application boundary, but are in the ownership of the applicant. These should be retained.

Policy CW21 Locational Constraints - Gypsy and Traveller Caravan Sites

Proposals for Gypsy and Traveller caravan sites, including on land outside of defined settlement boundaries, will be permitted provided:

A The site is well related to community facilities and services B The site can accommodate residential and home-based business uses without detriment to amenity and character of the area C The site is capable of being served by utilities including waste disposal and recovery

Policy CW21 allows for the development of Gypsy and Traveller caravan sites in locations that are outside of the settlement boundary where they adhere to the above criteria.

Cont…. Application No.19/0536/RET Continued

The site is reasonably well related to facilities in Rhymney (approximately 1 mile to Upper Rhymney Primary School, a Community Centre and small number of shops including Rhymney Post Office) and on a cycle route and regular bus route, which provides links to Rhymney (including the rail station), and . It is therefore considered that the proposal is acceptable under Criterion A.

The impact on amenity of the area has been discussed above. The number of caravans proposed on each pitch is considered to be appropriate, but any intensification of this may be detrimental in amenity terms. Further information is required on the proposed number of residents that will be residing on each pitch.

The impact on the character of the area has also been discussed, as the site is within an SLA. Subject to the comments on the Landscape Architect, it is considered that the landscape impact is not significant and there is potential to mitigate any affects through appropriate screening.

Criterion B also references home-based business use. However, this application is for a change of use of land to use as a residential caravan site and no reference has been made to use of the site for business purposes.

Further consultation with utility providers and waste department will be required to establish whether criterion C can be met.

Area Specific Policies

Section C of the LDP sets out the site-specific allocations within each strategy area in the LDP and elaborates on the role and function of settlements. Paragraph 3.5 states "Rhymney is the local centre for the HOVRA and it has the potential to provide a tourist gateway into the County Borough from the Heads of the Valleys area and further afield. Centrally located in terms of the HOVRA it is uniquely placed to help change the perception of the subregion through enhancing the visitor and tourism role the area has to offer, by for example the development of the Valleys Regional Park."

A heritage trail for the Rhymney/Butetown area has been developed, which passes to the south of the site and links to the Twisted Chimney sculpture, which is located to the south west of the site.

There is concern that the position of this Gypsy site at this key entrance to the County Borough would have a detrimental impact on tourism within the Rhymney area, as the prominent fence and portacabin fronting the B4257 are poor in visual amenity terms. This could, however, potentially be addressed through screening and soft landscaping measures.

Cont…. Application No.19/0536/RET Continued

Cycle route NCN 46 follows the route of the B4257 in this locality, and is identified as a transport proposal under Policy TR1 of the LDP (TR1.2 Completion and Extension of Cycle Route NCN 46). It is not considered that the proposal would impact on the operation of this route.

Other Considerations

The site is less than 300m away from Butetown, which is designated as a conservation area due to its unique character as one of the earliest examples of planned industrial housing in the Valleys. The settlement includes three terraced rows of housing that are listed (Grade II). The views of the Council's Conservation and Design Officer should be sought to determine whether there would be any detrimental impact on the setting of the listed building and conservation area.

Conclusion

Whilst there is no need for a Gypsy and Traveller site to be identified in the latest GTAA, the LDP includes a criteria based policy to address unexpected need and it is on the basis of Policy CW21, together with other policy considerations, that the application should be considered.

The principle of the location of a Gypsy and Traveller site in this edge of settlement location in Rhymney Bridge is accepted, as the LDP allows for the development of Gypsy and Traveller sites outside of the settlement boundary. Further information is, however, required to demonstrate that the applicants meet the planning definition of Gypsies or Travellers.

Whilst the site is an SLA, it is considered that the character of the SLA in this area is adversely affected by the road infrastructure and the landscape value of the site is therefore limited. There is a need, however, for appropriate screening to minimise the effect of the closeboard fencing on the wider landscape.

Further information is required on the number of residents proposing to live on the site. Subject to it being demonstrated that number of residents are appropriate for the number of pitches and this would not lead to additional caravans, which would be considered to be over-development, we would not raise an objection in respect of these policies.

Clarification is also required on the extent of the site boundary and the future use of the portacabin.

Subject to these matters being satisfactorily addressed, and subject to the views of other internal consultees, we do not object to this application.

Cont…. Application No.19/0536/RET Continued

CADW - The application site is located within a 1km buffer of the scheduled monument GM403 Rhymney Upper Furnace. However, intervening topography, buildings and vegetation mean it is unlikely that the proposal will be inter-visible with the scheduled monument. It is therefore unlikely that there will be any impact on the setting of the scheduled monument, and we consequently have no comment to make on this planning application.

Conservation & Design Officer - In the case of this particular site having considered any potential impact upon the settings of these heritage assets, there appears to be no impact and nothing that would compromise their significance and character as an important group of listed buildings of special architectural or historic interest, nor would the proposals have a detrimental impact upon nor damage the setting of the Butetown Conservation Area, a duty the LPA has a statutory requirement to preserve or enhance its character or appearance.

There is an existing belt of trees along the B4257 that is currently not included within the boundary of the site, but is understood to be in the ownership of the applicant and it is important that these trees be retained for the purpose of screening the mobile homes and touring caravans to prevent any wider visual impact within the surrounding area. The 1.8m high close boarded fencing is presently quite visually intrusive and dominates the site. It 'urbanises' the site and detracts from the surrounding boundary treatments in this Rhymney Bridge/Llechryd area that are more sensitive and in keeping with its semi- rural environment that comprise mainly of hedgerows and trees, low stone boundary walls and highway defences. I would recommend that the fence be initially 'painted out' in a muted green or grey colour and planted in front with a mixture of native species shrubs to form hedging and to screen the site from view of the road (B4257).

Conclusion

It is my view following consideration of all of the historic assets mentioned above that are located within a radius of 500ms of the application site that there would be no detrimental visual impact upon the settings of any of these historic assets from this development, given that the site lies low in a basin and totally out of sight from these assets.

I conclude that the retention of this site as a Gypsy Traveller site with no more than 5 no. mobile homes, 5 no. touring caravans, each having its own hardstanding, is acceptable in principle, provided it is limited to this size. There is a need however, for an appropriate level of screening of the site together and the retention of the exiting belt of trees. The existing closeboard fencing is currently one of the most visually intrusive elements of the development and it is therefore advised that it initially be painted out in a muted green or similar colour and a mixture of native species of hedging be planted in front of the fencing to limit its impact upon the surrounding area and views into the site from the B4257.

Cont…. Application No.19/0536/RET Continued

Clarification should be also sought from the applicant on the exact size of the portacabin and whether it is also intended to be a permanent structure fronting the main entrance to the site.

Recommendation:

I would recommend approval of this application for the retention of the site's use for Gypsy Travellers, provided that the matters raised above are satisfactorily resolved.

ADVERTISEMENT

Extent of advertisement: The application was advertised on site, and two neighbouring properties were consulted.

Response: At the time of report preparation 433 emails or letters had been received making comments about the proposal.

Summary of observations:

• Do the applicants fulfil the definition of Gypsies and Travellers set out in Circular 5/18? • The Gypsy and Traveller Accommodation Assessment (GTAA) concludes that there is no need for permanent or a transit site in the borough, and that is not up for review until 2020. • There are spaces available at the Gypsy and Traveller site in Merthyr County Borough. • The scheme does not support the objective of policy SP1 which is to promote the north of the Borough for tourism, employment and residential purposes. • The form of the development is not appropriate to this location bearing in view of its location outside the settlement boundary. • The development would be detrimental to the character and amenity of the area. • The caravans, fencing and use of highway verges as gardens are prominent features that detract from the appearance of the SLA, contrary to policy CW4. • The spacing of the caravans does not comply with Welsh Government guidelines. • Detrimental impact of the portacabin on the appearance of the area. Would the development comply with Fire and Building Regulations? • The area is characterised by large houses in large plots. Five pitches would significantly increase activity in the area which would not be compatible with the countryside surroundings. The intensification of the use of the site would significantly change the overall character and ambience of the area.

Cont…. Application No.19/0536/RET Continued

• The site is close to Bute Town Conservation Area, Rhymney Conservation Area, the Upper Rhymney Furnace Scheduled Ancient Monument (SAM), and Cadw should be consulted. • The site is at the gateway to the borough and close to the heritage trail for Rhymney and Bute Town, and is also close to the Twisted Chimney, a popular local attraction. • The former Bridge is within the site. • No evidence has been submitted about the ecological implications of the proposed development, particularly the impact of the surfacing. • The concerns of NRW have not been addressed. Insufficient information has been submitted in respect of drainage and sewerage for a development that could accommodate up to 60 people. • The implications of noise from the A465 have not been considered • The site is not well related to community facilities and services. • There would be an adverse impact on highway safety, including children playing on the road. • The site is outside the settlement boundary and previous applications for planning permission have been refused. • The application incorrectly states that there are no trees at the site. • The site is boggy in wet weather; no drainage plans are proposed. SAB approval may be required. • Insufficient information has been submitted in respect of the number of bedrooms, and concern is expressed about the number of residents at the site, and the number of visitors. • There are no waste collection services in place. • There are methane pipes at the site which have to be checked regularly, and exposure to the gas may be detrimental to health, making a residential development unsuitable. • An environmental impact assessment should have been submitted. • The Human Rights Act 1998 confers rights on the settled community as well as the gypsies and travellers. • An additional strain will be placed on local services. • Fires on site cause visibility problems on the A465. • The applicant has carried out the development before getting planning permission.

A response has also been received from a solicitor in respect of the applicant's supporting information, which in summary, amongst other things, states the following:

• a number of the law cases referred to refer to developments where permission was ultimately refused in the appeal court. • a number of the cases refers to the rights of children associated with deportation cases. Cont…. Application No.19/0536/RET Continued

• the need for a proportionality assessment would only apply in a Green Belt • the general rule is that LPAs should not give weight to the personal circumstances of the applicant and his family but where a case is more finely balanced, a genuine plea of hardship may tip the scales in the applicant's favour • the Council needs to be satisfied that the applicant fulfils the definition of Gypsy or Traveller • drainage at the site should comply with the appropriate legislation.

The following comments received are not referred to in detail and will not be considered any further because they are not planning matters: the purchase of the site from Welsh Government, encroachment on Council highway land, encroachment on neighbouring land, disagreements with local residents, health and safety implications of floodlighting, water pipe directed onto the highway, safety of electrical installations, and loss of property value.

Rhymney Community Council is concerned at the lack of enforcement action taken on the initial development of this area, resulting in this now retrospective application. They do not consider the application to be compliant with Welsh Government guidance for the development of a Gypsy and Traveller site, and also believe that previous Welsh Government demand reports, suggested the development of a new site within this geographical area was not necessary.

SECTION 17 CRIME AND DISORDER ACT

What is the likely effect of the determination of this application on the need for the Local Planning Authority to do all it reasonably can to prevent crime and disorder in its area? None. This is a type of residential use where such considerations would not arise.

EU HABITATS DIRECTIVE

Does the development affect any protected wildlife species? No

COMMUNITY INFRASTRUCTURE LEVY (CIL)

Is this development Community Infrastructure Levy liable? The Council would have to consider this separately as, without prejudice to any final decision, the liability for CIL would depend on whether the units on the site are considered to be caravans, i.e. a use of land; or buildings. The size, permanence and physical attachment to the land of the units would be factors that would require consideration.

Cont…. Application No.19/0536/RET Continued

ANALYSIS

Policies:

The application site is located outside the settlement boundaries defined in the LDP and therefore is within open countryside for planning purposes. Policies SP5 and CW15 adopt a restrictive approach to development in the countryside. There is no site allocation for Gypsy and Traveller Accommodation in the LDP, but policy CW21 sets out a criteria-based approach to the matter, and states:

Proposals for Gypsy and Traveller caravan sites, including on land outside of defined settlement boundaries, will be permitted provided: A The site is well related to community facilities and services B The site can accommodate residential and home-based business uses without detriment to amenity and character of the area C The site is capable of being served by utilities including waste disposal and recovery.

There is clearly a presumption in favour of such proposals, subject to the criteria, which will be considered in turn below.

A site should be well related to community facilities and services, which reflects the encouragement of placemaking in the most recent version of Planning Policy Wales (PPW). Welsh Government Circular 5/2018 Planning for Gypsy, Traveller and Showpeople Sites, gives the following advice for the identification of Gypsy and Traveller sites.

"Sites in the countryside, away from existing settlements, can be considered for Gypsy and Traveller sites if there is a lack of suitable sustainable locations within or adjacent to existing settlement boundaries. In assessing the suitability of such sites, local authorities should be realistic about the availability, or likely availability, of alternatives to the car in accessing local services. Over rigid application of national or development plan policies that seek a reduction in car borne travel in order to effectively block proposals for any Gypsy and Traveller Site in a countryside location would be inappropriate. Sites should be considered in context and in relation to the local infrastructure, population size and density to ensure they are in proportion to local settled communities."

Cont…. Application No.19/0536/RET Continued

That guidance is also pertinent in considering a site promoted by an applicant. Information submitted by the applicants about accessibility to services includes the following table.

Service/Facility Distance Walk (mins) Drive (mins) (miles) Upper Rhymney 1 19 3 Primary School Bishop Hedley Catholic 4.2 - 8 High School Rhymney Convenience 1 19 3 Store Post Office – Rhymney 0.8 15 - GP and Dentist – Rhymney Integrated 1.9 - 6 Health and Social Care Centre Pub – The Windsor 0.4 7 - Arms Bus stops – 40m west (Pentwyn Farm) and 150m east (Rhymney Bridge) of site Rhymney train station 1.6 - 4

The site is within a reasonable distance of a variety of community facilities and services, accessible by foot and car, in Rhymney, and in neighbouring towns along the A465. In that respect it is acceptable in terms of criterion A.

The application site is within an SLA, and criterion B requires that the site can accommodate residential and home-based business uses without detriment to amenity and character of the area. No primary home-based business are currently proposed, but the residential use will change the character of the site by the introduction of five mobile homes, five touring caravans, 1.8 metre high timber fencing, and the associated surfacing, including the access.

The Policy part of this report reproduces in full the important features of, the pressures on, and priorities for this SLA. The presence of the A465 immediately to the north of the site is acknowledged, and it is recognised that there is a need to ensure the quality of the remainder of the area is maintained, and to prevent further loss of overall landscape quality and character on the settlement edge as a result of development. The settlement boundary defined in the LDP is close by to the east, but the development within it is of a verty low density.

Cont…. Application No.19/0536/RET Continued

The application site is within a rural area. It is outside of any settlement, and beyond the urban fringe. Apart from the road network, it is surrounded by fields bounded by low fences and hedgerows, small copses of trees, and individual houses in large plots. Prior to its recent occupation, the site was an open field, bounded by a simple unobtrusive ranch style fence, with views across it to the hillsides in the distance. The proposed development will give the site a more urban character to the detriment of the appearance of the area. The impact will be local, but the site is at an important gateway to the county borough, and can be seen clearly from the Twisted Chimney, and the Council's Butetown Heritage Trail walk. The proposed development would be detrimental to the existing qualities of the area, and would be contrary to criterion B of policy CW21.

The Council's Landscape Architect has expressed concern that visual amenity is adversely affected, and has suggested mitigation measures. However, those measures are only required because of the adverse impact of the development, compared to its original appearance as an open field, which reflected the character of the surrounding area.

The portacabin at the entrance to the site currently aggravates the adverse impact of the scheme, but if the LPA were minded to grant planning permission, it would be reasonable to impose a condition to require its repositioning in a less obtrusive position.

Criterion C of policy CW21 requires that the site is capable of being served by utilities including waste disposal and recovery. NRW have significant concerns on the basis that the site should be connected to the mains sewerage system or satisfactory evidence should be provided to demonstrate that it is not reasonable to connect to mains. To that end they have asked for additional information, and should a connection to the mains sewer not be feasible, the applicant will also need to demonstrate that the proposal would not pose an unacceptable risk to the water environment.

The applicant has been asked to provide the additional information, and has responded by stating that the nearest mains sewer is some 115 meters to the centre point of the proposed access, but this includes a bridge over the Rhymney River. Therefore a connection to the mains is not practically feasible, and on this basis non-mains drainage is justified. Following re-consultation, NRW have said that their original response remains relevant. The agent has suggested that the matter could be resolved by the imposition of a negatively worded or 'Grampian' condition requiring the submission of details within three months.

Cont…. Application No.19/0536/RET Continued

Conditions can enable development proposals to proceed where it would otherwise be necessary to refuse planning permission. However, Grampian conditions should not be imposed if there is no reasonable prospect of the required action being performed within the time limit imposed by the permission. In this case, the applicants will have to satisfy NRW that a connection to the main sewer is not feasible, and then apply for an environmental permit or register an exemption with them allowing the use of private facilities. WG Circular 008/2018 'Planning requirement in respect of the use of private sewerage in new development, incorporating septic tanks and small sewage treatment plants' states that:

"Before deciding a planning application, the planning authority needs to be satisfied the sewerage arrangements are suitable. If the non-mains sewerage and sewage disposal proposals are assessed as being unsatisfactory, this would normally be sufficient to justify refusal of planning permission."

In this case, there is some uncertainty as to how satisfactory sewerage facilities are going to be provided for what amounts to five residential units, and therefore a condition would be inappropriate. In those respects, the development does not comply with criterion C.

Policy CW4 requires that development proposals that affect SLAs will only be permitted where they conserve and where appropriate enhance the distinctive or characteristic features of those areas. As set out above, the introduction of the proposed site into this rural area will not conserve the features of the SLA.

The need and supply of Gypsy and Traveller sites has to be considered. The most up- to-date assessment of need (GTAA) for Caerphilly CBC was published in 2016. The study concludes that there is no identified requirement for permanent site provision within the county borough, and there is currently insufficient evidence to support the provision of a transit site within the county borough. The Assessment states that,

"Should a planning application for a permanent or transit site be submitted in the future, this can be addressed through the existing planning policies. The emerging replacement LDP will continue to include a criteria-based policy to address any applications for Gypsy and Traveller sites." (para 6.0.5)

Policy CW21 has been considered above, and it is concluded that any need for Gypsy and Traveller sites within this locality does not outweigh the adverse impact of the proposal on the character of the area, along with the concerns about sewerage.

Cont…. Application No.19/0536/RET Continued

With regard to the personal circumstances of the applicant, The Planning Inspectorate advised LPAs in January 2019 that the following information will be sought in appeals relating to Gypsy and Traveller sites, and for consistency, the same information has been requested to aid the determination of this current application. A summary of the response received has been provided after each question.

• Gypsy status: if this is being claimed, provide details of family background and travel for work purposes over the last 10 years. If no travelling for work purposes has taken place recently, or it is proposed to give up the travelling lifestyle, please also provide details of this.

Gypsy status is being claimed, but the further information relating to the last 10 years has not been provided.

• Who will be living on the site? Give names (if known) and family relationships.

The number of adults and children has been provided (as set out at the start of this report) but no names or direct relationships.

• If more than one family (parent(s) and children) intend to occupy the site, how long have they travelled together and how important is it that they stay together? Do they want to be treated as a single group, for the purposes of the application, or as individual families?

Five families are to be accommodated on the site, but the additional information has not been provided.

• Do any of the residents have any particular educational or health needs? Where possible, these should be supported by written evidence from educational or medical authorities.

The five family units include 9 children and an expectant mother. There are a number of vulnerable adults living on the site including two who are registered disabled. Two have specific health needs with one on permanent medication , and there is a family member who is autistic.

• Are any buildings (day rooms, stables, toilet blocks etc.) proposed? How many caravans will normally be on the site, and what type (touring or static)?

This information has been provided.

• Is any business use of the site proposed?

No primary business use is proposed but there may be ancillary business activities.

Cont…. Application No.19/0536/RET Continued

• What efforts have been made to find an alternative site, e.g. approaching Council's housing and planning departments including applications for a pitch on a Local Authority site, estate agents, land owners, other gypsies and travellers? Written evidence should be provided wherever possible.

This information has not been provided

• Is the permission sought on a temporary or permanent basis? If temporary how long for and why?

The application is for full planning permission and there is no indication consent is sought on a temporary basis.

• If the application were unsuccessful what alternative accommodation options are realistically available?

It has been clarified that should the planning application be turned down the family will be staying in the area for education and health needs and will then become roadside living in the area.

Whilst the information requested and set out above has not been provided in full, on the balance of probability, the applicant has Gypsy status. Support for the submission of the application has been provided by Travelling Ahead, a Welsh advice and advocacy project working with young people and families from Gypsy, Roma and Traveller communities. A refusal of planning permission, if followed by successful enforcement action (if the applicant chose not to leave the site), would interfere with their private and family life. The children will be going to local schools, and benefiting from other support associated with their needs.

Regard has been had to the personal circumstances of the applicant, his family, and the other residents at this site, with particular reference to the Human Rights Act 1988 (HRA), and the Public Sector Equality Duty under the Equality Act 2010. Article 8 of the European Convention on Human Rights (as incorporated by the HRA) requires that decisions ensure respect for private and family life. Refusing planning permission in this case would not force the applicant and other occupants to leave the site, but it would introduce uncertainty about their future, affecting their homes and family life including the prospect of a roadside existence. If permission is refused, the LPA would then have to consider the expediency of taking enforcement action. If the LPA decided to take action, it could at that point ensure that the requirements of any notice gave the applicant a reasonable period to find satisfactory alternative accommodation.

Cont…. Application No.19/0536/RET Continued

The rights discussed above are qualified, and interference may be justified where in the public interest. In this case, the Council has identified this locality as an SLA, and whilst that does not preclude development, especially in view of the presumption in policy CW21, careful consideration has to be given to the impact of any scheme on its particular character and features. This site, at a significant northern entrance to the borough, close to the Butetown Heritage Trail, is in a sensitive location. The proposal would introduce a denser form of development, surrounded by tall fencing, into this rural area. Furthermore national policy, as emphasised by NRW requires more certainty in respect of sewerage at the site before permission could be granted.

Where Article 8 rights are those of children, they must also be seen in the context of Article 3 of the United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child. This requires a child's best interests to be a primary consideration. It is accepted that the best interests of the children would be served by a permanent and secure home, with access to the local schools, facilities, and any support that they need from the Council and other bodies, as well as activities in the wider community. However, this does not in this case outweigh the concerns set out in detail above. The need to resist the proposed development at this site in an SLA, as well as the concerns about sewerage, cannot be achieved by any means that interfere less with the applicant’s and the families’ rights and with the best interests of the children. The recommendation is proportionate and necessary in the circumstances.

Comments from Consultees:

Apart from those discussed above, there are no significant objections raised by the other statutory consultees, but a number of concerns require further consideration. The Head of Public Protection has requested a noise assessment, and drawn attention to the ground composition, the need to consider waste disposal, site layout to accord with the model standards, water supply, and fire risk. These matters have been referred to the applicant, who has responded as follows. On noise it is suggested that the harm is minimal, and appeal decisions letters are available that would support the proposal. With regard to contamination, rubbish and waste disposal it is suggested that conditions could be imposed. It is understood that there is a water supply to the site.

Whilst the impact of noise is a material planning consideration, it should not be given significant weight in this case. The applicant has chosen this site as his potential home, unlike other housing developments where a developer is hoping to provide dwellings for others to purchase. The other matters raised could be subject to condition or informative.

Surface water drainage matters raised by the Senior Engineer (Land Drainage) could be resolved through the SAB process if a separate consent is necessary. The Ecologist has suggested conditions that could be imposed on an approval.

Cont…. Application No. 19/0536/RET Continued

Comments from public:

The issues raised by local residents in respect of Gypsy status, the GTAA, the impact on the character of the locality and the SLA, site layout, fire regulations, ecology, sewerage, noise, the relationship with local facilities and services, site drainage, waste collection, Human Rights Act implications, have already been considered above.

Other matters raised are considered below. With regard to Policy SP1, whilst the scheme would have a harmful impact on the immediate locality for the reasons already discussed, it would be difficult to argue that it would undermined the objectives of that policy of promoting the north of the County Borough as a tourist, employment and residential area.

Neither Cadw nor the Council's Conservation Officer have raised any concerns about the impact of the development on heritage assets in the locality. The former Rhymney Railway Bridge may be within the site, but this is not listed. The Council's Transportation Engineering Manager has not raised any objections on highways grounds. Existing trees on the boundaries and within the site could be protected by condition. The numbers of occupants have been stated by the applicants. The matter of the methane pipes could be resolved by condition. The development is not of a scale that would trigger the need for an Environmental Impact Assessment to be carried out. It is unlikely that a development of this scale would place a significant burden on local services. Fires at the site would be controlled under other legislation. Finally, whilst the LPA discourages applicants carrying out development before securing planning permission, Planning legislation allows the submission of applications in retrospect.

Other material considerations:

The duty to improve the economic, social, environmental and cultural well-being of Wales, has been considered in accordance with the sustainable development principle, under section 3 of the Well-Being of Future Generations (Wales) Act 2015. In reaching the recommendation below, the ways of working set out at section 5 of that Act have been taken into account, and it is considered that the recommendation is consistent with the sustainable development principle as required by section 8 of that Act.

RECOMMENDATION that Permission be REFUSED

The reason(s) for the Council’s decision is/are

01) The proposed development would not conserve or enhance the character of this part of the Upper Rhymney Valley Special Landscape Area, near the gateway to the borough from the A465, and adjacent to the Butetown Heritage Trail. The introduction of caravans, hard surfacing, high fencing and other structures would be out of character with this rural area. The development would therefore be contrary to polices CW4(A) and CW21(B) of the adopted Caerphilly County Borough Local Development Plan up to 2021. Cont…. Application No 19/0536/RET Continued

02) Insufficient information has been submitted with regard to the feasibility of connection to the main sewer in the locality, and if it is not feasible, that the proposal would not pose an unacceptable risk to the water environment. That information is necessary to fulfil the requirements of Welsh Government Circular 008/2018 'Planning requirement in respect of the use of private sewerage in new development, incorporating septic tanks and small sewage treatment plants', which states that "Before deciding a planning application, the planning authority needs to be satisfied the sewerage arrangements are suitable." The development as submitted would also be contrary to Policy CW21 (C) of the adopted Caerphilly County Borough Local Development Plan up to 2021. ______