(Public Pack)Agenda Document for Planning, Taxi Licensing & Rights

Public Document Pack

Planning, Taxi Licensing & Rights of Way Committee

Meeting Venue Council Chamber - Neuadd Maldwyn, Welshpool, Powys

Meeting Date Thursday, 1 September 2016 County Hall Llandrindod Wells Meeting Time Powys 10.00 am LD1 5LG

For further information please contact Carol Johnson 24th August, 2016 01597826206 [email protected]

AGENDA

1. APOLOGIES PTLRW78 - 2016

To receive apologies for absence.

2. MINUTES OF THE PREVIOUS MEETING PTLRW79 - 2016

To authorise the Chair to sign the minutes of the previous meeting of the Committee held on 14th July, 2016 as a correct record.

(To Follow)

Taxi and other licensing

3. DECLARATIONS OF INTEREST PTLRW80 - 2016

To receive declarations of interest in respect of the following agenda item.

4. SCRAP METAL LICENSING FEES PTLRW81 - 2016

To consider the report regarding Scrap Metal Licensing Fees.

(Pages 5 - 8)

1 Planning

5. DECLARATIONS OF INTEREST PTLRW82 - 2016

a) To receive any declarations of interest from Members relating to items to be considered on the agenda. b) To receive Members' requests that a record be made of their membership of town or community councils where discussion has taken place of matters for the consideration of this Committee. c) To receive declarations from Members of the Committee that they will be acting as 'Local Representative' in respect of an individual application being considered by the Committee. d) To note the details of Members of the County Council (who are not Members of the Committee) who will be acting as 'Local Representative' in respect of an individual application being considered by the Committee.

6. PLANNING APPLICATIONS FOR CONSIDERATION PTLRW83 - 2016 BY THE COMMITTEE

To consider the reports of the Head of Regeneration, Property and Commissioning and to make any necessary decisions thereon.

(Pages 9 - 10)

6.1. Updates Any Updates will be added to the Agenda, as a Supplementary Pack, wherever possible, prior to the meeting.

6.2. P/2016/0615 Land at Little Bank Farm, Mellington, Churchstoke, Montgomery, Powys, SY15 6TL (Pages 11 - 22)

6.3. P/2016/0314 The Hendre, Felindre, Knighton, LD7 1YT (Pages 23 - 44)

6.4. P/2016/0324 Haulage Depot, The Old Station Yard, Pen y Bont, Oswestry (Pages 45 - 70)

6.5. P/2015/0076 Land adjacent to Lords Land, Whitton (Pages 71 - 84)

6.6. P/2016/0650 Lower Hall, Meifod, Powys, SY22 6HR (Pages 85 - 94) 6.7. TREE/2016/0024 Works to trees in a conservation area (Pages 95 - 100)

7. DECISIONS OF THE HEAD OF REGENERATION, PTLRW84 - 2016 PROPERTY AND COMMISSIONING ON DELEGATED APPLICATIONS

To receive for information a list of decisions made by the Head of Regeneration, Property and Commissioning under delegated powers.

(Pages 101 - 110)

8. APPEAL DECISION PTLRW85 - 2016

To receive the Planning Inspector's decisions regarding appeals and decisions regarding costs.

(Pages 111 - 176) This page is intentionally left blank PTLRW81 - 2016

CYNGOR SIR POWYS COUNTY COUNCIL

PLANNING, TAXI LICENSING & RIGHTS OF WAY COMMITTEE

REPORT AUTHOR: Senior Licensing Officer SUBJECT: Scrap Metal Licensing Fees DATE: 1stSeptember 2016 ______

REPORT FOR: Decision

1.0 Summary

1.1 The Committee is requested to consider the approval of the revised fees for scrap metal site licences and for scrap metal collectors licences, issued under the Scrap Metal Dealers Act 2013.

1.2 A site licence is required for all sites where a licensee carries on business as a Scrap Metal Dealer within the local authority area.

A collector’s licence authorises a licensee to operate as a mobile collector in the area of the issuing licensing authority permitting them to collect any scrap metal as appropriate. This includes commercial as well as domestic scrap metal.

We currently have 12 sites licensed and 14 collectors in Powys.

2.0 Proposal

2.1 A report was made to Cabinet on 1st October 2013, in relation to setting an initial fee for the scrap metal licences. It was agreed at Cabinet that in the future, changes in fees could be approved by this committee.

2.2 The licences are issued for a period of 3 years, as laid out in the Act. The first licences were issued in November 2013; therefore they are coming up for renewal in 2016. 2.3 The Act gives the Authority the power to set fees for cost recovery in line with guidance issued by the Home Office and recent case law on local authority fee setting (Hemming v Westminster City Council).

2.4 The proposed fee is a reduction on the previous fee set in 2013, however this reduction in fees would appear to be consistent with those fees currently being revised by other Local Authorities across Wales. When the legislation was first proposed, Licensing Officers attended a considerable number of meetings to clarify the arrangements in relation to the implementation. Licensing Officers also made visits to all of the sites prior to the legislation coming into force, to inform them of the application process and what records were required to be kept under the Act. These costs were considered and impacted on the setting of the initial fee.

Page 5 Page 1 of 4

The proposed fee takes into consideration the current known administration, inspection and enforcement costs related to scrap metal licensing. These fees have been calculated using a toolkit devised and used across the Welsh Local Authority Licensing Services and in consultation with our finance team.

PROPOSED FEE CURRENT FEE SITE £270.00 £348.00 COLLECTOR £270.00 £310.00

The reduction in fees will result in an annual loss of in the region of £500.00 which will be accommodated within existing budgets.

2.5 Members are invited to approve the revised fees.

3.0 One Powys Plan

3.1 Licensing contributes in a cross cutting manner to various aspects of the One Powys Plan and the proposal serves to build on this.

4.0 Options Considered/Available

4.1 Leaving the fees unchanged would leave them out of step with legislative requirements and the Authority subject to challenge. The Act permits the Local Authority to set fees based on cost recovery. The All Wales tool kit was adapted to enable us to establish a fee in a consistent manner to our Welsh counterparts, within the boundaries of the Act. The fees proposed have been set using this toolkit in consultation with our finance team and are therefore recommended for approval.

5.0 Preferred Choice and Reasons

5.1 Consideration of the revised fees is required to ensure the Authority is in compliance with legal requirements.

6.0 Sustainability and Environmental Issues/Equalities/Crime and Disorder,/Welsh Language/Other Policies etc

6.1 The proposal does not have any impact on any of the above.

7.0 Children and Young People's Impact Statement - Safeguarding and Wellbeing

7.1 The proposal does not have any impact on the above.

8.0 Local Member(s)

8.1 This report has no particular significance on one or some electoral divisions.

Page 6 Page 2 of 4 9.0 Other Front Line Services

9.1 This report has no impact on front line services.

10.0 Support Services (Legal, Finance, Corporate Property, HR, ICT, Business Services)

The Finance Business Partner Places notes the contents of the report and that the potential reduction in income as a result of the reduced fee can be accommodated within current revenue budgets.

The Professional Lead-Legal has commented as follows – ‘the Professional Lead Legal has no comment to make regarding the recommendation in this report’.

11.0 Local Service Board/Partnerships/Stakeholders etc

11.1 The proposal has no impact on Local Service Board / Partnerships / Stakeholders.

12.0 Corporate Communications

12.1 The revised fees will be communicated to all existing licence holders in a letter also reminding of their duty to renew their licences.

13.0 Statutory Officers

The Solicitor to the Council (Monitoring Officer) has commented as follows: “I note the legal comment and have nothing to add to the report.

The Strategic Director Resources (S151 Officer) notes the comments made by finance.

14.0 Members’ Interests

The Monitoring Officer is not aware of any specific interests that may arise in relation to this report. If Members have an interest they should declare it at the start of the meeting and complete the relevant notification form.

Page 7 Page 3 of 4 Recommendation: Reason for Recommendation: That the revised Scrap Metal fees be To enable a new compliant fee to be approved set for licences issued under the Scrap Metal Act 2013.

Relevant Policy (ies): Scrap Metal Act 2013 Within Policy: Y Within Budget: Y

Relevant Local Member(s): N/A

Person(s) To Implement Decision: Senior Licensing Officers Date By When Decision To Be Implemented: 15thSeptember 2016

Contact Officer Name: Tel: Fax: Email: Nigel Williams 01938 551328 01938 551248 [email protected]

Background Papers used to prepare Report:

Cabinet minutes 1st October 2013

Scrap Metal Act 2013

Guidance Issued by the Home Office and Local Government Association.

Page 8 Page 4 of 4 PTLRW83 - 2016

Planning, Taxi Licensing and Rights of Way Committee 1st September, 2016

For the purpose of the Government (Access to Information) Act 1985, the background papers relating to each individual planning application constitute all the correspondence on the file as numbered in the left hand column.

Applications for consideration by Committee:

Application No: Nature of Development: Community: Location of Development: O.S. Grid Reference: Applicant: Date Received: Recommendation of Head of Planning:

P/2016/0615 Full: Erection of an affordable dwelling, installation of septic tank, formation of Churchstoke vehicular access including improvements to existing access at junction opposite "The 326764.92 291675.4 Pullets" (resubmission of P/2015/0915)

08/06/2016 Land at Little Bank Farm, Mellington, Churchstoke, SY15 6TL

Katie Higgs and George Thomas

Recommendation: Refuse

P/2016/0314 Full: Erection of 2 No. agricultural buildings for poulty rearign units with 5 No. feed bins, Beguildy hardstanding and access

315025.76 281988.54 The Hendre, Felindre, Knighton, LD7 1YT.

18.03.2016 Edward Harris

Recommendation: Conditional Consent

P/2016/0324 Outline: Haulage Depot, The Old Station Yard, Pen y Bont, Oswestry Llansantffraid Haulage Depot, The Old Station Yard, Pen 31005.54 323474.43 y Bont, Oswestry

05.04.2016 Doug Williams

Recommendation: Refuse

Page 9 P/2015/0076 Outline: Residential development comprising erection of 4 dwellings (3 Whitton affordable) and formation of vehicular access and all associated works 327287.79 267301.2 Land adjacent to Lords Land, Whitton.

Mr D Jones

Recommendation: Conditional consent subject to a Section 106

P/2016/0650 Full: Erection of a livestock building

Meifod Lower Hall, Meifod, Powys SY22 6HR

314920.01 311287.63 J & E Jones

Recommendation: Conditional Consent

TREE/2016/0024 Works to trees in a conservation area

Montgomery Junction of Back Lane and Bishops Castle Street, Montgomery, Powys SY15 6PP 322289.43 296361.25 Mr A Jones

Recommendation: Consent

Page 10 PTLRW83 - 20162

Planning, Taxi Licensing and Rights of Way Committee Report

Application No: P/2016/0615 Grid Ref: 326764.92 291675.4

Community Churchstoke Valid Date: Officer: Council: 08/06/2016 Karen Probert

Applicant: Katie Higgs and George Thomas, Mellington, Little Bank Farm, Churchstoke, Montgomery, Powys, SY15 6TL.

Location: Land at Little Bank Farm, Mellington, Churchstoke, Montgomery, Powys, SY15 6TL

Proposal: Erection of an affordable dwelling, installation of septic tank, formation of vehicular access including improvements to existing access at junction opposite ""The Pullets"" (resubmission of P/2015/0915)

Application Application for Full Planning Permission Type:

The reason for Committee determination

The application is a departure from the Powys Unitary Development Plan.

Site Location and Description

This is a resubmission of a recently refused application relating to erection of an affordable dwelling, installation of septic tank, formation of vehicular access including improvements to an existing access (P/2015/0915). For information, an earlier application P/2015/0463 for the erection of affordable dwelling and installation of septic tank was refused at the same site.

The application site is situated in a rural location east of the rural settlement of Mellington, Churchstoke. The site is accessed initially via a single track road leading to Little Bank Farm from the junction with C2149 and then via a green track which served the former agricultural building at the site. The site is on a relatively elevated position with open views towards Mellington and Mellington Hall. The site contains a ruin of what appears to be a former agricultural building.

Consent is sought for the development of a two storey, four bedroomed dwelling. The dimensions would be 8.2 metres to ridge, 5 metres to eaves with an external footprint of 75.26 square metres. The proposed design is of brick walls with heavy timbers on the projecting front gable infilled with render, slate roof and UPVC windows and doors (light oak colour).

A parking and turning area are proposed directly south of the proposed dwelling.

A septic tank is also proposed as a means of foul water disposal.

1 Page 11

This re-submission has provided the same junction proposals to the existing access at the junction adjoining the dwelling known as The Pullets as the former application P/2015/0915.

The submission also includes an Affordable Housing Eligibility Criteria Questionnaire.

Consultee Response

Churchstoke Community Council

Please find attached the response from Churchstoke Community Council made at the council meeting 29th June 2016:

Churchstoke Commmunity Council notes the application without further comment.

Highways Dept north

Please attach the same highway conditions as recommended for the previous application P/2015/0915.

The conditions are as follows:

HC4 Within 5 days from the commencement of the development the access shall be constructed so that there is clear visibility from a point 1.05 metres above ground level at the centre of the access and 2.4 metres distant from the edge of the adjoining carriageway, to points 0.26 metres above ground level at the edge of the adjoining carriageway and 45 metres distant in a westerly direction measured from the centre of the access along the edge of the adjoining carriageway and 10 metres distant from the edge of the adjoining carriageway and 10 metres in a westerly direction. Nothing shall be planted, erected or allowed to grow on the areas of land so formed that would obstruct the visibility and the visibility shall be maintained free from obstruction for as long as the development hereby permitted remains in existence.

HC7 Within 5 days from the commencement of the development the area of the private access abutting the C2149 to be used by vehicles is to be constructed to a minimum of 410mm depth, comprising a minimum of 250mm of sub-base material, 100mm of bituminous macadam base course material and 60mm of bituminous macadam binder course material for a distance of 9 metres from the edge of the adjoining carriageway. Any use of alternative materials is to be agreed in writing by the Local Planning Authority prior to the access being constructed.

HC21 Prior to the occupation of the dwelling the area of the private access abutting the C2149 to be used by vehicles is to be finished in a 40mm bituminous surface course for a distance of 9 metres from the edge of the adjoining carriageway. This area will be maintained to this standard for as long as the development remains in existence,

HC32 No storm water drainage from the private access shall be allowed to discharge onto the county C2149 highway.

Building Control

2 Page 12

Please be aware that the proposed development will require Building Regulations approval. For furher information or to discuss the project please feel free to contact me on 07876216734.

Wales & West Utilities

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

Severn Trent Water

Thank you for the opportunity to comment on this planning application. Please find our response noted below:

Waste Water Comments

With Reference to the above planning application the company’s observations regarding sewerage are as follows.

I can confirm we have no comment to make as no foul sewage or surface water is to discharge to the public sewerage system.

To help us provide an efficient response please could you send all responses to [email protected] rather than to named individuals.

Environmental Health

Environmental Protection has no objection to this application.

Rights of Way

No public rights of way are affected by this application.

Affordable Housing Officer

No response at the time of writing this report.

Cllr Michael Jones

Cllr Michael Jones has requested the applicaton be called in “as it is possibly a departure from UDP policy”. No additional comments received.

CPAT

Thank you for the consultation on this application.

I write to confirm that there are no archaeological implications for the development at this location. The structure presently on-site has no architectural or archaeological merit and appears to have been an agricultural structure of post 1816 date. I photographed this

3 Page 13

structure on a previous site visit. The 'Old House' referred to was a building further west, which is now no longer visible, but can be seen on the 1816 OS Surveyors mapping (copy attached).

CADW

CADW confirm that the proposed development is located within the vicinity of the scheduled ancient monuments known as Offa’s Dyke: Cwm Section (MG151) and Offa’s Dyke: Mellington Hall Section Extending from Mellington hall Lodge to Lower Cwm (MG039). The proposed dwelling may be visible from Offa’s Dyke but it will be a solitary building on the site of a former structure and will therefore fit into the existing pattern of settlement in this area. Consequetnly there will be no impact on the setting of the monument.

The proposal is also within the vicinity of the registered historic park and garden known as Mellington Hall PGW (Po) 28 (POW). The proposed dwelling is unlikely to be visible from the registered park and garden at Mellington Hall.

CADW therefore have no comments to make on the proposed development.

PCC Ecologist

No response at the time of writing this report.

Contaminated Land Officer

In relation to Planning Application P/2016/0615 the following advice is provided for the consideration of Development Control.

Advice

Section 3 ‘Application Site’ of the Roger Parry ‘Planning Statement: Erection of a local needs dwelling at land at Little Bank Farm, Mellington, Churchstoke’, submitted in support of Planning Application P/2016/0615, identifies that the application site forms part of an overall farm and that: “the proposed dwelling will be on a brownfield site (disused traditional building)”.

It is advised that former agricultural buildings and land could contain potential sources of contamination depending on what they were used for in the past such as: pesticides, fuels and oils, slurry tanks and pits, fire sites, animal burial pits or other buried waste, fertiliser, sheep dip pits, asbestos, old machinery, waste chemical drums and ammunition.

Paragraph 13.5.1, of Chapter 13 ‘Minimising and Managing Environmental Risks and Pollution’, of the Welsh Government document ‘Planning Policy Wales’ (2014) advises: “responsibility for determining the extent and effects of instability or other risks remains that of the developer. It is for the developer to ensure that the land is suitable for the development proposed, as a planning authority does not have a duty of care to landowners”.

Therefore, it is recommended that the following Informant is attached to any planning approval granted for Planning Application P/2016/0615:

4 Page 14

Conversion Informant

The development site may potentially be affected by land contamination due to its former use as an agricultural building. Therefore, should any made ground and/or contamination be identified during the redevelopment works it would be practical to investigate and assess any potential risks, and to inform the Council’s Contaminated Land Officers immediately.

Representations

A site notice was erected on the 15th June 2016; at the time of writing this report no public representations have been made.

Planning History

P/2015/0915 - Erection of an affordable dwelling, installation of septic tank, formation of vehicular access including improvements to existing access at junction opposite ""The Pullets"" (resubmission of P/2015/0463) - REFUSED

P/2015/0463 - Erection of affordable dwelling and installation of septic tank - REFUSED

PPAE/2014/0035 – The applicant was provided with advice and guidance in respect of the proposal, namely the policy context for the development in the open countryside.

Principal Planning Constraints

Historic Landscapes Register Open Countryside C2149 classified road

Principal Planning Policies

National planning policy

Planning Policy Wales (8th Edition, 2016) Technical Advice Note 1 – Joint Housing land Availability Studies (2015) Technical Advice Note 2 – Planning and Affordable Housing (2006) Technical Advice Note 6 – Planning for Sustainable Rural Communities (2010) Technical Advice Note 18 – Transport (2007)

Local planning policies

Powys Unitary Development Plan (2010): UDP DC11 – Non Mains Sewage Treatment UDP ENV 2 - Safeguarding the Landscape UDP ENV 3 - Safeguarding Biodiversity & Natural Habitats UDP ENV 16 – Landscapes, Parks and Gardens of Special Historic Interest UDP ENV 17 – Ancient Monuments and Archaeological Sites UDP GP1 - Development Control UDP GP2 - Planning Conditions and Obligations UDP GP3 - Design and Energy Conservation

5 Page 15

UDP GP4 - Highway and Parking Requirements UDP HP5 - Residential Developments UDP HP6 - Dwellings in the Open Countryside UDP HP9 - Affordable Housing in Rural Settlements UDP HP10 - Affordability Criteria

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

Officer Appraisal

Section 38 (6) of the Planning and Compulsory Purchase Act 2004

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

Principle of Development

The proposal as submitted is for an affordable dwelling within the community council area of Churchstoke.

The housing policies of the Powys Unitary Development Plan permit affordable dwellings to meet proven local needs on exception sites either adjoining settlements with development boundaries (UDP policy HP8) or within designated rural settlements (UDP policy HP9).

As an exception to normal housing policies, the development of single dwellings within designated rural settlements which provide affordable housing for local need is supported within UDP policy HP9.

The stated policy notes that the development will be permitted where they comply with the following criteria of Policy HP9:

1. The dwelling would be sensitively located and designed and would be capable of being integrated into the settlement without unacceptably adversely affecting the amenity and character of the area.

2. Satisfactory arrangements have been made that ensure the housing remains affordable in perpetuity and the development would comply with Policy HP7 criteria (b), (c) and (d).

3. The proposal complies with UDP Policy HP10.

Given the above, it is considered that the main issue to be whether the site is an appropriate location for a dwelling, particularly in terms of any effect on the character and appearance of the surrounding area, and having regard to the housing objectives of Local and National Policies.

6 Page 16

In support of the application the Agent has noted that “Powys has a much dispersed settlement pattern and many of the rural settlements identified and acknowledged by Powys County Council have no definitive boundaries and are sporadic in nature, with no central hub. This is no different in the Churchstoke area, with rural settlements of Pentre, Mellington and Cwm only a stone’s throw away from each other, with no identified hub…”

Having assessed the site context, it is noted that the nearest housing cluster is some 350- 400 metres west of the site which is considered to constitute the rural settlement of Mellington. The housing cluster of Pentre is approximately one kilometre distant in a north easterly direction and the cluster of houses known as Cwm over a kilometre distant in a south westerly direction.

It is considered that the site is physically detached from the nearest rural settlement of Mellington and within open countryside as defined by the adopted Powys Unitary Development Plan (UDP) 2010.

It is considered that the proposal is not integrated in the nearby settlement due to its detached location and as such is not in accordance with criterion 1 of Powys UDP policy HP9.

Visual Impact

Although the dwelling would be sited in a slight dip where the former (now derelict) agricultural building once sat, the proposal would be seen from distant viewpoints in a westerly direction. The proposal could be viewed from the road which passes through Mellington (approximately 350 metres directly west of the site) and from public viewpoints.

Policy HP9 states that the “dwelling would be sensitively located and designed and would be capable of being integrated into the settlement without unacceptably adversely affecting the amenity and character of the area”

The proposal is for a relatively large (8.2 metres to ridge), two-storey, four bedroomed, detached domestic dwelling. It is considered that the scale would have a harmful urbanising effect on the character and appearance of the area. It is acknowledged that planting and other landscape measures could in time provide some screening therefore some mitigation could be achieved. However, even this would not adequately mitigate the nature of the built development in this particular location.

In light of the above, the application does not accord with criteria 1 of Policy HP9 of the UDP in terms of unacceptably adversely affecting the amenity and character of the area.

Compliance with the Affordability Criteria

The eligibility criteria for affordable dwellings are set out within policy HP10 of the UDP. An affordable housing eligibility questionnaire has been completed and submitted by the applicant. According to the information supplied within and accompanying the questionnaire, it could be concluded that the applicant fulfils the criteria for an affordable home under the provisions of the above policy.

7 Page 17

In terms of compliance with the other requirements of HP10 and requirements set out within the Affordable Housing Supplementary Planning Guidance, it is noted that the proposed internal floor area of the proposed dwelling would be 130m² as permitted by the said policy. The Agent has confirmed in the supporting information that the dwelling will be “limited to a maximum floor area of 130 metre squared to ensure the dwelling remains affordable in perpetuity”.

In support of the application the Agent has submitted information to confirm that that the applicants are a young local couple who have been “born, bred and still work in the local area (and confirmed to be compliant with the affordability criteria (HP10). Both currently live in their respective parent’s house’s, and therefore in recent years have sought to buy a dwelling or plot in the local area to live independently together. Unfortunately the lack of affordable housing in the immediate area and the high costs of open market dwellings in the area, has meant that they are on their last option of building a local needs house on the family farm (within the settlement of Mellington)”

Having assessed the submission, it is considered that the applicant fulfils the criteria for an affordable home under the provisions of Policy HP10 of the UDP.

Highway access and parking

The proposal involves the construction of a vehicular access as well as parking and turning area within the application site. The access to the proposed property would be upgraded from the current grass track to form an adequate access route. This track would then link with the existing track/lane that currently serves Little Bank Farm and leads towards the junction with the C2149.

The submission indicates that improvements to the existing access at the junction directly south west of the “The Pullets" will be secured in order to achieve appropriate visibility.

The Highway Officer has recommended that the same highway conditions as provided for the previous application P/2015/0915 be used (as the same access improvement details have been re-submitted).

The Highway Officer (as previously P/2015/0915) confirms that due to the proposed visibility and surfacing improvement to the junction of the private access with the C2149, the Highway Authority is able to support the application and recommends a number of conditions to be attached to any decision notice.

In light of the above, it is considered that the application accords with Policy GP4 of the UDP.

Foul drainage

It is stated on the application form that the foul drainage is to be connected to the new septic tank. In support of the application Percolation tests for septic tank effluent drains have been provided.

Environmental Health Services have confirmed that they have no objections to the application.

8 Page 18

Heritage and Archaeological Assets

CADW and CPAT have both been consulted on the application.

CPAT have confirmed that there are no archaeological implications for the development at this location.

CADW confirm that the proposed development is located within the vicinity of the scheduled ancient monuments known as Offa’s Dyke: Cwm Section (MG151) and Offa’s Dyke: Mellington Hall Section Extending from Mellington hall Lodge to Lower Cwm (MG039). The proposed dwelling may be visible from Offa’s Dyke but it will be a solitary building on the site of a former structure and will therefore fit into the existing pattern of settlement in this area. Consequently there will be no impact on the setting of the monument.

In light of the above it is considered that the proposed development will have no impact on the historic or acheaological assets in the area or the site itself and therefore accords with Policies ENV 16 and 17 of the UDP.

Five Year Housing Supply:

Members are advised that a lawful decision to approve a departure can only be made where other material considerations outweigh the provisions of the development plan. Such material considerations include Planning Policy Wales (2016) and UDP policy HP3, which require the Local Planning Authority to ensure that sufficient land is genuinely available or will become available to provide a 5-year supply of land for housing.

The Powys JHLAS (2015) provides information on land availability and indicates a land supply of 1.9 years (as of 01/04/2015) within Powys. Whilst it is anticipated that the new local development plan will allocate land for residential development to address the shortfall in supply, the current figure is below the supply required by Planning Policy Wales and the Unitary Development Plan. Officers acknowledge that a number of departures have recently been justified and permitted on the grounds of housing land supply. Whilst it is accepted that these permissions will contribute to the supply of housing, the housing land supply within Powys remains below the 5 year supply required by national and local planning policy.

Paragraph 6.2 of Technical Advice Note 1: Joint Housing Land Availability Studies states as follows:

“The housing land supply figure should also be treated as a material consideration in determining planning applications for housing. Where the current study shows a land supply below the 5-yreas required or where the local planning authority has been unable to undertake a study, the need to increase supply should be given considerable weight when dealing with planning applications provided that the development would otherwise comply with development plan and national planning policies”.

9 Page 19

The above paragraph is clear that the lack of a 5-year supply is given considerable weight in favour of the development where it otherwise complies with the development plan and national policies. In this case the development does not comply (landscape and visual impact) and therefore less weight would be attributed to the contribution this development would make to housing land supply.

Conclusion

Notwithstanding the acceptability of the proposal in terms of other planning issues, it is considered that the erection of a dwelling within this rural setting would undermine the open, rural character of the area by introducing new built development into open countryside.

The dwelling would be in a relatively prominent position, visible from the surrounding area and would be out of character with the countryside in which it would be set. Development Management has taken into account all other matters raised. However, the personal circumstances of the applicant are not, in the view of officers, sufficiently exceptional to justify what would be an inappropriate form of development within the open countryside which is detached from the designated rural settlement.

In this context, the development would be in an inappropriate location for residential development and have a harmful impact on the character and appearance of the surrounding area. For these reasons, the proposal would be in conflict with local and national housing objectives and policies.

Recommendation

The proposed development is considered to be unjustified development in the open countryside. The recommendation is therefore one of refusal.

Reason:

1. The proposed dwelling is detached from the rural settlement of Mellington. The proposed development is therefore considered to be unjustified development in the open countryside. As such, the proposed development would be contrary to the provisions of Policies HP9, GP1, and ENV2 of Powys Unitary Development Plan (2010), Technical Advice Note 6 and Planning Policy Wales (2016).

Case Officer: Karen Probert- Planning Officer Tel: 01597827372 E-mail:[email protected]

10 Page 20 Page 21 This page is intentionally left blank PTLRW83 - 20163

Planning, Taxi Licensing and Rights of Way Committee Report

Application No: P/2016/0314 Grid Ref: 315025.76 281988.54

Community Beguildy Valid Date: Officer: Council: 18/03/2016 Holly-ann Hobbs

Applicant: Mr Edward Harris, The Hendre, Felindre, Knighton, LD7 1YT.

Location: The Hendre, Felindre, Knighton, LD7 1YT.

Proposal: Erection of 2 No. agricultural buildings for poulty rearign units with 5 No. feed bins, hardstanding and access

Application Application for Full Planning Permission Type:

The reason for Committee determination

Members are advised that the above application is accompanied by an Environmental Statement.

Site Location and Description

The site subject to this application is located within the open countryside, approximately 1.5 miles North West of Felindre, Knighton. The application site comprises of agricultural land which is bounded by agricultural fields to the west and south. Located to the north is the county class II highway (B4355) and to the east two existing broiler units consented under P/2013/0545 and P/2013/0546.

Consent is sought in full for the erection of a two broiler units measuring approximately 94.5 metres in length by 24.4 metres in width, the ridge and eaves height will measure 6.1 metres and 3 metres respectively. The proposed unit will comprise of polyester coated profile sheeting with a juniper green finish. The proposal further includes the erection of five feed bins measuring approximately 7.6 metres in height, boiler room, creation of new vehicular access and provision of hardstanding.

Access to the application site will be provided via a new access off the unclassified highway located to the east whilst HGV parking and turning provision will be provided within the application site boundary.

The proposed buildings will operate as broiler rearing units, rearing chicks from day old to finished table weight. The units will operate on an all in all out basis, with 43,750 birds per building. The enterprise operates on a 45 day growing cycle which includes a 7 day cleanout period.

Consultee Response

1 Page 23

Beguildy Community Council

Beguildy Community Council discussed the above application at its recent meeting and had no objections to the application for 2 poultry houses at the Hendre.

Highway Authority

Correspondence received 19th April 2016 -

The County Council as Highway Authority for the County Unclassified Highway, U1167

Wish the following recommendations/Observations be applied

Recommendations/Observations

This application should be refused.

Reasons

The junction of the county unclassified road with the county class II road through which all traffic to this site would pass is severely substandard in terms of visibility and layout. The additional traffic generated by this scheme would exacerbate these hazards to the detriment of highway safety.

The unclassified road is also substandard in terms of width and the vehicles serving this development will inflict damage to the verge banks resulting in further hazards on the highway.

Correspondence received 18th May 2016 -

I received this email from Ian last week but am not sure what it signifies!

As a plan it does not reflect the visibility splays shown on the approved drawings for the two sheds already built. It actually shortens the easterly one by quite some distance. It does show the area of solid wooden fencing rails that must be removed but I still remain concerned that the splays ‘approved’ by Dunya are not really what the HA would accept. There are other ways of ensuring that the verges do not become public areas or get parked upon indiscriminately.

Could you let me know if I am supposed to be offering a revised response to the latest application based upon this plan, or can I recommend inclusion of the visibility conditions again?

Do you need anything from me to ensure that Mr Harris progresses the works we discussed on site and secures a Street works licence before doing so?

Many thanks for any guidance you can offer.

Wales & West Utilities

2 Page 24

With regards to your above request, this is not Wales & West Utilities area. This falls within National Grid’s area, contact details for them below:

Email: [email protected] Telephone: 0800 688 588

If you have any further questions please don’t hesitate to contact me. Many thanks

Welsh Water

No comments received at the time of writing this report.

Land Drainage

No comments received at the time of writing this report.

Environmental Health

Correspondence received 15th April 2016 -

Has a manure management plan been submitted as part of this application? I can’t see one on the planning portal and the odour assessment is based purely on the potential odour from the sheds. The location and frequency of manure spreading can be an important factor in terms of odour, so this is something we usually insist on.

Correspondence received 22nd August 2016 -

Further to our discussion and my previous email, I have no problem with the manure management plan being made a condition of the planning permission, subject to the prohibition of on-site manure piles. As discussed, in our experience problems (odour, flies etc.) only tend to be an issue when manure is piled on site prior to spreading or transportation off site.

I can confirm that I am also satisfied with the noise impact assessment.

Therefore I have no objection to the application.

County Ecologist

Thank you for consulting me with regards to Planning Application P/2016/0314 which concerns the erection of 2 No. agricultural buildings for poultry rearing units with 5 No. feed bins, hardstanding and access.

The proposal is for an additional 2 broiler rearing units at the site, the site currently operates 2 broiler units with a total of 87,500 birds on site. The proposed addition will increase the number of birds on site to 175,000.

Due to the scale of the proposed development the application an Environmental Statement has been submitted with the application chapter 12 provides a summary of the potential ecological impacts and proposed mitigation measures, a more detailed assessment has been

3 Page 25

provided in the accompanying Ecological Appraisal Report by ACD Environmental dated December 2015.

An Extended Phase 1 Habitat Survey was undertaken in December 2015, the report identifies that the sites comprises a greenfield site consisting of improved sheep grazed grassland bordered by boundary hedgerows and a stream.

The River Wye SAC is approximately 4.4km south west of the proposed development. The River Teme SSSI lies approximately 60m to the north of the development and the River Ithon SSSI lies approximately 4.4km south west of the proposed development. No non-statutory designated sites are present within 2km of the proposed development. In addition areas of Ancient Semi-natural Woodland have been identified within 2km of the proposed development.

The watercourse along the eastern boundary is a tributary of the River Teme SSSI. The Environmental Statement and Ecological Appraisal Report both identify that a 5m buffer zone will be maintained along the watercourse to protect it from potential pollution during construction and operation of the proposed development. A detailed plan has been submitted outlining the propose drainage system and associated soakaway, this is directed away from the watercourse. NRW have identified in their response that they consider that a buffer zone of at least 10m should be maintained either side of the watercourse and that a planning condition should be included to secure this.

No ponds were identified within 500m of the site and the ecology report determines that whilst suitable terrestrial habitat is present for great crested newts given the absence of suitable breeding sites the application site provides negligible potential to support great crested newts.

No evidence of badger activity was observed during the survey and no badger setts were found within or adjacent to the site, the nearest record identified for a badger sett is approximately 600m form the site. The site has been identified as potential habitat for foraging/commuting badgers.

No suitable features for use by roosting bats were identified during the survey on-site trees were categorised as having no potential to support roosting bats due to lack of suitable features. The boundary hedgerows and watercourse were considered to have potential of foraging and commuting bats – the grassland is considered to be of low value for foraging bats due to lack of diversity and associated invertebrates.

No records of Dormice were identified within 2km of the proposed development and the condition of the boundary hedgerows was considered to reduce the suitability of the site for this species due to the lack of connectivity with the wider landscape.

No records of freshwater pearl mussel were identified within 2km, however due to the connectivity of the watercourse with the River Teme SSSI and the River Clun impacts from the proposed development could be possible – this species is highly susceptible to pollution impacts.

No evidence of otter activity or suitable breeding or resting sites were identified during the survey, however otters are considered to be present on the majority of watercourse within

4 Page 26

Powys and therefore it is possible that otters commute along the watercourse adjacent to the site.

The site was assessed has having negligible potential to support reptiles due to the lack of suitable habitat.

No records of water vole were identified within 2km of the site, no evidence of their presence and lack of suitable habitat for this species has led to the conclusion that the site has negligible potential to support water vole.

No records of white clawed crayfish were identified within 2km, however they are known to be present in the River Teme and due to the connectivity of the watercourse with the River Teme impacts from the proposed development could be possible – this species is highly susceptible to pollution impacts.

Section 6 of the report outlines the measures recommended to minimise any potential impacts identified as a result of the Extended Phase 1 Habitat Survey. Point 6.13 recommends that a buffer zone of 5m is maintained along the watercourse on the eastern boundary, point 6.14 identifies that this should confirmed by NRW as acceptable – as identified above NRW have recommended that a buffer zone of 10m is required to be maintained and that this is secured through an appropriately worded condition. Point 6.25 identifies that sensitive lighting design will be required to minimise impacts to nocturnal wildlife commuting or foraging in the local area, NRW have requested that a lighting scheme is requested though an appropriately worded condition.

The other measures outlined within this section are considered to be appropriate and achievable to minimise any potential impacts from the proposed development.

Section 6, point 6.48 of the Ecological Appraisal report also includes biodiversity enhancement recommendations, the provision of biodiversity enhancement measures is welcomed in accordance with the requirements of Section 6 of Part 1 of the Environment (Wales) Act 2016 (which replaces the NERC Duty 2006 in Wales) Local Authorities to Maintain and Enhance biodiversity through all of its functions – this includes the planning process.

Having reviewed the Ecological Appraisal and associated measures to minimise the impacts to habitats and species potentially present or affected by the proposed development it is considered that the survey effort is appropriate and in accordance with National Guidelines and that the measures identified with regards to minimising impacts are acceptable. NRW have identified that due to lack of specific details regarding mitigation and enhancement measures that a condition should be included to require the submission of a detailed mitigation and enhancement plan to illustrate the measures outlined within the Ecological Appraisal Report.

A Report on the Modelling of the Dispersion and Deposition of Ammonia from the Existing and Proposed Broiler Rearing Units produced by AS Modelling & Data Ltd has been submitted to support the application. As identified in the Design and Access Statement and confirmed in the response received from NRW a permit has been issued by NRW for the proposed poultry unit extension. The permit process has considered the potential for the proposed development to result in negative impacts to designated sites from aerial emission

5 Page 27

and have concluded that there would not be any likely significant impact form the proposed development.

NRW have identified that the following will need to be required through appropriately worded conditions: · A Pollution Prevention Plan for both the construction and operation phase of the proposed development to ensure the protection of the adjacent watercourse. · A Detailed Manure Management Plan consistent with the requirements of the Code of Good Agricultural Practice

Having reviewed the application and the submitted information I agree with NRW’s comments that these plans will need to be required though an appropriately worded condition.

Therefore should you be minded to approve the application I recommend inclusion of the following conditions:

Prior to commencement of development, a detailed Biodiversity Mitigation and Enhancement Plan illustrating the measures outlined in Section 6 of the Ecological Appraisal Report by ACD Environmental dated December 2015 shall be submitted to the Local Planning Authority and implemented as approved and maintained thereafter unless otherwise agreed in writing with the LPA.

Reason: To comply with Powys County Council’s UDP Policies SP3, ENV3, ENV5 and ENV7 in relation to The Natural Environment and to meet the requirements of Planning Policy Wales (Edition 8, January 2016), TAN 5: Nature Conservation and Planning and Section 6 of the Environment (Wales) Act 2016.

Prior to commencement of development a detailed Drainage and Pollution Prevention Plan shall be submitted to the Local Planning Authority and implemented as approved and maintained thereafter unless otherwise agreed in writing with the LPA.

Reason: To comply with Powys County Council’s UDP Policies SP3, ENV3, and ENV5 in relation to The Natural Environment and to meet the requirements of Planning Policy Wales (Edition 8, January 2016), TAN 5: Nature Conservation and Planning and Section 6 of the Environment (Wales) Act 2016.

Prior to the commencement of development a detailed Manure Management Plan outlining measures for storage and spreading of manure in accordance with the requirements of DEFRA Code of Good Agricultural Practice for the Protection of Air, Water and Soil shall be submitted to the Local Planning Authority and implemented as approved and maintained thereafter unless otherwise agreed in writing with the LPA.

To ensure protection of the River Teme SSSI a buffer zone of at least 10 metres will be maintained using a fence line either side of the watercourse along the eastern boundary of the site

6 Page 28

Prior to the commencement of development a detailed Lighting Design Scheme to take any impacts on nocturnal wildlife into consideration shall be shall be submitted to the Local Planning Authority and implemented as approved and maintained thereafter unless otherwise agreed in writing with the LPA.

Reason: To comply with Powys County Council’s UDP Policies SP3, ENV3, ENV6 and ENV7 in relation to The Natural Environment and to meet the requirements of Planning Policy Wales (Edition 8, January 2016), TAN 5: Nature Conservation and Planning and Section 6 of the Environment (Wales) Act 2016.

Natural Resources Wales

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

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

We have significant concerns with the proposed development as submitted.

We recommend that planning permission should only be given if the following requirements can be met. If these requirements are not met then we would object to this application.

Protected Sites: Air Quality

A permit has been issued for this poultry unit. NRW determined as part of the permitting process that the unit will not have a significant impact on any designated sites in terms of the aerial emissions from this installation.

Protected Sites: River Teme SSSI

Given the proximity of the installation to the River Temem SSSI and the presence of otter in this area which is a feature of the SSSI, NRW agree with the proposed controls on light pollution mentioned in the Ecology Report. Detail on the methods of control are very limited in the report and therefore NRW recommend that the submission of a lighting plan to be agreed with NRW be made a condition of the planning permission.

The stream on the east of the development site is a feeder to the River Teme SSSI. The Ecology Report (6.9, 6.14, 6.36, 6.37, 6.44 and 6.45) proposes a streamside buffer and fencing in order to protect the stream, the protect species it supports and the features of the River Teme SSSI, against the effects of construction and operation of the new unit. In addition to the implementation of PPG 5 NRW advise a planning condition requiring the

7 Page 29

proposed fence line be placed 10m either side of the watercourse feeding the River Teme SSSI to provide a 10m protection buffer.

Given the proximity of the shed and access track to the feeder stream of the river Teme SSSI it is recommended that a detailed drainage and pollution prevention plan (to be agreed by the local authority in consultation with NRW) be submitted in support of this planning application and provided it can be agreed, that is implementation be made a condition of the planning permission. The plan should explain what measures the applicant will put in place during construction and operation to prevent the water quality of the River Teme being impacted by this development.

Water Quality

The applicant has provided some information about the planned drainage system and have mentioned that there will be a soakaway system for the clean water and a dirty water tank (25,000 litres) for the dirty water. NRW would advise that the dirty water tank which will be installed as part of this proposal should be constructed to meet SSAFO Regulations (Wales) 2010. It is understood that the external concrete apron around the shed will drain to the dirty water tank when the sheds are being cleared out and the rest of the time the apron will drain to the soak away and that this will be controlled by a switch on the drainage system. It is important that this system is maintained to ensure that dirty water from the apron is not accidentally directed to the soakaway as the nearby watercourse and SSSI support features which are extremely sensitive to water pollution.

It is noted that the applicant has submitted a detailed plan showing the layout of the proposed drainage system and the soakaway from the new building is directed away from the adjacent course, which is in line with NRW advice.

The work should also be compliant with all appropriate pollution control measures to ensure that the water environment (both groundwater and surface water) is not polluted during construction.

Manure Management Plan

It is estimated that the new unit will generate 120 tonnes of manure per cycle (8 cycles per year will lead to 960 tonnes per year) and that this will be transported for field storage and disposal though spreading on operator controlled land.

It is not clear from the supporting information if the applicant has sufficient land to spread the manures produced by the proposed development at a rate that is consistent with the Code of Good Agricultural Practice (CoGAP) recommended upper limit of 250kg Nitrogen /ha. Therefore it is advised that the applicant submit manure management plan which confirm this. The plan should consider all of the waste generated on the farm in combination with the new proposed unit. It is recommended that the submission of a Manure Management Plan be made a condition of the planning permission.

Consideration must also be given to the phosphate contained with the manures and residual amounts in the soils to ensure that crop requirement is not exceeded. It is recommended that routine soil sampling is undertaken for pH, phosphate and magnesium, and that manure and fertiliser application rates be adjusted as required to meet the requirement of the crop.

8 Page 30

The Plan should identify areas where manure spreading should not take place including around ditches, watercourses and sensitive sites (including the nearby SSSI). It is advised that a 10m buffer should be maintained around watercourses and any other sensitive areas. No spreading should take place within 50m off springs, wells and boreholes (CoGAP).

Spreading of manure should be carried out in accordance with the CoGAP (i.e. not on wet, waterlogged, frozen, snow covered or steeply sloping ground).

Please note that CoGAP advises that the location of temporary field heaps should be located in the same position for up to 12 months with no return for 2 years. Field heaps should be located to avoid run off to any watercourse or ground waters being located at least 10m from any watercourses (including land drains), and 50m from any well, spring or borehole.

Environmental Permitting Regulations

It is understood that the applicant has applied for a new EPR permit as the extension to the poultry unit is in excess of the threshold on 40,000 poultry.

The grant of planning permission does not permit activities that require consent, licence or permit under other legislation. It is the applicant’s responsibility to ensure that all relevant authorisations are obtained before any work commences on site.

Protected Species

NRW have records of bats (1.9km), otter (1.9km) and great crested newts (3.9km) in the vicinity but no records of any protected species within the site.

NRW have reviewed the plans and the proposed development site appears to be located entirely within an improved agricultural field. The development location does not appear to affect any hedges or mature trees and there are no ponds within 500m of the proposed unit. Provided that the applicant does not intend on removing any mature trees as part of this development it is unlikely that the proposed poultry unit will affect bats.

NRW have reviewed the submitted ecology report (Ref: Perry, N. (2015). The Hendre, Felindre. ACD Environmental Limited. Unpublished. Report No. IPA21093 and in our view it is satisfactory for the purposes of determining the impact of the scheme on protected species. NRW wish to confirm that NRW consider that the proposal is not likely to affect European or British protected species provided the mitigation measures laid out in the report are implemented.

The block plan in the ecological Report (Appendix 2) which illustrates the proposed mitigation and enhancement measures is very limited. NRW advise that the submission and implementation of a detailed plan (to be agreed) which illustrates all the mitigation and enhancement measures outlined in the report be made a condition of the planning permission.

Natural Environment and Rural Communities (NERC) Act

9 Page 31

Please note that we have not considered possible effects on all local or regional interests, including those relating to the upkeep, management and creation of habitat for wild birds. Therefore, you should not rule out the possibility of adverse effects on such interests, which would be relevant to your Authority’s general duty to have regard to conserving biodiversity, as set out in section 40 of the Natural Environment and Rural Communities (NERC) Act (2006). This advice includes any consideration of the planned provision and management of “linear” and “stepping stone” habitats.

To comply with your authority's duty under section 40 of the NERC Act, to have regard to conserving biodiversity, your decision should take account of possible adverse effects on such interests. We recommend that you seek further advice from your authority's internal ecological adviser and/or third sector nature conservation organisations such as the local wildlife trust, RSPB, etc. The Wales Biodiversity Partnership's web site has guidance for assessing proposals that have implications for section 42 habitats and species (www.biodiversitywales.org.uk). In summary, we have significant concerns with the proposed development as submitted.

We recommend that planning permission should only be given if the requirements outlined above can be met. If these requirements are not met then we would object to this application.

Welsh Government Planning Division

No comments received at the time of writing this report.

Councillor John Brunt – Local Member

Correspondence received 4th April 2016 - You will remember that when the planning application was brought to the planning committee for the first units on this site it was approved by the chairman’s’ casting vote against officers’ recommendation.

As you might imagine there is strong feeling in the area about this second application and I have been asked if it will be a delegated decision or be referred to the committee.

I would be grateful for your advice.

Representations

At the time of writing this report, 11 letters of objection have been received by Development Management. The concerns expressed therein can be summarised as follows;

. Adverse impact on highway safety and movement due to increased traffic; . Unacceptable adverse impact on residential amenity – noise and odour; . Pollution of the environment – manure spreading; . Further expansion of the site – potential precedent; . Unacceptable landscape and visual impact; . Failure of the applicant to adhere to conditions attached to earlier consents; . Cumulative impact.

Planning History

10 Page 32

P/2013/0545 - Full: Erection of an agricultural building for broiler rearing, feed bins, hard standing and new highway access at Unit 1, Land South West of Lane House,The Hendre, Felindre, Knighton, LD7 1YT. Approved.

P/2013/0546 - Full: Erection of an agricultural building for broiler rearing, feed bins, hard standing and new highway access at Unit 2, Land South West of Lane House,The Hendre, Felindre, Knighton, LD7 1YT. Approved.

P/2014/0868 - Lawful Development Certificate (proposed): Installation of solar panels on roof or agricultural building at The Hendre, Felindre. Approved.

AGRI/2014/0029 - Erection of agricultural general storage building. Approved.

NMA/2015/0085 - Non Material Amendment to planning permission P/2013/0545 to allow amendment to height and location of feed bins in connection with poultry unit 1. Approved.

NMA/2015/0092 - Non Material Amendment to planning permission P/2013/0546 to allow amendment to height and location of feed bins in connection with poultry unit 2. Approved.

Principal Planning Constraints

River Teme SSSI within close proximity of the application site.

Principal Planning Policies

National Planning Policy

- Planning Policy Wales (8th Edition, 2016) - Technical Advice Note 5 – Nature Conservation and Planning (2009) - Technical Advice Note 6 – Planning for Sustainable Rural Communities (2010) - Technical Advice Note 11 – Noise (1997) - Technical Advice Note 12 – Design (2016) - Technical Advice Note 13 – Tourism (1997) - Technical Advice Note 15 – Development and Flood Risk (2004) - Technical Advice Note 16 – Sport, Recreation and Open Space (2009) - Technical Advice Note 18 – Transport (2007) - Technical Advice Note 23 – Economic Development (2014)

- Welsh Office Circular 11/99 – Environmental Impact Assessment

- Natural Environment and Rural Communities Act (2006)

Local Planning Policy

- Powys Unitary Development Plan (2010)

SP3 – Natural, Historic and Built Heritage SP4 – Economic and Employment Developments GP1 – Development Control

11 Page 33

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

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

Officer Appraisal

Introduction

Environmental Impact Assessment Regulations 2016

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

Schedule 1 of the Regulations states that the threshold for the “intensive rearing of poultry is 85,000 places for broilers or 60,000 for hens”. The proposed bird capacity is 87,500 birds (43,750 per building) and therefore an Environmental Impact Assessment is a mandatory requirement.

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

12 Page 34

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

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

Permitting Regulations

Members are advised that the existing broiler installation is permitted by Natural Resources Wales in accordance with the Environment Permitting Regulations (EPR) 2012 given the current bird capacity. A further permit application was submitted and a permit issued by Natural Resources Wales in respect of the proposed expansion on 9th March 2016.

Planning Policy Wales states that Local Planning Authorities and Natural Resources Wales should work closely to ensure that conditions attached to planning consents and those attached to Environmental Permits are complementary however should not duplicate one another. Planning Authorities need to be satisfied that proposals are capable of effective regulations and Natural Resources Wales should assist in establishing this position. Good practice suggests that the parallel tracking of planning and environmental permitting and a planning application should be encouraged.

Whilst emissions in respect of noise and odour are material planning considerations, Members are advised that it is Natural Resources Wales’ role to determine if the operation can be managed on an ongoing basis to prevent or minimise pollution. On the basis that an IPPC permit has been granted by Natural Resources Wales for the proposed expansion, Officers are satisfied that emissions resulting from the intensive livestock installation are capable of being regulated thus minimising potential environmental impact.

Principal of Development

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

Farm Diversification

The applicants currently operate two existing broiler units at the Hendre (adjoining site) with a total of 87, 500 birds accommodated. It is proposed to extend the existing poultry enterprise to support the current farm diversification project.

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

13 Page 35

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

Landscape and Visual Impact

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

Landmap defines the area surrounding the application site as an attractive and coherent landscape, well composed upland valley landform with well defined strong and traditional patterns of small scale fields which is awarded a high visual and sensory value. The application site sits at the valley bottom and is bounded by enclosed fields of semi-improved grassland.

The application is accompanied by a Landscape and Visual Impact Assessment which comprises of a written assessment and accompanied photomontages. The photomontages assess the potential visual impact from identified receptors including the public highway and existing rights of way network. Whilst acknowledging the visibility of the proposed development within the landscape, the assessment suggests that its grouping with the existing complex together with existing landscape features will mitigate potential harm. Furthermore, the assessment considers the proposal to be in keeping with the agricultural nature of the host landscape when viewed within the wider context.

The existing broiler development is detached from the main farmstead which is located to the north east, (approximately 390 metres) and separated by the public highway. It is proposed to erect two additional units on land to the west of the existing broiler complex within an agricultural field. The topography of the application site is relatively flat whilst existing field boundaries comprise of established hedgerows and trees. The proposed units will be sited parallel to the eastern site boundary, with the gable elevations fronting the county highway located to the north.

The application is accompanied by a landscaping scheme which details the retention of existing hedgerows together with the implementation of additional landscaping along the northern, western and southern site boundaries to enhance and supplement the established boundaries.

The Powys Unitary Development Plan through policy EC9 seeks to ensure that the harm from new agricultural buildings is minimised through sensitive design and siting. Guidance within EC9 suggests that wherever possible, new buildings should be grouped with existing buildings. Whilst Officers acknowledge that the proposed broiler development represents a substantial addition to the rural landscape, given the proposed grouping, it is considered that the proposal is capable of being accommodated without causing unacceptable harm to the character and appearance of the surrounding landscape. Notwithstanding the prominent location adjacent to the public highway, the proposed units would be largely screened by the existing units when approaching the site from the east (Knighton direction) and would be

14 Page 36

viewed against the backdrop of the existing units when travelling from the west. Existing and proposed landscaping would offer screening opportunities from sensitive locations such as nearby residential properties and public highway whilst further assimilating the development within the wider landscape.

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

Transport Impacts

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

Access to the application site will be provided via the existing junction of the B4355 and U1167. A new vehicular access will be provided off the unclassified highway whilst parking and turning provision will be provided within the application site boundary. The proposed development will generate approximately 112 movements per flock totalling 896 movements per annum (8 flocks per annum). This represents a 45% increase in vehicular movements.

The junction of the county class II and unclassified highway was subject to surface, widening and visibility improvements as part the earlier approved schemes (P/2013/0545 & 0546). Following an initial site visit, the Highway Authority noted that the visibility splays had not been provided as per the requirements of the aforementioned planning permissions however following a further site meeting and discussions, it was determined that this matter could be appropriately addressed through the imposition of suitable conditions on any subsequent grant of consent.

Unfortunately, at the time of writing, revised conditions have not been received by Development Management. Nevertheless, based upon the consultation responses received to date, Officers are satisfied that an adequate means of access is capable of being provided as per the requirements of policy GP4. As such, Officers will look to secure appropriate conditions in advance of the Committee Meeting and update Members accordingly.

Biodiversity and Ecology

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

15 Page 37

indirectly, the nature conservation interest of national nature reserves or sites of special scientific interest.

The River Wye SAC is located approximately 4.4km south west of the proposed development. The River Teme SSSI lies approximately 60 metres to the north of the development whilst the River Ithon SSSI lies approximately 4.4km south west of the proposed development. The watercourse which runs along the eastern boundary of the application site is a tributary of the River Teme SSSI. It is considered by Officers that the key impacts associated with the proposed development include impacts to water quality through surface water run-off, airbourne emissions and manure spreading.

With respect to the River Wye SAC, given the noted distance and advice received from Natural Resources Wales (NRW) and the County Ecologist, it is not considered that the proposed broiler development will have an unacceptable adverse impact on the integrity of the designated site both individually or in combination with existing, proposed and consented intensive livestock installations.

The application is accompanied by an Extended Phase 1 Habitat Survey which assesses the potential impact of the development on the River Teme SSSI and further proposes mitigation to avoid possible pollution during the construction of the units and operation thereafter. Following consultation, Members are advised that both NRW and the County Ecologist have offered no objection to the proposed development subject to further details being secured by appropriate conditions. Such information includes the provision of a 10 metre buffer between the application site and proposed units, a comprehensive pollution prevention plan together with a manure management plan. Subject to the above details being secured, Officers consider that potential pollution resulting from run-off and manure spreading can be adequately controlled.

A Report on the Modelling of the Dispersion and Deposition of Ammonia from the Existing and Proposed Broiler Rearing Units produced by AS Modelling & Data Ltd also accompanies the planning application. As identified in the Design and Access Statement and confirmed in the response received from NRW, a permit has been issued by NRW for the proposed poultry unit extension. The permit process has considered the potential for the proposed development to result in negative impacts to designated sites from aerial emission and has concluded that there would not be any likely significant impact form the proposed development.

Subject to the above and notwithstanding the third party concerns expressed, Officers do not consider that the proposed poultry development will adversely impact upon the designated sites mentioned above. The proposal is therefore considered to be compliant with policies ENV3, ENV4 and ENV5 of the Powys UDP, Technical Advice Note 5 – Nature Conservation and Planning (TAN5) and Planning Policy Wales (PPW).

Residential Amenity

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

16 Page 38

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

Noise and Odour

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

As with the existing units, the proposed buildings will have 15 extract fans located within each unit with roof mounted duct terminations at approximately 7.1 metres above ground level. The application is accompanied by ‘Plant Noise Assessment’ prepared by Matrix Acoustic Design Consultations, dated 11th March 2016. This report considers the operation of the fans on the poultry house and the potential for noise from their operation to harm amenity. Within the plant noise assessment, there are three residential properties identified within approximately 450 metres of the application site, namely;

. (A) Lane House (within applicants’ ownership) – approximately 400 metres to the east; . (B) Little House (un-associated property) – approximately 300 metres to the west; . (C) Hendy (un-associated property) – approximately 450 metres to the north west.

At the identified properties, the noise assessment indicates that subject to attenuation features being fitted, the noise levels will not exceed the agreed day and night rating level limits. Members are advised that this assessment has been considered by the Councils’ Environmental Health Officer and no objections have been received at the time of writing this report.

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

The application is supported by an “Odour Dispersion Modelling Study” prepared by AS Modelling & Data, dated 12th December 2014. This assessment uses the standardised approach to odour assessment and the results of the model runs are presented in a report. The conclusion states the following: “The modelling predicts that at under the proposed scenario, the ground level odour concentrations in the area surrounding the poultry units would increase. In most case, odour concentration would remain below the Environment Agency’s benchmark for moderately offensive odours, a 98th percentile hourly mean of 3.0 ouE/m3 over a one year period. However, at receptor 2 (Lane House, within applicants ownership), the predicted 98th percentile hourly mean odour concentration is slightly in excess of 3 ouE/m3”.

17 Page 39

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

Other impacts on living conditions

Issues such as rodents and flies also have the potential to adversely affect the living conditions of nearby residential properties. The Environmental Impact Assessment confirms that the building will be baited in order to control rodents whilst the regular cleaning of the building will control the fly breeding cycle. Officers consider that subject to appropriate conditions these matters can be adequately addressed and managed thus avoiding any unacceptable impact upon neighbouring properties.

Conclusion

On the basis of the information submitted and responses received, it is considered unlikely that the proposed development will have an unacceptable adverse impact on the amenities enjoyed by occupants of neighbouring properties. Therefore, notwithstanding the concerns expressed, Development Management considers the proposal to be in accordance with planning policy, in particular UDP policy GP1.

RECOMMENDATION

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

The Environmental Information has been taken into account in reaching the above recommendation. If approved, this statement will be included on the decision notice as required by the Town and Country (Environmental Impact Assessment) (England & Wales) Regulations 1999, Regulation 3(2), which states that: “The relevant planning authority or the Secretary of State or an inspector shall not grant planning permission pursuant to an application to which this regulation applies unless they have first taken the environmental information into consideration, and they shall state in their decision that they have done so.”

Condition

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

2. The development shall be carried out strictly in accordance with the documents received 18th March 2016 (Design & Access Statement and Environmental Statement), plans received 18th March 2016 (drawing no’s IP/HP/01, IP/HP/02 and IP/HP/03).

18 Page 40

3. Notwithstanding the details submitted, a landscape phasing scheme (implementation scheme) for the landscaping scheme as detailed on drawing no. IPA20193 11 (sheets 1 & 2) shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority prior to the commencement of development. The landscaping scheme shall thereafter be fully implemented in accordance with the phasing scheme (implementation scheme) so approved.

4. The approved landscaping scheme as implemented by the landscape phasing scheme (condition 3) shall thereafter be maintained for a period of five years. Such maintenance is to include the replacement of any plant/tree/shrub/hedge that is removed, significantly damaged, diseased or dying, with plants/trees/shrubs/hedges of the same species and size within the next planting season, unless otherwise agreed in writing by the Local Planning Authority.

5. Prior to the commencement of building works full details of the colour of the external materials proposed in the construction of the application buildings and feed bins shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The development shall thereafter be fully implemented in accordance with the details so approved.

6. No development shall begin until a Drainage and Pollution Prevention Plan has been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The Pollution Prevention Plan shall include all measures to reduce pollution of existing watercourses during the construction and operation of the poultry development hereby approved. Thereafter, the development shall be undertaken strictly in accordance with the Pollution Prevention Plan so approved.

7. Notwithstanding the provisions of the Town and Country Planning (General Permitted Development) Order 1995 (or any order revoking and re-enacting that Order with or without modification), no extensions or alterations to the unit shall be erected without the consent of the Local Planning Authority.

8. Notwithstanding the provisions of the Town and Country Planning (Use Classes) Order 1987 and the Town and Country Planning (General Permitted Development) Order 1995 as amended or in any provision equivalent to that Class in any statutory instrument revoking and re-enacting that Order with or without modification, the premises shall not be used for any purpose other than that hereby authorised.

9. Notwithstanding the details submitted, a manure management plan shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority prior to the first operational use of the poultry unit hereby approved. The manure management plan shall include details of manure spreading together with means of transportation and storage. The development shall not be undertaken other than in full accordance with the manure management scheme as approved. The manure management scheme shall be fully implemented as approved in perpetuity.

10. The development hereby approved shall be undertaken strictly in accordance with Section 6 of the Ecological Appraisal prepared by ACD Environmental, dated December 2015 unless otherwise agreed in writing by the Local Planning Authority.

11. No development shall commence on site until a scaled plan detailing the implementation of 10 metre buffer separating the application site and adjoining watercourse has been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The plan shall

19 Page 41

include details of the proposed buffer together with a maintenance scheme. Thereafter, the buffer shall be erected in accordance with the details so approved prior to the commencement of development and retained as such in perpetuity.

12. Prior to the commencement of development a detailed Lighting Design Scheme shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The scheme shall include details of the lighting location, size, projection and levels of illumination. Thereafter, the development shall be undertaken strictly in accordance with the details so approved.

Reasons:

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

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

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

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

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

6. To safeguard the environment in accordance with policies ENV3, ENV4, ENV5 & ENV6 of the Powys Unitary Development Plan (March 2010) and Technical Advice Note 5: Conservation and Planning (2009) and Planning Policy Wales (2016).

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

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

9. To protect the local amenities of the local residents and prevent pollution of the environment in accordance with policies GP1, EC1, EC10 and DC9 of the Powys Unitary Development Plan (March 2010), Technical Advice Note 5 – Nature Conservation and Planning (2009) and Planning Policy Wales (2016).

10. To comply with Powys County Council’s UDP Policies SP3, ENV3 and ENV7 in relation to The Natural Environment and to meet the requirements of Planning Policy Wales (Edition 8, January 2016), TAN 5: Nature Conservation and Planning and the NERC Act 2006.

20 Page 42

11. In order to safeguard the integrity of designated sites in accordance with policies SP3, ENV3, ENV4 and ENV5 of the Powys Unitary Development Plan (2010), Technical Advice Note 5 – Nature Conservation and Planning (2009), Planning Policy Wales (Edition 8, January 2016) and the NERC Act 2006.

12. To comply with Powys County Council’s UDP Policies SP3, ENV3 and ENV7 in relation to The Natural Environment and to meet the requirements of Planning Policy Wales (Edition 8, January 2016), TAN 5: Nature Conservation and Planning and the NERC Act 2006.

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

21 Page 43 Page 44 PTLRW83 - 20164

Planning, Taxi Licensing and Rights of Way Committee Report

Application No: P/2016/0324 Grid Ref: 321005.54 323474.43

Community Llansantffraid Valid Date: Officer: Council: 05/04/2016 Kate Bowen

Applicant: Mr Doug Williams, Bryn Vyrnwy, Llansantffraid-ym-Mechain, Powys, SY22 6AY

Location: Haulage Depot, The Old Station Yard, Pen y Bont, Oswestry

Proposal: Erection of up to 5 dwellings, construction of vehicular access and installation of septic tank (outline)

Application Application for Outline Planning Permission Type:

Reason for Committee determination

The Local Member has exercised their right to call-in the application for determination by the Committee.

Site Location and Description

The application site extends to 0.45 hectares and is located to the south of the settlement boundary of Pen-y-bont Llanerch Emrys, on the western side of the C2003 class three highway. To the north east of the application site, across the C2003 highway, there is a cluster of properties known as The Old New Inn and New Inn Cottages. The planning history of the site indicates that planning permission was granted for ‘use of land as heavy goods haulage depot’ in 1993 and the site is currently vacant with a portakabin on site. The site consists of a mixed hard surfaced and vegetated area bound by fencing along the eastern boundary, a hedgerow along the southern boundary and hedging and trees along the northern and western boundaries.

The application is submitted in outline with access to be considered at the outline stage for the erection of up to five detached dwellings with various indicative scales as set out below:

 One, three bedroom detached house (147 square metres, 8.4m x 9.4m); and  Four, four bedroom detached houses (141 square metres to 189 square metres, 8.7m x 11m to 11m x 12m).

Eaves height will be approximately 4.8m with ridge heights of up to 9m. There is a mixture of detached and attached garages indicated to have eaves heights of 2.2m and ridge heights of 5.35m.

The indicative layout indicates that access would be gained off the C2003 highway leading to turning and parking facilities for each dwelling. During the processing of the application, the

1 Page 45

proposed method of drainage has been amended from a septic tank with discharge to a soakaway on site to discharge to the watercourse to the north west of the application site.

Consultee Response

Llansantffraid Community Council

At a recent meeting of the above council, planning application P2016/0324 was discussed and the council is in favour of supporting this application as it was felt that the area is an eyesore and needs to be tidied up and also the strength of the bridge was questioned in regards to HGVs travelling over it.

Llangedwyn Community Council

Llangedwyn Community Council is in favour of additional housing in the area, particularly if it meets the needs of the local community. We are, therefore, in support of the outline application and look forward to seeing more detailed plans if and when available.

PCC Building Control

Please note building regulations required on this application.

PCC Highway Authority

The HA is unable to support this application as the site is simply not sustainable and has no pedestrian links back into the village. I appreciate it has a former use but the location of this access for residential purposes is too close to the junction of the C2003/U2043 as it would cause driving confusion as to when a vehicle is entering which road.

PCC Land Drainage

Thank you for consulting the LLFA.

In respect to flood risk, I note that the TAN 15 Development Advise Maps designate part of the development site as category B. You may want to consult NRW, particularly with reference to any Section 105(2) Survey and indicative flood map data.

With regard to surface water drainage, the proposal is to utilise soakaway systems. The use of soakaways is commended and should be investigated in the first instance for surface water disposal. Porosity tests and the sizing of the soakaways should be designed in accordance with BRE Digest 365 to cater for a 1 in 100 year return storm event plus an allowance of 30% for climate change.

Full details, calculations and location of the porosity tests and the proposed soakaways should be submitted and approved in writing by the LPA.

If soakaways are not feasible, drainage calculations to limit the discharge rate from the site equivalent to a Greenfield run-off rate. The attenuation drainage system should be designed so that storm events of up to 1 in 100 year + 30% for climate change and will not cause flooding of any property either within the proposed development or any other in the vicinity.

2 Page 46

There must be no discharge to a surface water body or sewer that results from the first 5mm of any rainfall event.

Although rainwater harvesting for the use of washing purposes is to be encouraged, it cannot be taken into account when sizing an attenuation system as the storage facility may be full when a storm event occurs.

No surface water run-off shall flow onto the public highway.

Reason: To ensure that the proposed surface water drainage systems for the site are fully compliant with regulations and are of robust design.

Informative: The applicant should consider employing measures such as the following: · Water Butts · Permeable paving on any new driveway/paved area · Greywater recycling system

Wales & West Utilities

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

Safe digging practices, in accordance with HS(G)47, must be used to verify and establish the actual position of mains, pipes, services and other apparatus on site before any mechanical plant is used. It is your responsibility to ensure that this information is provided to all persons (either direct labour or contractors) working for you on or near gas apparatus.

Please note that the plans are only valid for 28 days from the date of issue and updated plans must be requested before any work commences on site if this period has expired.

Severn Trent Water

Thank you for the opportunity to comment on this planning application. Please find our response noted below:

Waste Water Comments:

With Reference to the above planning application the company’s observations regarding sewerage are as follows.

I can confirm we have no comment to make as no foul sewage or surface water is to discharge to the public sewerage system.

PCC Environmental Health

First response:

3 Page 47

I will require more information regarding the plant and percolation test results for the proposed development.

Has the applicant considered a private treatment plant and a discharge into the river?

Second response:

I did a site visit on the 3rd of May and saw the percolation test holes. Whilst the ground conditions on the site should not differ the holes have been dug where the proposed dwellings are to be placed. The soil appeared to compromise heavily of gravel/shale and drained well.

Third response:

Provided that the foul drainage discharges into the watercourse I have no objection to the application.

PCC Affordable Housing

I am happy to support the application however, I will be looking forward to receiving details regarding the proposal for an Affordable Housing contribution so it can then be agreed as part of this application.

I can confirm the majority of housing need for the area concerned is for 1 and 2 bedroomed properties only.

PCC Contaminated Land

The following document has been submitted in support of Planning Application P/2016/0324:

 Brownfield Solutions Ltd ‘Pan-y-Bont, Llanerch Emrys, Powys: Desk Study Assessment Report’ (ref: WG/C3134/1225) February 2016.

Based on the information submitted in the above referenced report the following advice is provided for the consideration of Development Control.

Advice Consultations 1. Paragraph 3.6.2 of the ‘Desk Study Assessment Report’ states: “Pen-y-Bont, Llanerch Emrys, is not in an area that requires Radon precautions in foundations in accordance with BRE Report 211 ‘Radon – Guidance on protective measures for new dwellings’ 2007 Edition”.

Development Control should consult with Building Control to confirm the requirements for Radon protection measures. It is requested that any advice from Building Control is also provided to this Section.

2. It is stated in paragraph 4.5.12 of the ‘Desk Study Assessment Report’ that: “The risks to Controlled Waters from the identified on-site sources of contamination are deemed to be moderate”.

4 Page 48

Development Control should consult with Natural Resources Wales (NRW) to confirm the requirements for the investigation and assessment of the risks associated with Controlled Waters. It is requested that any advice from NRW is also provided to this Section.

Preliminary Risk Assessment 3. It has been stated in paragraph 3.2.6, of the ‘Desk Study Assessment Report’, that: “There are no potable water abstraction licenses recorded within 2000m of the site”. Records available to this Section identify that the following private water supplies are located within 1000m if the application site:

 Borehole (280m to South) Four Crosses Farm (Grid Ref: 320873, 323209)  Spring (850m to North) Nant Goch (Grid Ref: 321376, 324315)  Spring (1000m to Northwest) Abercynllaith (Grid Ref: 320097, 324011)

The preliminary risk assessment and conceptual site model should be updated accordingly.

4. The potential human health and controlled waters receptors associated with the application site have been identified in subsection 4.4 ‘Receptors’ of the ‘Desk Study Assessment Report’.

It is recommended, for completeness, that the residential properties/cottages located approximately 50m to the Northeast of the application site should be included in the preliminary conceptual site model as potential off-site receptors.

5. Paragraph 4.6.2 of the ‘Desk Study Assessment Report’ states: “Made ground was identified as a potential source of ground gas however thick and widespread made ground deposits are not anticipated at the site and the gas generation potential is likely to be low to very low. The risk is deemed moderate/low”.

Furthermore, it is stated in paragraph 4.6.3 that: “In accordance with CIRIA C665 the recommended gas monitoring programme should comprise 6-9 visits over a 3-6 month period”.

Based on the identified ground gas source and the potential risk associated with the source it is recommended that consideration could be given to employing the approach to ground gas risk assessment prescribed in the CL:AIRE Research Bulletin ‘RB17: A Pragmatic Approach to Ground Gas Risk Assessment’ (2012).

6. It is detailed in paragraph 6.1.2, of the ‘Desk Study Assessment Report’ that: “Potential on- site sources of contamination have been identified associated with the historic uses of the site. The potential risks to human health from contaminants associated with the railway and coal yard are considered to be moderate and a Phase 2 investigation is recommended to quantify the risks”.

A detailed proposal for the intrusive site investigation should be submitted for review and approval prior to the works being undertaken.

Furthermore, the intrusive site investigation should be designed, justified and completed in accordance with current guidance and best practice, such as; BS10175:2011:A1:2013 ‘Investigation of Potentially Contaminated Sites – Code of Practice’ and BE8576:2013

5 Page 49

‘Guidance on Investigations for Ground Gases – Permanent Gases and Volatile Organic Compounds (VOCs)’.

Summary The ‘Desk Study Assessment Report’ has identified potential risks, associated with the presence of land contamination, to the proposed development and has provided outline recommendations to investigate these potential risks. Therefore, it is advised that the following Condition and Note to the applicant should be included on any permission granted for Planning Application P/2016/0324:

Condition A Condition 1. Site Characterisation An investigation and risk assessment, in addition to any assessment provided with the planning application, must be completed in accordance with a scheme to assess the nature and extent of any contamination on the site, whether or not it originates on the site. The contents of the scheme are subject to the approval in writing of the Local Planning Authority. The investigation and risk assessment must be undertaken by competent persons (a contaminated land specialist with proven experience within the contaminated land industry) and a written report of the findings must be produced. The written report is subject to the approval in writing of the Local Planning Authority. The report of the findings must include:

(i) a survey of the extent, scale and nature of contamination; (ii) an assessment of the potential risks to: • human health, • property (existing or proposed) including buildings, crops, livestock, pets, woodland and service lines and pipes, • adjoining land, • groundwaters and surface waters, • ecological systems, • archaeological sites and ancient monuments;

(iii) an appraisal of remedial options, and proposal of the preferred option(s).

This must be conducted in accordance with DEFRA and the Environment Agency’s ‘Model Procedures for the Management of Land Contamination, CLR 11’ and the WLGA document ‘Development of land affected by contamination: a guide for developers’ 2012 .

Item (iii) above should not be submitted until written approval has been obtained from the Local Planning Authority for items (i) & (ii).

Condition 2. Submission of Remediation Scheme A detailed remediation scheme to bring the site to a condition suitable for the intended use by removing unacceptable risks to human health, buildings and other property and the natural and historical environment must be prepared, and is subject to the approval in writing of the Local Planning Authority. The scheme must include all works to be undertaken, proposed remediation objectives and remediation criteria, timetable of works and site management procedures. The scheme must ensure that the site will not qualify as contaminated land under Part 2A of the Environmental Protection Act 1990, The Contaminated Land (Wales) Regulations 2001 in relation to the intended use of the land after remediation. The detailed

6 Page 50

remediation scheme should not be submitted until written approval for Condition 1 has been received from the Local Planning Authority.

Condition 3. Implementation of Approved Remediation Scheme The approved remediation scheme must be carried out in accordance with its terms prior to the commencement of development other than that required to carry out remediation, unless otherwise agreed in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The Local Planning Authority must be given two weeks written notification of commencement of the remediation scheme works.

Following completion of measures identified in the approved remediation scheme, a verification report (referred to in PPS23 as a validation report) that demonstrates the effectiveness of the remediation carried out must be produced, and is subject to the approval in writing of the Local Planning Authority. The verification report contents must be agreed with the Local Planning Authority before commencement of the remediation scheme.

Condition 4. Reporting of Unexpected Contamination In the event that contamination is found at any time when carrying out the approved development that was not previously identified it must be reported in writing immediately to the Local Planning Authority. An investigation and risk assessment must be undertaken in accordance with the requirements of condition 1, and where remediation is necessary a remediation scheme must be prepared in accordance with the requirements of condition 2, which is subject to the approval in writing of the Local Planning Authority. Following completion of measures identified in the approved remediation scheme a verification report must be prepared, which is subject to the approval in writing of the Local Planning Authority in accordance with condition 3.

Condition 5. Long Term Monitoring and Maintenance A monitoring and maintenance scheme to include monitoring the long-term effectiveness of the proposed remediation over a period of duration to be agreed in writing with the Local Planning Authority and the provision of reports on the same must be prepared, both of which are subject to the approval in writing of the Local Planning Authority.

Within six months following the completion of the measures identified in that scheme and the achievement of the remediation objectives, reports that demonstrate the effectiveness of the monitoring and maintenance carried out must be produced, and submitted to the Local Planning Authority.

This must be conducted in accordance with DEFRA and the Environment Agency's 'Model Procedures for the Management of Land Contamination, CLR 11'.

Reason (common to all): To ensure that risks from land contamination to the future users of the land and neighbouring land are minimised, together with those to controlled waters, property and ecological systems, and to ensure that the development can be carried out safely without unacceptable risks to workers, neighbours and other offsite receptors [in accordance with policy ____ of the adopted Local Plan (date)].

Note to Applicant Potential Contamination

7 Page 51

The Council’s guidance leaflet on the development of sites with potential land contamination is attached. Further advice on compliance with this condition may be obtained by contacting the Environmental Health Service on 0870 1923757.

PCC Ecologist

No response received.

Natural Resources Wales (NRW)

First response (dated 27th April 2016):

Thank you for referring the above application which NRW received by letter on the 7th of April 2016. Natural Resources Wales do not object to the proposal, subject to suitable conditions being attached to any planning permission.

Summary of Requirements:

Requirement 1 – European Protected Species - Bats

Tanat & Vyrnwy Bat Sites SAC / Hendre, Llangedwyn SSSI / Garth-eryr SSSI

The proposal site is close to two designated sites, namely Hendre, Llangedwyn SSSI (2.2 km to the West) and Garth-eryr SSSI (4.7 km to the West). The first supports a maternity roost of Lesser Horseshoe Bats, and the latter a hibernaculum for the same species. Both SSSIs are also included within Tanat & Vyrnwy Bat Sites SAC. Lesser Horseshoe Bats forage largely within 3 km of a roost, but also need good habitat connectivity between roosts used in different seasons. In this case the site of the development does not contain good habitat and neither are there connectivity implications. NRW consider that there would be no likely significant effects on the Tanat & Vrynwy Bat SAC.

NRW have also considered the possibility of impact on a further Lesser Horseshoe Bat maternity roost at Pentre Mawr, approximately 0.5 km SW of the proposal. The site is recently discovered and undesignated although NRW consider it probable that the bats are part of the same meta-population as those in the Tanat & Vrynwy Bat SAC. Examination of an aerial photograph indicates that there are two good flight routes to the Afon Tanat and neither of these routes include the site of the development proposal which is not well connected by hedges or trees in a southerly direction. We have reached a conclusion that the proposed development would not impact on the Lesser Horseshoe Bat roost at Pentre Mawr.

Requirement 1 – European Protected Species - Bats

European Protected Species – Bats

NRW note that the ecological report submitted in support of the above application (Land at Pen-y-bont Station Yard, Preliminary Ecological Assessment (February 2016) by Turnstone Ecology Ltd) is satisfactory. The report did not identify the presence of part of the Tanat and Vyrnwy bat sites SAC within 2km to the west, however, this has been considered in our comments on protected sites above.

8 Page 52

We consider that the proposed development represents a lower risk for bats, as defined in our guidance document ‘Natural Resources Wales Approach to Bats and Planning (2015)’. Bats and their breeding sites and resting places are protected under the Conservation of Habitats and Species Regulations 2010 (as amended). Any development that would contravene the protection afforded to bats under the Regulations would require a derogation licence from Natural Resources Wales. A licence may only be authorised if: i. There is no satisfactory alternative and ii. The action authorised will not be detrimental to the maintenance of the population of the species concerned at a favourable conservation status in its natural range. In addition, iii. The development works to be authorised must be for the purposes of preserving public health or safety, or for other imperative reasons of overriding public interest, including those of a social or economic nature and beneficial consequences of primary importance for the environment.

Paragraph 6.3.7 of Technical Advice Note 5: Nature Conservation and Planning (TAN5) states that your Authority should not grant planning permission without having satisfied itself that the proposed development either would not impact adversely on any bats on the site or that, in its opinion, all three conditions for the eventual grant of a licence are likely to be satisfied.

In this case, the ecological report concludes that the proposed development is not likely to harm or disturb the bats or their breeding sites and resting places at this site, provided that avoidance measures described in the report, in section 4.3.5 are implemented. Also, because the development represents a lower risk to bats in this case, we do not consider that the development is likely to be detrimental to the maintenance of the population of the species concerned at a favourable conservation status in its natural range.

Therefore, we do not object to the proposal, subject to; i. The implementation of a site lighting plan. Security lighting must be installed in a way that minimise/avoid light spill in areas that could potentially be used by foraging and commuting bats (all tree lines and hedgerows surrounding the site) and otters (river corridor). Low level and low wattage, as well as low pressure sodium or high pressure sodium lamps, should be preferred to mercury or metal halide lamps. ii. The retention of existing hedgerows and tree lines around the perimeter of the development site to maintain habitat connectivity for bats and wildlife. A Root Protection Zone must be established and fenced off to protect hedgerows and trees during the construction phase.

This advice applies to the proposal in its present form. If the plans are changed in ways that may harm or disturb the bats or their breeding sites and resting places at this site, you would need a revised report that takes account of such changes. Please consult us again if a revised report concludes that this is no longer a lower risk case. Otherwise, our advice for lower risk cases would still apply and we would recommend that you secured the avoidance measures described in the revised report.

Contaminated Land

9 Page 53

The geoscience team have examined the following reports that were submitted with the planning application and have no concerns.  Planning Application Supporting Statement (including Design and Access Statement). Berrys, report reference SA21445 Rev.01, date unknown.  Desk Study Assessment Report. Brownfield Solutions Limited, WG/C3134/1225, February 2016.

With regards the potential for land contamination, NRW note that the desk study assessment report suggests intrusive site investigation (Phase 2) to determine the level of potential contamination. We consider the site to be low priority given the environmental setting and therefore do not require further consultation, but we offer the following information in relation to this planning application.

Contaminated Land - Advice to LPA

Natural Resources Wales considers that the controlled waters at this site are of low environmental sensitivity, therefore we will not be providing detailed site-specific advice or comments with regards to land contamination issues for this site.

It is recommended that the requirements of Planning Policy Wales and the Environment Agency Guiding Principles for Land Contamination (GPLC 1, 2, and 3), March 2010, should be followed. GPLC can be downloaded from the Environment Agency website.

These comments are based on our assumption that gross contamination is not present at this location. If, during development, gross contamination is found to be present at the site the Local Planning Authority may wish to re-consult the Natural Resources Wales.

Foul Drainage

NRW note that this outline planning application will present the details of the foul and surface water disposal in greater details as part of the Reserved Matters application. Given the size of the site the discharge from the proposed septic tank may require an Environmental Permit from NRW and we recommend early consultation with NRW on the permit application.

Government policy states that, where practicable, foul drainage should be discharged to the mains sewer. Where this is not possible and private sewage treatment / disposal facilities are utilised, they must be installed and maintained in accordance with British Standard 6297 and Approved Document H of the Building Regulations 2000. You should also have regard to Welsh Office Circular 10/99 in respect of planning requirements for non mains sewerage. The applicant will need to apply for a Permit or Exemption, if they wish to discharge anything apart from uncontaminated surface water to a watercourse/ditch. They may also need to apply for a Permit from our National Permitting Team to allow certain discharges into ground. They must obtain any necessary Permit prior to works starting on site. The Welsh Government has also advised that all septic tanks and small sewage treatment plant discharges in Wales will need to be registered. More information, including a step by step bilingual guide to registering, is available on our website at the following link https://naturalresources.wales/media/2879/septic-tank-registration-guidance.pdf?lang=en

Flood Risk

10 Page 54

DAM B indicates an area known to have been flooded in the past evidenced by sedimentary deposits. DAM B is used as part of a precautionary approach to indicate where site levels should be checked against the extreme (0.1%) flood level. If site levels are greater than the flood levels used to define adjacent extreme flood outline there is no need to consider flood risk further.

We have examined lidar data from the Lle Geo-Portal and can confirm site levels are greater than adjacent extreme flood levels. This assessment is based on desk study only, we are not liable for any variations in levels that may exist.

Of course, as with any highly vulnerable development, it is advised that finished floor levels are set a nominal distance above adjacent ground level, for the perimeter of the dwelling, in order to mitigate against flash flooding from sources and other unmapped sources

The Natural Environment and Rural Communities (NERC) Act (2006)

Please note that we have not considered possible effects on all species and habitats listed in section 42 of the Natural Environment and Rural Communities (NERC) Act 2006, or on the Local Biodiversity Action Plan or other local natural heritage interests. To comply with your authority's duty under section 40 of the NERC Act, to have regard to conserving biodiversity, your decision should take account of possible adverse effects on such interests. We recommend that you seek further advice from your authority's internal ecological adviser and/or nature conservation organisations such as the local Wildlife Trust, RSPB, etc. The Wales Biodiversity Partnership's web site has guidance for assessing proposals that have implications for section 42 habitats and species (www.biodiversitywales.org.uk).

Second response:

We have no comments to make regarding these drainage proposals. Our response from 27th April Ref: CAS-17635-M6V1 is still valid.

PCC Planning Policy

No response received.

Councillor Representations

County Councillor Gwynfor Thomas

First response:

In respect of planning application P/2016/0324 (Haulage Depot, Penybont LE), I would like to exercise the call in procedure to bring the application to committee. I believe there would be a planning gain from this application to convert from its current use to residential. It has longstanding issues within its current usage and residents locally feel that residential usage would see an end to these problems. It would further benefit highways as its current usage allows it to have large vehicles using an unsuitable road.

I have discussed this application with cllr. Aled Davies who shares my thoughts. It does not appear that he has received notification of the application and in some respects this has a

11 Page 55

greater relevance to his ward rather than mine due to its locality. It would obviously bring much needed housing into that community.

I trust this meets with the regulations to call this to committee, if you require any further information do not hesitate to contact me.

Second response:

Thank you for your telephone call on Monday.

I have been reflecting on our conversation and I visited the application on line last evening. I notice there is no communication recorded from Llansantffraid and Llangedwyn community councils. Can you confirm whether you are in possession of them because I understand that there are some very relevant supportive comments particularly surrounding the development boundary.

I would further add that I am not aware of any opposition locally to this application. It is clear that the surrounding communities see the application as more desirable than a return to its current usage. There are massive problems with large vehicles using the adjacent Winllan Road and residents see this application as a planning gain.

I acknowledge your concerns as regards the development boundary and I understand that the agent has made relevant comments as regards this issue and I do not wish to be repetitive but reading his comments sent to me yesterday I felt that the fact that the yard was the old railway station, made it very relevant because it established a connection with the local village. I note that the agent’s correspondence was also not available on line.

Many thanks once again for your attention to this application.

Public Representations

Following display of a site notice and publicity in the local press, one public representation received and summarised as follows:

 This brownfield site is preferable to any greenfield site in this area; and  The visual impact would be minimised if the dwellings were low rise and existing boundary hedges were retained.

In addition, a representation has been received from the applicant and is summarised as follows:

The site was purchased several years ago with the aim of using it as a haulage depot, but over the years the need reduced. Many years ago full planning was given for a five bedroom dwelling house and it is felt that this site is best suited for such a scheme. Also taking into consideration the structures that would be erected to accommodate a haulage business (large obtrusive buildings) in an otherwise residential area.

Planning History

12 Page 56

M/2004/1211 - Outline application for residential development (5 dwellings), installation of septic tanks and formation of vehicular access (resubmission M2004 0562). Refused 06.12.2004

M/2004/562 – Outline application for residential development (5 dwellings), installation of septic tanks and formation of vehicular access. Refused 06.09.2004

M23727 - Use of land as a haulage depot (heavy goods), siting of temporary residential caravan (during construction of proposed dwelling) and siting of temporary building. Conditional consent 01.10.1993

M20935 – Erection of a dwelling, construction of new vehicular access and installation of septic tank. Conditional consent subject to section 106 agreement 07.06.1991

M19361 – Outline permission for erection of a dwelling. Conditional consent 06.07.1990

M17817 – Outline for erection of a dwelling. Refused 25.11.1989

Principal Planning Constraints

 Flood Zone B  Class 3 Road C2003  Unclassified highway  Open countryside

Principal Planning Policies

National Planning Policy

Planning Policy Wales (Edition 8, 2016)

TAN 1: Joint Housing Land Availability Studies (2015) TAN 2: Planning and Affordable Housing (2006) TAN 5: Nature Conservation and Planning (2009) TAN 6: Planning for Sustainable Rural Communities (2010) TAN 12: Design (2016) TAN 15: Development and Flood Risk (2004) TAN 18: Transport (2007) TAN 20: Planning and the Welsh Language (2013) TAN 23: Economic Development (2014)

Welsh Government Circular 016/2014 – The Use of Planning Conditions for Development Management

Welsh Office Circular 13/97 - Planning Obligations

Welsh Office Circular 10/99 - Planning requirements in respect of the use of non-mains sewerage incorporating septic tanks in new development

13 Page 57

Welsh Office Circular 61/96 – Planning and the Historic Environment: Historic Buildings and Conservation Areas

Welsh Office Circular 22/87: Development of Contaminated Land

Local Planning Policy

Powys Unitary Development Plan (2010)

UDP SP1 – Social, Community and Cultural Sustainability UDP SP2 - Strategic Settlement Hierarchy UDP SP3 – Natural, Historic and Built Heritage UDP SP5 – Housing Developments UDP SP6 – Development and Transport UDP GP1 – Development Control UDP GP2 – Planning Obligations UDP GP3 – Design and Energy Conservation UDP GP4 – Highway and Parking Requirements UDP GP5 – Welsh Language and Culture UDP ENV1 – Agricultural Land UDP ENV2 – Safeguarding the Landscape UDP ENV3 – Safeguarding Biodiversity and Natural Habitats UDP ENV4 – Internationally Important Sites UDP ENV5 – Nationally Important Sites UDP ENV7 – Protected Species UDP ENV14 – Listed Buildings UDP CS3 – Additional Demand for Community Facilities UDP HP3 – Housing Land Availability UDP HP4 – Settlement Development Boundaries and Capacities UDP HP5 – Residential Developments UDP HP6 – Dwellings in the Open Countryside UDP HP7 – Affordable Housing within Settlements UDP HP8 – Affordable Housing Adjoining Settlements with Development Boundaries UDP HP10 – Affordability Criteria UDP TR2 – Tourist Attractions and Development Areas UDP DC11 – Non-mains Sewerage Treatment UDP DC13 – Surface Water Drainage UDP DC15 – Development on Unstable or Contaminated Land UDP RL2 – Provision of Outdoor Playing and Recreation Space

Affordable Housing for Local Needs Supplementary Planning Guidance (SPG) Approved September 2010 Updated July 2011

Powys Residential Design Guide (2004)

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

14 Page 58

Officer Appraisal

Section 38 (6) of the Planning and Compulsory Purchase Act 2004

Background

Members will note that planning application M/2004/1211 for residential development (5 dwellings), installation of septic tanks and formation of vehicular access (resubmission M2004 0562) was refused. The reason for refusal was as follows:

1. It is the general policy of the local planning authority and the approved Powys Structure Plan to confine new residential development within the physical limits of those settlements defined in development plans, in order to safeguard the character of the open countryside and economise on the provision of services. The local planning authority consider that insufficient reasons have been shown in this case to warrant a departure from this general policy and the application is therefore contrary to Local Plan Policy HD10: Housing in the Countryside of the Draft Montgomeryshire Local Plan 1995 and Policy HD11: Housing Development in the Countryside of the Interim Planning Guidance 1997.

Consent was granted under reference M23727 for use of land as heavy goods haulage depot in 1993 along with the temporary siting of a caravan during the construction of a dwelling and a temporary building. Permission (subject to a section 106 agreement) was granted for a single dwelling in 1993.

Principle of development

The proposed development lies wholly outside the development boundary of Pen-y-bont Llanerch Emrys as detailed on inset map M185 (Powys Unitary Development Plan) and would result in five dwellings being constructed outside the settlement boundary.

Outside of settlement boundaries, UDP Policy HP4 applies and states that ‘outside settlement boundaries, proposals for new residential development will only be approved where they comply with UDP Policies HP6, HP8 or HP9’. Policy HP6 relates to rural enterprise dwellings, policy HP8 relates to affordable dwellings adjoining a settlement boundary and Policy HP9 relates to affordable dwellings within rural settlements. It is considered that the proposed development does not comply with UDP Policy HP6, HP8 or HP9. The proposed development is therefore not in accordance with the UDP and should be considered a departure.

Housing land supply

The departure is being justified by the applicant on the basis that Powys County Council does not have a 5 year housing land supply.

15 Page 59

Paragraph 9.2.3 of Planning Policy Wales states that ‘Local planning authorities must ensure that sufficient land is genuinely available or will become available to provide a 5 year supply of land for housing judged against the general objectives and the scale and location of development provided for in the development plan.’

The Powys Joint Housing Land Availability Study (JHLAS) 2015 states that there was 1.9 years supply of housing land in the Powys Local Planning Authority (LPA) area. Failure to have a 5-year housing land supply is an important material consideration that should be taken into account when determining this scheme. Technical Advice Note 1: Joint Housing Land Availability Studies (2015) states as follows:

“The housing land supply should also be treated as a material consideration in determining planning applications for housing. Where the current study shows a land supply below the 5 year requirement or where the local planning authority has been unable to undertake a study, the need to increase supply should be given considerable weight when dealing with planning applications provided that the development would otherwise comply with development plan and national planning policies”.

The JHLAS identified a significant undersupply of housing land within Powys. As mentioned above, TAN 1 confirms that the need to increase supply should be given considerable weight but only where the development would otherwise comply with development plan and national planning policies.

Members are advised that the lack of housing land supply should be primarily considered on a county-wide basis. One site was allocated within the UDP for residential development (site M185 HA1 – Land opposite Pen-y-bont Inn extending to 0.39 ha) and this site has been developed.

In light of the above, whilst acknowledging that the proposal does constitute a departure from the development plan, Members are advised that the lack of a five year housing supply in Powys does need to be given considerable weight in the determination of this application. However, before reaching a decision, the scheme will need to be considered against other polices contained within the UDP in order for a balanced view to be made on the acceptability of the development overall.

Sustainable location

When providing additional housing it is important to consider whether the scheme can be considered to be sustainable development. This can relate to a wide range of matters including public transport provision and access to education, employment opportunities and other services.

Pen-y-bont Llanerch Emrys is classified as a small village in the UDP and it is noted that the village is served by limited community services and facilities consisting of a public house. It is also noted that the village lies on the B4396 highway which hosts a public bus route. It is also noted that the larger settlements of Llansantffraid Ym Mechain and Oswestry are located approximately 3 miles and 7 miles distant respectively and that these settlements host a range of facilities and services. The nearest primary school is located at Llangedwyn approximately 2 miles distant.

16 Page 60

The site is located approximately 139 metres to the south of the southern part of the settlement boundary of Pen-y-bont Llanerch Emrys. There is no footway to link the site with the village.

The site has been put forward as previously developed (brownfield) land. Paragraph 4.9.1 of Planning Policy Wales advises that previously developed (or brownfield) land should, wherever possible, be used in preference to greenfield sites, particularly those of high agricultural or ecological value. PPW further advises that many previously developed sites in built-up areas may be considered suitable for development because their re-use will promote sustainability objectives. Figure 4.4 of Planning Policy Wales includes a definition of previously developed land:

‘Previously developed land is that which is or was occupied by a permanent structure (excluding agricultural or forestry buildings) and associated fixed surface infrastructure. The curtilage of the development is included, as are defence buildings, and land used for mineral extraction and waste disposal where provision for restoration has not been made through development management procedures.

Excluded from the definition are: • land and buildings currently in use for agricultural or forestry purposes; • land in built-up areas which has not been developed previously, for example parks, recreation grounds and allotments, even though these areas may contain certain urban features such as paths, pavilions and other buildings; • land where the remains of any structure or activity have blended into the landscape over time so that they can reasonably be considered part of the natural surroundings; • previously developed land the nature conservation value of which could outweigh the re-use of the site; and • previously developed land subsequently put to an amenity use’.

The site is currently vacant and the applicant states that two local haulage firms have used the site in the past following the M23727 consent. The contents of the Committee report for planning application M/2004/0562 state that the permission was implemented. The submission states that the use has been scaled back in recent years, however the planning permission granted under reference M23727 enabled the operation of several 30 ton tipper lorries operating of a 24 hour basis and also a 38 ton articulated vehicle. There is a portakabin on site along with piled materials, and whilst these items are not of a significant scale and the use is not noticeably in operation at present, because of the presence of the portakabin and the piled materials, it cannot be said that the remains of the structure or activity have blended into the landscape so that they can reasonably be considered part of the natural surroundings. Therefore, it is considered that the site can be considered previously developed land, subject to the use having been commenced lawfully and having been abandoned. Therefore, whilst the HGV use is not currently apparent on site, it is recognised that the proposal would have benefits in terms of removing the potential for impacts upon the amenities of the area including noise, disturbance, odour and dust.

In light of the above considerations, Members are advised that the sustainability of the development at this location is considered borderline by Development Management.

Affordable housing provision

17 Page 61

Given that the proposal is for five dwellings, the UDP requires a proportion of affordable housing. UDP Policy HP7 states that a proportion of affordable housing will be sought based on the extent and type of need as identified by the Council’s Housing Needs Survey, successive surveys or other reliable robust data sources and the nature of the site.

The submission puts forward a financial contribution to the provision of affordable housing because the Viability Assessment forming part of the evidence base for the LDP identifies a guideline of 10% affordable provision in this area of Powys. The Council’s Affordable Housing Officer has advised that the majority of housing need for the area concerned is for 1 and 2 bedroomed properties only. The Affordable Housing Officer further advises that they are happy to support the application, however they will be looking forward to receiving details regarding the proposal for an Affordable Housing contribution.

Therefore, the Affordable Housing Officer provides evidence of housing need in the locality, albeit for smaller properties. The outline submission indicates a mixture of dwellings, however Members are advised that this scale is indicative only with scale being a reserved matter for future consideration.

The applicant has offered to provide less than the current 30-35% proportion advised that is normally achievable within the UDP and as a financial contribution rather than on-site provision. The UDP supporting text to Policy HP7 emphasises that:

‘The negotiation process will be the key to actual provision by ensuring that each site is capable of providing the necessary subsidy and yet still able to be developed economically. All negotiations for the provision of affordable housing will be based on the characteristics - development costs, constraints and nature – of each individual site and whilst all eligible sites will be expected to contribute, the degree of provision actually achieved will vary in relation to the circumstances of each site. Although the scale of affordable housing to be provided will be a matter for negotiation for each individual site, as a guideline, proportions of between 30- 35% should normally be achievable and this is in line with the level of need identified in the Housing Needs Study 2002.’

The submission contends that the CIL Viability Assessment provides a more up to date and robust basis for determining the affordable housing contribution than the now historic “guideline” figure contained within the UDP. Whilst the proposed provision of the financial contribution would equate to a lower proportion than that identified within the UDP and on- site affordable housing provision is the preferred method of delivery set out by the UDP and SPG, officers are aware that the viability evidence of the Local Development Plan is currently being reviewed and updated. It is understood that it is likely that the affordable housing provision requirement will be lower than that currently required under the Unitary Development Plan. Therefore, if the proposal is considered acceptable in all other respects, Members will need to consider whether the proposed financial contribution is acceptable.

Crime reduction

Paragraph 4.11.12 of Planning Policy Wales advises that ‘Local authorities are under a legal obligation to consider the need to prevent and reduce crime and disorder in all decisions that they take. Crime prevention and fear of crime are social considerations to which regard must be given by local planning authorities in the preparation of development plans. They should

18 Page 62

be reflected in any supplementary planning guidance, and may be material considerations in the determination of planning applications’.

The submission states that the site has a history of anti-social and criminal behaviour including fly-tipping and the occupation of the site on two separate occasions by travellers. Whilst these concerns are recognised, the issues put forward do not appear to have occurred frequently or in recent years, particularly given that the site is now secured (by fencing and padlocked). However, Members are advised that weight can be given the proposal’s benefits in reducing the potential for crime prevention and fear of crime at the site.

Design and layout and impact upon surrounding area – landscape and visual impacts

Guidance contained within UDP policy HP5 indicates that residential development will be permitted where the development is of an appropriate scale, form and design and general character, to reflect the overall character and appearance of the settlement and surrounding area. Whilst design and layout are reserved and will be dealt with at the reserved matters stage, it is relevant to consider whether the number of dwellings proposed could be appropriately developed on the site and whether the site is appropriate in consideration of its impact upon the surrounding area.

The site is detached from the settlement boundary of Pen-y-bont Llanerch Emrys by agricultural land and the Afon Tanat at a distance of approximately 139 metres. Opposite the site, across the highway, at a distance of approximately 50 metres is a cluster of dwellings adjacent to the Old New Inn. The site can be seen from the surrounding highway network and public rights of way in the locality. However, the principal concern is the detached form of development from the principal part of the settlement located within the development boundary and the resulting impact upon the landscape. The site is located within the LANDMAP Visual and Sensory Aspect Area of Lower Tanant Valley (MNTGMVS580) which is evaluated as moderate and summarised as follows:

‘Relatively narrow valley bottom levels with heavily cultivated farmland consisting medium to large scale field pattern clearly defined by managed hedgerows. Contains the meandering upper to mid reaches of the Afon Tanat and Rhaeadr defined with a narrow band of mixed broadleaf woodland plantings. Two main settlements at Penybontfawr and Llanrhaeadr-ym- Mochnant plus numerous scattered farmsteads. Domestic, settled setting’

The submission contends that whilst the site is located outside the settlement boundary, this does not mean that it would not be part of the settlement, despite the physical features of separation. Reference is also made within the submission to the cluster of dwellings opposite the site and that the site also accommodated the former railway station and the HGV depot. In terms of the HGV use, the visual appearance of this use is appreciated where parking of 30 ton tipper lorries and a 38 ton articulated vehicle was enabled. Whilst this use has been scaled back in recent years, the submission states that the owner has been approached by an operator of 44 ton vehicles used for the transportation of chemicals which has expressed interest in acquiring the site. The benefits of removing this use and the associated visual impact are recognised as is the opportunity to improve the character and appearance of the locality.

The indicative layout and scale indicates five, two storey dwellings, with attached and detached garages. The layout demonstrates that the site can accommodate five dwellings

19 Page 63

and detailed design would follow at reserved matters stage, which would provide the opportunity to ensure that the dwellings have an acceptable appearance and design. Properties within the settlement and in proximity to the site are a mixture of one and two storey and whilst the comments regarding scale within the public representations are noted, it is considered that the proposed scale of two storeys is not considered to be out of character with the locality. The proposal does not include landscaping details, however the site is enclosed with hedgerows and trees. Additional landscape planting could assist in mitigating visual impact and landscaping is a reserved matter and therefore detailed proposals could be considered at a later date.

Whilst the proposal demonstrates that the site can accommodate the proposed number of dwellings and that some benefits would result from the loss of the HGV use, it is considered that proposal would appear as an isolated form of development, being separated from the settlement by the physical features of agricultural land and the river. Therefore, it is concluded that the proposal would be contrary to UDP Policies HP5 and ENV2.

Impact upon tourist attractions

There are a number of public rights of way in the locality, the closest being located at a distance of approximately 90 metres to the north east. Given the distances involved and that the proposal would introduce residential development which is not uncommon in the locality, it is not considered that the proposal would have an unacceptable adverse effect upon the environmental setting of established tourist attractions in accordance with UDP Policy TR2.

Impact upon heritage assets

Setting of Listed Building

The authority is required have special regard to the desirability of preserving the listed buildings or their settings under section 66(1) of the Planning (Listed Buildings and Conservation Areas) Act 1990. UDP Policy ENV14 states that proposals unacceptably adversely affecting a listed building or its setting will be refused taking into account the desirability of preserving the listed building and its setting, the importance of the building, the effects of the proposal on any particular features and the contributions of the building to the local scene.

Pont Llanerch Emrys is a grade II listed building and was listed as a fine example of an early nineteenth century masonry bridge of elegant form suggestive of estate influence, combined with plain, vernacular detailing. The bridge is located to the north of the application site, along the C2003 highway at a distance of approximately 90 metres.

Whilst the proposal would result in visual changes in the area, subject to appropriate design to be considered at the reserved matters stage and the distance involved, the proposed development is not considered to have a significant unacceptable adverse effect upon the setting of the listed building known as Pont Llanerch Emrys in accordance with UDP Policy ENV14.

It is acknowledged that the HGV use would generate heavy vehicles using the Pont Llanerch Emrys and as such this can also be considered as a benefit of the proposal; the reduction of the number of heavy vehicles travelling over the listed bridge.

20 Page 64

Residential amenity

Policy GP1 states that development proposals will only be permitted where the amenities enjoyed by the occupants of nearby or proposed properties will not be unacceptably affected. The Powys Residential Design Guide provides guidance on overshadowing and privacy.

As discussed above, the benefits of replacing the HGV use are recognised in terms of removing the potential for noise, odour etc associated with such uses. In terms of the impacts of the construction of the proposed dwellings, the distances between the site and the nearest neighbouring properties (approximately 50 metres) leads to the conclusion that residential development can be provided at this location without unacceptably adversely affecting the amenities enjoyed by occupants of existing residential properties and that of the proposed dwellings in accordance with UDP Policy GP1 and the Council’s Residential Design Guide. Furthermore, the proposal may see improvements upon residential amenities through the loss of the existing use.

Highway access and parking requirements

UDP Policy GP4 requires adequate highway provision in terms of a safe access, visibility, turning and parking. Access to the site would be gained off the C2003 class three highway with the existing access proposed to be upgraded. The centre of the access measures at 23 metres from the centre of the junction of the C2003/U2043 highways (in a northerly direction). The application site is located within the 60mph national speed limit zone, although the 30mph zone is located immediately north of the access.

The Highway Authority has objected to the proposal because the site is not sustainable and has no pedestrian links back into the village. The Highway Authority has taken the former use into consideration but the location of the access for residential purposes is considered too close to the junction of the C2003/U2043 because it would cause driving confusion as to when a vehicle is entering which road.

In terms of the HGV depot, as discussed above the permission enabled the operation of several 30 ton tipper lorries operating on a 24 hour basis and also a 38 ton articulated vehicle. This use has been scaled back in recent years, however it is appreciated that the site has the potential to generate significant highways movements and the Highway Authority has acknowledged this use. On the basis of the Highway Authority’s comments, concern is expressed as to the close proximity of the junction of the C2003/U2043 highways to the access and that the proposal would cause driving confusion.

In terms of the lack of pedestrian facilities into the village, given the nature of the highway, there is limited opportunity for the provision of a footway and this is a situation which is replicated in a number of locations within Powys. Whilst the provision of a footway would be extremely beneficial, it is considered that such cannot be requested as a result of the proposed development. The lack of an existing footway is also of concern, however, given that such situations are present within Powys, this matter is not considered to warrant a reason for refusal.

Overall, whilst the lack of a footway is not considered to warrant a reason for refusal, the Highway Authority’s concerns over the close proximity of the access to the junction are

21 Page 65

appreciated and as such, it is concluded that the proposal would not provide an adequate means of access, contrary to UDP Policy GP4.

Contaminated land

A contaminated land Desk Study Assessment Report supports the application which has identified potential risks, associated with the presence of land contamination, to the proposed development and has provided outline recommendations to investigate these potential risks. Therefore, the Council’s Contaminated Land Officer has advised that the conditions requiring the submission, approval and implementation of an investigation and risk assessment, a remediation scheme and monitoring and maintenance should be included on any permission granted.

On the basis of the advice from the Contaminated Land Officer and NRW, it is concluded that subject to the use of the conditions and informative, the applicant has demonstrated that the proposal would not result in problems of contamination on or off site and would not unacceptable adversely affect public health and safety or nature conservation in accordance with UDP Policy DC15.

Development and flood risk and surface water disposal

The site is located within the DAM B flood zone which indicates an area known to have been flooded in the past evidenced by sedimentary deposits. DAM B is used as part of a precautionary approach to indicate where site levels should be checked against the extreme (0.1%) flood level. If site levels are greater than the flood levels used to define adjacent extreme flood outline there is no need to consider flood risk further.

NRW have confirmed that the site levels are greater than adjacent extreme flood levels (based upon a desk study assessment) and it is recommended that the finished floor levels are set a nominal distance above adjacent ground level, for the perimeter of the dwellings, in order to mitigate against flash flooding from sources and other unmapped sources. On the basis of the advice from NRW, it is considered that the proposal is acceptable in flood risk terms.

In terms of surface water drainage, it is proposed to utilise soakaway systems. The Council’s Land Drainage Engineer has commended the use of soakaways and has recommended conditions requiring full details of the proposed soakaways and the prevention of surface water run-off onto the public highway. Subject to the use of these conditions, it is considered that the proposal would make adequate provision for surface water drainage in accordance with UDP Policy DC13.

Impact upon nature conservation

The site is close to two protected sites; Hendre, Llangedwyn SSSI (2.2 km to the West) and Garth-eryr SSSI (4.7 km to the West). The first supports a maternity roost of Lesser Horseshoe Bats, and the latter a hibernaculum for the same species. Both SSSIs are also included within Tanat & Vyrnwy Bat Sites SAC. Lesser Horseshoe Bats forage largely within 3 km of a roost, but also need good habitat connectivity between roosts used in different seasons. The site does not contain good habitat and neither are there connectivity

22 Page 66

implications and as such NRW advise that there would be no likely significant effects on the Tanat & Vrynwy Bat SAC.

NRW have also considered the possibility of impact on a further Lesser Horseshoe Bat maternity roost at Pentre Mawr, approximately 0.5 km SW of the proposal. The site is recently discovered and undesignated although NRW consider it probable that the bats are part of the same meta-population as those in the Tanat & Vrynwy Bat SAC. Examination of an aerial photograph indicates that there are two good flight routes to the Afon Tanat and neither of these routes include the site of the development proposal which is not well connected by hedges or trees in a southerly direction. NRW have reached a conclusion that the proposed development would not impact on the Lesser Horseshoe Bat roost at Pentre Mawr.

In terms of protected species, NRW confirm that the report did not identify the presence of part of the Tanat and Vyrnwy bat sites SAC within 2km to the west, however, this has been considered in NRW’s comments on protected sites above. NRW advise that the proposal represents a lower risk for bats and the ecological report concludes that the proposed development is not likely to harm or disturb the bats or their breeding sites and resting places at this site, provided that avoidance measures described in the report are implemented. NRW have therefore advised that because the development represents a lower risk to bats, it is not considered that the development is likely to be detrimental to the maintenance of the population of the species concerned at a favourable conservation status in its natural range.

NRW have recommended conditions in respect of the implementation of a site lighting plan and the retention of existing hedgerows and trees around the perimeter of the site which are considered reasonable. Therefore subject to the use of conditions in relation to avoidance measures, lighting and retention of existing vegetation, it is considered that the proposal would comply with the relevant nature conservation policies.

Foul sewage disposal

During the processing of the application, the proposed method of drainage has been amended from a septic tank with discharge to a soakaway on site to a treatment plant with discharge to the watercourse to the north west of the application site. The revised discharge method would travel through land within the ownership of a third party. Written confirmation has been received from the neighbouring landowner which states that access will be allowed onto the neighbouring land to place the drainage across the land to the watercourse. Therefore, Development Management is satisfied that the proposed method of drainage can be achieved.

Government policy states that, where practicable, foul drainage should be discharged to the mains sewer. It is accepted that connection to the mains sewer would not be practicable at this location and therefore on the basis that an acceptable drainage solution has been achieved and agreed by the Council’s Environmental Health Officer and NRW, it is considered that the proposal meets the requirements of UDP Policy DC11.

Welsh language and culture

Pen-y-bont Llanerch Emrys is a settlement where the Welsh language has been identified within the UDP as being important to the social, cultural and community fabric. The Planning

23 Page 67

(Wales) Act 2015 contains provisions relating to the consideration of the Welsh language in dealing with applications for planning permission. Paragraph 4.13.5 of Planning Policy Wales advises:

‘Considerations relating to the use of the Welsh language may be taken into account by decision makers so far as they are material to applications for planning permission. If required, language impact assessments may only be carried out in respect of major development not allocated in, or anticipated by, a development plan proposed in areas of particular sensitivity or importance for the language. Any such areas should be defined clearly in the development plan. Decisions on applications for planning permission must not introduce any element of discrimination and should not be made on the basis of any person(s)’ linguistic ability’.

Therefore, given that the proposal is not classified as major development, a language impact assessment is not required to be carried out. One way in which developers can demonstrate that the language has been taken into account is by ensuring that there is provision of affordable homes. This approach does not seek to restrict occupancy on grounds of linguistic criteria but recognises that those meeting the affordable housing eligibility criteria are more likely to be able to support the Welsh language and culture. Therefore, given that Members could require the provision of at least one affordable dwelling as part of a development at the site, it is concluded that the development would assist in contributing to the well-being of the Welsh language within Powys. Otherwise the proposal is not of a scale that would warrant a language impact assessment.

Recommendation

The Council’s lack of housing land supply is acknowledged as are the benefits of the proposal in terms of utilising a previously developed site and the potential to address concerns over anti-social behaviour as well as the advantages of losing the existing HGV depot use. The support from the Local Member, Community Councils and within the public representation is also acknowledged. However, in consideration of all the factors, the schemes benefits are not considered to outweigh the Highway Authority’s objection regarding the close proximity of the junction of the C2003/U2043 highways and developments adverse impact upon the character and appearance of the locality. The recommendation is one of refusal.

Reasons for Refusal

1. The proposal would result in unjustified dwellings in the open countryside, contrary to Planning Policy Wales (2016), Technical Advice Note 6 (2010) and Policies HP4 and HP8 of Powys County Council’s Unitary Development Plan (2010).

2. The proposed development would be a detached form of development which would have an unacceptable adverse impact upon the character and appearance of the locality, contrary to Policies HP5 and ENV2 of the Powys Unitary Development Plan (2010), Planning Policy Wales (2016) and Technical Advice Note (TAN) 12 (2016).

3. The proposal would not make adequate provision for highway access in respect of the access being in close proximity to the junction of the C2003/U2043 highways thereby

24 Page 68

causing driving confusion contrary to Policy GP4 of the Powys Unitary Development Plan (2010), Planning Policy Wales (2016) and Technical Advice Note 18: Transport (2007).

______Case Officer: Kate Bowen- Planning Officer Tel: 01938 551268 E-mail:[email protected]

25 Page 69 Page 70 PTLRW83 - 20165

Planning, Taxi Licensing and Rights of Way Committee Report

Application No: P/2015/0076 Grid Ref: 327287.79 267301.2

Community Whitton Valid Date: Officer: Council: 14/01/2015 Holly-ann Hobbs

Applicant: Mr D Jones, J K & E G Jones, Whitton Court, Whitton, Knighton Powys, LD7 1NN.

Location: Land adjacent to Lords Land, Whitton.

Proposal: Outline: Residential development comprising erection of 4 dwellings (3 affordable) and formation of vehicular access and all associated works

Application Application for Outline Planning Permission Type:

The reason for Committee determination

The proposed development represents a departure from the Unitary Development Plan.

Site Location and Description

The site subject to this application adjoins the settlement development boundary of Whitton as defined by the Powys Unitary Development Plan. The site is bound by agricultural land to the north and east. Located to the west is the public highway and to the south existing residential properties.

Outline planning permission is sought in respect of the provision of 3 affordable dwellings and 1 open market dwelling, formation of vehicular access and associated works. All matters have been reserved for future consideration.

Consultee Response

Whitton Community Council

Further to the monthly Community Council meeting held on Tuesday 17th February I would like to make the following comments on behalf of Whitton Community Council regarding the proposed planning for land adjacent to Lords Land, Whitton.

Several residents attended the meeting to voice the following concerns, which are upheld by the Council:

1. Water – rainwater run off would add considerable pressure to the land lower down in the field and cause more frequent flooding to an area, which is already susceptible.

1 Page 71 2. Sewerage – there is concern that Whitton could not cope with any further development without a new sewage works being installed. The development proposes a sewage treatment plant with clean water outfall into the stream at the bottom of the field.

3. The height of the development above the existing properties would have a detrimental effect on their privacy/light.

4. Affordable Housing – the proposed selling prices of these three ‘affordable’ properties would not be attainable for many local families. What is the definition of ‘affordable’ in this case.

5. The development is proposed on agricultural land, which is beyond the defined building line in the village.

6. Traffic – there would be an increase in vehicles coming in to the village in a spot where the 30mph speed limit is systematically ignored. This is at the entrance to the school and community hall, which is considered dangerous.

Highway Authority

Correspondence received 27th February 2015 –

The County Council as Highway Authority for the County Unclassified Highway, U1550 wish the following recommendations/observations be applied

Recommendations/Observations

Whilst the principle of residential development is not an issue there are a number of concerns generated by this submission that I would wish the applicant to be aware of.

 The application boundary does not extend to the existing limit of the adopted highway and therefore there would appear to be third party land within the access route.

 Although the indicative layout plan shows just four units there is very obvious scope to extend the development further. This raises two issues.

Firstly, APC Notices will necessarily be served when building regulation approval is granted to protect the public purse in the event of further development being sought and;

Secondly, the layout, although indicative, does not suggest sufficient land is being set aside for a potentially adoptable estate road.

I trust these matters will be given consideration.

Correspondence received 22nd April 2015 –

I refer to the additional information regarding land ownership and confirm I am satisfied that no third party land exists between the adopted highway and the development site.

2 Page 72 The other comments within my response were observations so I trust this clarification allows you to proceed.

Building Control

P/2015/0076 will require a building regulations.

Wales & West Utilities

With regards to your above request, this is not Wales & West Utilities area. This falls within National Grid’s area, contact details for them below:

Email: [email protected] Telephone: 0800 688 588

If you have any further questions please don’t hesitate to contact me. Many thanks

Welsh Water

No comments received at the time of writing this report.

Land Drainage Authority

The County Council as Land Drainage Authority would wish the following recommendations/observations be applied:-

Land Drainage / Flood Risk

The Lead Local Flood Authority holds no historical flooding information relating to the development site but records indicate that the site slopes towards the watercourse, the applicant would need to consider how surface water will be controlled from the site whilst interrupting drainage of the surrounding land and not exacerbating or creating any flooding problems. From available information the ground conditions for the site are freely draining slightly acid loamy soils.

Surface Water Run-off

Comments: The site is classed as Greenfield. Therefore, proposed surface water flows should be equivalent to existing Greenfield run-off in accordance with the principles of TAN15 – Development and Flood Risk and good practice drainage design.

The use of soakaways and or other infiltration techniques should be investigated in the first instance for surface water disposal. Porosity tests and the sizing of the soakaways should be designed in accordance with BRE Digest 365 to cater for a 1 in 100 year return storm event plus an allowance of 30% for climate change.

No development shall commence until a scheme for the drainage of the site has been submitted to and approved in writing by the local planning authority. The approved scheme shall be completed before any of the dwellings are occupied. The scheme to be submitted shall show foul drainage being connected to the public sewerage system.

3 Page 73

Reason: To ensure that the proposed surface water drainage is fully compliant with regulations and is of robust design.

Reason: To ensure that no surface water runoff from the new driveway runs onto the highway.

Affordable Housing Officer

I am happy with the application as long as the following guidelines are adhered to:

• All Affordable units will have to be constructed to Welsh Government Design Quality Requirements which include all of the Lifetime Homes and Secured by Design Standards. • All units will have to meet the floor areas specified in Powys County Council’s Affordable Housing Supplementary Planning Guidance. • The Design Quality Requirements will be those current at the time of the detailed planning application.

Correspondence received 9th July 2015 –

Please see the latest figures below that I have from WG regarding the acceptable cost guides for affordable homes.

Having looked through the planning details for this application I cannot find the property size details?

I can confirm that Whitton is situated in Band 1 so the prices being suggested are definitely too high.

(Please see Acceptable Cost Guidance table below)

4 Page 74

Estates Department

I write to provide the following comments with regards to the proposed development, Land adjacent to Lords Land, Whitton.

The valuation team have considered the Development Viability Assessment dated the 9th May 2016, our comments are as follows.

1, The likely affordable sale values stated are considered realistic and justified.

2, The construction costs fall within the BCIS build cost estimates range but are considered high considering the end market being affordable. By reducing the build costs and quality the scheme could be made viable. This judgement has been formed without sight of a detailed cost breakdown.

3, The Development would also become profitable by allowing one open market value property resulting in an increased sale value.

Councillor Hywel Lewis – Local Member

5 Page 75 Further to our telephone conversation regarding the above planning application and your acceptance of a verbal notice of call in of the application for determination by committee I wish to confirm that request.

Having attended Whitton Community Council meeting yesterday evening where members of the community were present and were invited to express their views it became clear that there concerns regarding the proposal as listed below.

The development would be outside the designated planning line therefore would be on agricultural land.

Rainwater run-off from the proposed development which is on an elevated site could cause more flooding further down the field which is a flood plain.

Foul water discharge would have to be via a digester as Whitton has no public sewerage works and as the existing estate discharges into the stream the extra discharge could be detrimental to water quality.

The estimated selling price of the dwellings is well above what would be regarded as affordable in view of the low earnings of the area.

I trust the above concern will be passed on to the planning committee for their deliberation.

Representations

At the time of writing this report, a total of 6 representations have been received by Development Management which comprise of the following;

3 letters of objection;

. Is there a need for housing within the area? . Development in the open countryside when there are brownfield sites available; . Adverse impact on adjoining residential properties; . Poor drainage; . Loss of Community Centre parking and increased parking on the highway; . Adverse impact on pedestrian safety; . Sustainability – poor public transport and reliance on private vehicles; . Limited water supply; . No mains sewer.

3 letters of support;

. Provision of affordable housing will provide opportunities for local couples and families to remain within the community/area that they grew up in or currently work.

Principal Planning Constraints

Open Countryside

6 Page 76 Principal Planning Policies

National Planning Policy

Planning Policy Wales (2016)

- Technical Advice Note 1 – Joint Housing Land Availability Studies (2015) - Technical Advice Note 2 – Planning and Affordable Housing (2006) - Technical Advice Note 5 – Nature Conservation and Planning (2009) - Technical Advice Note 6 – Planning for Sustainable Rural Communities (2010) - Technical Advice Note 12 – Design (2016) - Technical Advice Note 15 – Development and Flood Risk (2004) - Technical Advice Note 18 – Transport (2007) - Technical Advice Note 23 – Economic Development (2014)

Local Planning Policy

- Powys Unitary Development Plan (2010)

SP1 – Social, Community and Cultural Sustainability SP3 – Natural, Historic and Built Heritage SP5 – Housing Developments GP1 – Development Control GP3 – Design and Energy Conservation GP4 – Highway and Parking Requirements ENV1 – Agricultural Land ENV2 – Safeguarding the Landscape ENV3 – Safeguarding Biodiversity and Natural Habitats HP3 – Housing Land Availability HP4 – Settlement Development Boundaries and Capacities HP5 – Residential Developments HP6 – Dwellings in the Open Countryside HP8 – Affordable Housing Adjoining Settlements with Development Boundaries HP10 – Affordability Criteria HP14 – Sustainable Housing DC8 – Public Water Supply DC9 – Protection of Water Resources DC11 – Non Mains Sewage Treatment DC13 – Surface Water Drainage TR2 – Tourist Attractions and Development Areas

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

Officer Appraisal

Introduction

Members are advised to consider this application in accordance with Section 38 (6) of the Planning and Compulsory Purchase Act 2004, which requires that, if regard is to be had to

7 Page 77 the development plan for the purpose of any determination to be made under the Planning Acts, the determination must be made in accordance with the plan unless material considerations indicate otherwise.

Principle of Development

The proposed site of development adjoins the settlement development boundary of Whitton as defined by the proposed development. The proposed residential development proposes the erection of three affordable unit and one open market dwelling. In assessing the acceptability of the proposed development, consideration is given to the following;

Proposed Affordable Dwellings

UDP policy HP8 indicates that with the exception of area centres, favourable consideration will be given to proposals for affordable housing to meet local needs in rural area as an exception to normal housing policies in cases where all the following are met;

1. The site adjoins a settlement with a development boundary; 2. The proposal is small in scale, well located and sensitively designed in keeping with its surroundings and local building styles; 3. The housing should remain affordable in perpetuity and comply with policy HP7, criteria (B), (C) and (D). 4. The proposal complies with UDP policy HP10.

Having carefully considered the proposed development, Officers are satisfied that the proposal (three affordable houses) is in accordance with policy HP8 as above. The site immediately adjoins the settlement development boundary and is of a scale in keeping with the character and appearance of the existing settlement.

Should Members be minded to grant planning permission, it is recommended that the provision and of the affordable housing and occupancy requirements be secured through an appropriate legal agreement. Furthermore, given that the application is made in outline, it is recommended that the floor area of the affordable units be limited to 130 square metres in accordance with policy HP10 of the Powys UDP.

In light of the above observations and subject to an appropriate legal agreement, Development Management considers the provision of affordable housing in this location to be fundamentally acceptable in principle.

Proposed Open Market Dwelling

The provision of an open market dwelling in this location constitutes a departure from the adopted development plan. In order to justify the provision of the proposed dwelling, the application is accompanied by a Viability Assessment which has been subject to review by the Council’s Estates Department.

The viability assessment confirms that the delivery of the three affordable units would not be a viable option unless an open market dwelling is provided on site. Having reviewed the viability assessment, the Council’s Valuer has confirmed that whilst the figures relating to estimated build costs are relatively high, they fall within the recognised industry range.

8 Page 78 Furthermore, estimated sale costs are considered to be reasonable and in line with the acceptable costs guidance reference by the Councils’ Affordable Housing Officer.

Based upon the assessment provided in addition to the Councils lack of a 5 year housing supply, Officers consider that sufficient evidence has been provided to demonstrate that the provision of an open market dwelling can be justified thus supporting a departure from the adopted plan. Nevertheless, in order to ensure that the affordable housing is delivered in association with the open market unit, it is recommended that a suitable condition be attached to any grant of consent requiring the submission of an affordable housing phasing scheme. Subject to the above, it is considered that the delivery of the affordable units can be secured whilst ensuring that the development remains viable.

Appearance, Layout, Scale & Landscaping

UDP policy HP5 (Residential Development) indicates that development proposals will only be permitted where the scale, form and appearance of the development generally reflects the character and appearance of the existing settlement.

It is noted that concern has been raised within third party representations received regarding the impact of the proposed development on the character and appearance of the existing settlement and the potential impact on the amenities enjoyed by occupants of neighbouring properties. Particular concern has been expressed regarding the level of the site relative to the adjoining estate (Lords Land) and possibility of overlooking and overbearing impact.

Having visited the application site, it is noted that the topography of the application site is relatively flat although it is acknowledged that the site is slightly elevated relative to the adjoining development. Notwithstanding the above, subject to a condition requiring details of existing and proposed site levels to be provided at reserved matters, it is considered that potential impact on adjoining properties can be adequately managed through site layout and design.

Whilst Officers acknowledge that matters relating to appearance, layout, landscaping and scale have been reserved for future consideration, on the basis of the plans provided, it is considered that the application site is capable of accommodating a residential scheme without unacceptably adversely affecting the character and appearance of the area or amenities enjoyed by occupants of neighbouring properties. As such, the proposed development is considered to be in accordance with planning policy, particularly policies GP1, ENV2 and HP5 of the Powys UDP.

Highway Safety and Movement

UDP policy GP4 confirms that in the interests of highway safety, all development proposals that generate or involve traffic must be provided with an adequate means of access including visibility, parking and turning facilities.

Although access is a matter reserved for future consideration, the indicative layout indicates that access will be facilitated via the existing access off the county highway serving the Lord Lands estate.

9 Page 79 Following initial consultation, land ownership was queried by the Highway Authority. Comments were also made in respect of the indicative road layout and possible issues regarding future adoptability. Subsequent to the above, the applicants’ agent provided confirmation of the landownership which was accepted by the Highway Authority. Although the comments remain regarding future ability to comply with adoptable standards, as this is independent of any planning permission granted, it is not considered that significant weight can be given to this in determining the current planning application.

Members will note that concern has been expressed by the Community Council and interested third parties regarding increased vehicular movements generated by the proposed residential development and potential impact on highway safety. Whilst acknowledging the concerns expressed, in light of the Highway Authority comments received, it is not considered that a refusal on highway grounds would be justified.

On the basis of the information submitted, albeit indicative at this stage, Development Management considers that adequate highway provision including access, parking and turning is capable of being provided as required by policy GP4 of the Powys UDP, the detail of which will be subject to consideration upon the submission of a reserved matters application.

Non-mains Sewage Disposal and Surface Water Run-Off

Sewage Disposal

Policy DC10 of the Powys UDP confirms that where it is not feasible for development proposals to connect to the public foul sewerage system, permission will be granted for the provision and use of private treatment plants providing that the ground conditions in terms of drainage and porosity are suitable and will not give rise to pollution problems or adversely affect the quality of surface or ground waters.

The indicative site layout indicates the provision of a private treatment plant which will discharge to a nearby watercourse, consent for which will need to be sought from Natural Resources Wales. Subject to an appropriate condition being attached requiring details of the proposed system to be provided, Officers are satisfied that potential impact on the environmental can be adequately control in accordance with DC11 of the Powys UDP.

Surface Water

UDP policy DC13 indicates that development proposals will only be permitted where they make adequate provision for land drainage and surface water disposal and would not give rise to unacceptable on or off site flooding.

Following consultation, the Land Drainage Authority has confirmed that the proposed development would not result in land drainage issues subject to appropriate conditions being attached to any grant of planning permission securing the submission of a detailed Drainage Scheme. In light of the above and notwithstanding the concerns expressed, Development Management considers the proposed development to be in accordance with planning policy, particularly policy DC13 of the Powys UDP.

10 Page 80

RECOMMENDATION

The proposed residential scheme is considered to be of a modest scale, in keeping with the character and appearance of the existing settlement.

Whilst the provision of the open market dwelling constitutes a departure from the adopted development plan, sufficient evidence has been provided to demonstrate that the provision of the affordable units would not be economically viable without this. Considerable weight has also been given to securing a 5 year housing supply.

The provision of three affordable units at this location is considered to be in accordance with planning policy HP8 and actively supported by Development Management, providing affordable housing to meet local need in a rural area.

In light of the above, subject to no objections being received from Environmental Health Services, the recommendation is one of conditional consent subject to a Section 106 agreement securing the provision of three affordable housing units in perpetuity.

It is also recommended that a time limit of two months is given for the legal agreement to be completed and in the event that it is not concluded within such time period, delegation is given to the Professional Lead for Development Management, in consultation with the Chair and Vice Chair, to refuse the application, unless satisfied that the delay is unavoidable and that there is sufficient evidence to conclude that the matter will be concluded within a further reasonable time period.

Conditions:

1. Details of the access, 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.

2. Any application for approval of the reserved matters shall be made to the local planning authority not later than three years from the date of this permission.

3. The development shall begin either before the expiration of five years from the date of this permission or before the expiration of two years from the date of approval of the last of the reserved matters to be approved, whichever is the later.

4. The development shall be carried out strictly in accordance with the documents (Planning, Design and Access Statement) and plans (Site Location Plan – 4420/2A) received 14th January 2015 and 19th August 2016 respectively stamped as approved.

5. Notwithstanding the provisions of Article 3 and Parts I & 2 of the second schedule to the Town and Country Planning (General Permitted Development) (Amendment) (Wales) Order 2013, no development as specified in Part I Classes, A,B,D,E,G & H within the curtilage of the affordable dwellings hereby authorised or any minor operations as specified in Part 2 (Class A) other than that indicated on the plans hereby approved shall be carried out without planning permission.

11 Page 81

6. Prior to the commencement of development, a phasing scheme for the delivery of the affordable units hereby approved shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. Thereafter, the development shall be implemented strictly in accordance with the affordable housing phasing scheme so approved.

7. Full details of the existing and proposed ground levels of the application site together with the proposed finished floor levels of the proposed residential units shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority at the same time as the matters referred to in condition 1. The development shall thereafter be undertaken in full accordance with the details so approved.

8. No development shall commence until a detailed foul and surface water drainage scheme has been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. Thereafter, the development shall be undertaken strictly in accordance with the details so approved prior to the first occupation of the dwellings hereby approved.

Reasons:

1. To enable the Local Planning Authority to exercise proper control over the development in accordance with Section 92 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990.

2. Required to be imposed by Section 92 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990.

3. Required to be imposed by Section 92 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990.

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

5. The proposed dwellings are permitted as an exception to normal housing policy. This condition is imposed in order to control future development at the site which has the potential to compromise the affordability of specified units in accordance with policies HP8 and HP10 of the Powys Unitary Development Plan (2010) and Planning Policy Wales (2016).

6. In order to ensure the delivery of the affordable housing and prevent the provision of an unjustified dwelling in the open countryside. This condition is imposed in accordance with policies HP6, HP7, HP8 and HP10 of the Powys Unitary Development Plan (2010), Technical Advice Note 6 – Planning for Sustainable Rural Communities (2010) and Planning Policy Wales (2016).

7. In order that the Local Planning Authority can assess changes in levels in the interest of the character and appearance of the area and amenities enjoyed by occupants of neighbouring properties. This is in accordance with policies GP1, ENV2, and HP5 of the Powys Unitary Development Plan (2010).

8. In order to ensure the proposed means of drainage is acceptable. This condition is imposed in accordance with policies GP1 and DC13 of the Powys Unitary Development Plan (2010) and Planning Policy Wales (2016).

Notes:

12 Page 82

If non permeable surfacing is used on the new driveway and parking area and/or the driveway slopes toward the highway, the applicant should submit for approval a drainage system to intercept water prior to flowing on to the public highway. ______Case Officer: Holly-ann Hobbs- Principal Planning Officer Tel: 01597 827319 E-mail:[email protected]

13 Page 83 Page 84 PTLRW83 - 20166

Planning, Taxi Licensing and Rights of Way Committee Report

Application No: P/2016/0650 Grid Ref: 314920.01 311287.63

Community Meifod Valid Date: Officer: Council: 08/07/2016 Kate Bowen

Applicant: J & E Jones, Lower Hall, Meifod, Powys, SY22 6HR

Location: Lower Hall, Meifod, Powys, SY22 6HR

Proposal: Erection of a livestock building

Application Application for Full Planning Permission Type:

Reason for Committee determination

One of the applicants is a close family member of a County Councillor.

Site Location and Description

The application site is located to the east of the C2126 class three highway, approximately 2km to the south from the centre of the village of Meifod. Access is gained off the C2126 highway. It is proposed to erect an agricultural building measuring 32 metres by 12 metres and a ridge height of 6.53 metres. The building would have concrete base walls with box profile sheeting above under a blue fibre cement sheeted roof.

Consultee Response

Meifod Community Council

The proposed site will be well screened and not obviously visible – support.

PCC Highway Authority

No objection.

PCC Land Drainage

No response received.

PCC Environmental Health

Environmental Protection has no objection to this application.

Wales & West Utilities

1 Page 85 According to our mains records Wales & West Utilities has no apparatus in the area of your enquiry. However Gas pipes owned by other GT's and also privately owned may be present in this area. Information with regard to such pipes should be obtained from the owners.

Please note that the plans are only valid for 28 days from the date of issue and updated plans must be requested before any work commences on site if this period has expired.

Severn Trent Water

Thank you for the opportunity to comment on this planning application. Please find our response noted below:

Waste Water Comments With Reference to the above planning application the company’s observations regarding sewerage are as follows.

I can confirm we have no comment to make as no foul sewage or surface water is to discharge to the public sewerage system.

PCC Rights of Way

Thank you for consulting Countryside Services on the above application.

Unfortunately we must object to the proposal. A Public Right of Way (Footpath 80) could be obstructed by the proposed development.

The applicant will either need to consider re-siting the proposed building in order to avoid obstructing the right of way, or applying for a diversion of the footpath to avoid the development.

Natural Resources Wales (NRW)

Thank you for consulting Natural Resources Wales (NRW) about the above, which was received on 12/07/2016.

NRW does not object to the proposal. In our opinion, as explained below, the proposal is not likely to adversely affect any of the interests listed.

Environmental Management Under the Water Resources (Control of Pollution) (Silage, Slurry and Agriculture Fuel Oil) (Wales) Regulations 2010 (SSAFO) any slurry produced must be contained. This will include any liquid arising from solid manures and any liquid produced if feeding cattle on the hard standing as this is classified as slurry under the SSAFO Regulations.

2 Page 86 If any arising slurry is being directed to an existing store the applicant must ensure there is sufficient capacity to allow for the required minimum 4 months storage.

The SSAFO Regulations 2010 require all installations to be constructed to set standards with a durability life of at least 20 years. Installations for storing and/or making slurry and silage must not be constructed within 10 metres of any inland freshwater or coastal water. Further information on the requirements of the SSAFO Regulations is contained within Welsh Government’s SSAFO Guidance Notes for Farmers. This can be viewed at http://wales.gov.uk/topics/environmentcountryside/farmingandcountryside/farmcountrypublica tionindex/ssafowalesregs2010/?lang=en.

We would advise the applicant that Natural Resources Wales must be notified in writing at least 14 days before bringing any new or substantially altered or enlarged silage or slurry store into use. It is a legal requirement to submit this information prior to using the new structure. A form (WQE3) is available from our website at: http://www.naturalresources.wales/farming/good-farming-practice/?lang=en (please scroll to the bottom of the page). Before commencing any construction work, we strongly advise that the applicant to contact our NRW 03000653000 or [email protected]

Protected Species We note that there is no information about protected species with the application and, therefore, are assuming that: a) your Authority has screened the application and concluded that there is not a reasonable likelihood of protected species being present

Please don’t hesitate to contact me if you require clarification on the above.

Our comments above only relate specifically to matters that are included on our checklist “Natural Resources Wales and Planning Consultations” (March 2015) which is published on our website: (https://naturalresources.wales/planning-and-development/planning-and- development/?lang=en). We have not considered potential effects on other matters and do not rule out the potential for the proposed development to affect other interests, including environmental interests of local importance. The applicant should be advised that, in addition to planning permission, it is their responsibility to ensure that they secure all other permits/consents relevant to their development.

PCC Ecologist

Thank you for consulting me with regards to planning application P/2016/0650 which concerns an application for the Erection of a livestock building.

I have reviewed the proposed plans submitted with the application as well as photographs of the site, local records of protected and priority species and designated sites within 500m of the proposed development. The data search identified 27 record of protected and priority species within 500m of the proposed development – no records were for the site itself.

The Clawdd Llesg Road Verge Nature Reserve is within 500m of the proposed development, having reviewed the location of the proposed development in relation to the RVNR as well as the nature of the proposed development it is considered that the proposed works would not

3 Page 87 result in a negative impact to the RVNR of the features for which it was designated. There are no other statutory or non-statutory designated sites within 500m of the proposed works.

The area of land affected by the proposed development is an existing area of hardstanding surrounded by semi improved grassland and scattered trees, hedgerows and scrub. Having reviewed the photographs of the site as well as local records it is considered that the site of the proposed development has negligible potential to support protected species or habitats and that the proposed development would not result in negative impacts or loss of biodiversity and no surveys are considered necessary.

Part 1 Section 6 of the Environment (Wales) Act 2016 requires Local Authorities to Maintain and Enhance biodiversity through all of its functions – this includes the planning process. I therefore recommend that a biodiversity enhancement plan is secured through an appropriately worded condition to ensure net biodiversity benefits (biodiversity enhancements) through the proposed development. These measures could include: • provision of bird and bat boxes including the details of the number, type and location of these boxes; • a wildlife buffer strip and a scheme of appropriate management of these areas, hedgerows should be retained within buffer strips and should be unlit or lighting to be directed away from the hedgerows to create dark movement corridors for nocturnal wildlife through the site;

Therefore should you be minded to approve the application I recommend inclusion of the following conditions:

Prior to commencement of development, a Biodiversity Enhancement Plan shall be submitted to the Local Planning Authority and implemented as approved and maintained thereafter unless otherwise agreed in writing with the LPA.

Reason: To comply with Powys County Council’s UDP Policies SP3, ENV2 and ENV3 in relation to The Natural Environment and to meet the requirements of TAN 5: Nature Conservation and Planning, Welsh government strategies, and Section 6 of the Environment (Wales) Act 2016.

Open Spaces Society

No response received.

Powys Ramblers Association

Thank you for the opportunity to comment on this application.

It looks very much like the proposed development would obstruct a right of way. In these circumstances it is our view that planning permission should not be granted unless the proposed development is moved so that it does not obstruct the right of way or that an acceptable diversion is agreed and implemented before any development takes place. We note that Countryside Services has objected to the application on these grounds.

4 Page 88 Public Representations

Following display of a site notice and publicity in the local press, no public representations have been received.

Planning History

AGRI/2010/0080 - Construction of a hardstanding. Planning permission not required 27.07/2010 M/1999/0406 - Alteration to vehicular access. Conditional consent 04/06/1999 M954 – Construction of forest road and access. Conditional consent 07/02/1975

Principal Planning Constraints

 Public Right of Way 249/80/1; and  Class three highway (C2126).

Principal Planning Policies

National Planning Policy

Planning Policy Wales (Edition 8, 2016)

Technical Advice Note (TAN) 6 - Planning for Sustainable Rural Communities (2010) Technical Advice Note 23 – Economic Development (2014)

Local Planning Policy

Powys Unitary Development Plan (2010)

UDP SP3 – Natural, Historic and Built Heritage UDP GP1 – Development Control UDP GP4 – Highway Access and Parking Requirements UDP ENV2 – Safeguarding the Landscape UDP ENV3 – Safeguarding Biodiversity and Natural Habitats UDP EC9 – Agricultural Development UDP TR2 – Tourist Attractions and Development Areas UDP RL6 - Rights of Way and Access to the Countryside

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

Officer Appraisal

Section 38 (6) of the Planning and Compulsory Purchase Act 2004

5 Page 89 Acts, the determination must be made in accordance with the plan unless material considerations indicate otherwise.

Principle and policy

UDP Policy EC9, Agricultural Development seeks to reduce the visual impact of buildings by encouraging proposed buildings to be grouped with existing buildings, using appropriate materials and insisting on additional landscaping in particularly sensitive locations. UDP Policies GP1 and GP4 require consideration of the impact of the proposal upon the amenities enjoyed by the occupants of neighbouring properties and whether the site is served by an adequate vehicular access.

Visual and landscape impact

The surrounding landscape is characterised by undulating topography and the application site is a levelled area of hardstanding set into the hillside which is screened by mature trees. The site is surrounded by semi improved grassland and scattered trees, hedgerows and scrub. The building would not be grouped with existing buildings (limited opportunities exist for expansion of main farm complex) and would be located approximately 160 metres to the south east of the poultry unit building which forms part of the main farm complex. However, the site already accommodates an area of hardstanding and is set into the hillside and is well screened from the class three highway and from long distance views. A public right of way travels through the application site and there would be close views of the building from this public vantage point, however, such agricultural buildings are common within the rural landscape and as such it is not considered that there would be an adverse visual impact arising from the proposal. Otherwise the building is similar in scale elsewhere on the farm complex and neighbouring agricultural enterprises with the proposed materials being standard modern materials used on agricultural buildings in the locality and as such would not be inappropriate at this location.

It is considered that the proposed building would not cause any unacceptable adverse visual or landscape impact. Given that the building would be sited in an existing cleared area, set into the hillside which is well screened, it is considered that there is no requirement for additional landscaping.

Public right of way

As referred to above, a Public Right of Way (Footpath 80) travels through the application site. The Countryside Services department has advised that the footpath could potentially be obstructed by the proposed development. The Countryside Services department has further advised that the applicant will either need to consider re-siting the proposed building in order to avoid obstructing the right of way, or applying for a diversion of the footpath to avoid the development.

A copy of the Definitive Map has been provided to Development Management which indicates that the footpath originates at the C2126 highway and travels in a north easterly direction through the woodland known as Foel Wood. Given the scale of the Definitive Map, it is very difficult to clarify whether the building would actually obstruct the route of the public right of way. The responses from Countryside Services and Powys Ramblers Association are noted, however given that Countryside Services have advised that the applicant can apply for

6 Page 90 a diversion of the public footpath and that the submission demonstrates that the applicant has the land holding in which to accommodate such a diversion if necessary, it is considered that this matter does not warrant refusal of the application. The granting of planning permission does not entail that the works can proceed without consideration of other statutory instruments such as legislation safeguarding Rights of Way and as such it is recommended that an informative is attached to any consent granted to ensure that the developer is reminded of the public right of way.

Impact upon tourist attractions

Public footpath 80 travels through the application site and there are a number of public rights of way in the locality which are considered to be part of Powys’ tourist attractions. Given the nature of the proposal and the location, set within the hillside and well screened, it is considered that the proposed building would not have an unacceptable adverse effect upon the environmental setting of established tourist attractions.

Highway access

Vehicular access would be gained via the existing access off the class three highway. In consideration of the nature of the access and the proposal and that the Highway Authority has not objected to the proposal, it is considered that the proposal is served by an adequate means of access in accordance with UDP Policy GP4.

Impact upon amenities enjoyed by residents of neighbouring properties

The nearest residential properties, not associated with the farm enterprise are known as Ty Brith and Trefedrid, located to the south east of the application at distances over 180 metres. Agricultural buildings have the potential to impact upon the amenities enjoyed by occupiers of neighbouring residential properties from noise, odour, dust and insects. The Council’s Environmental Health department have not raised concern over the proposal and given that the proposed development seeks to construct a building where an area of hardstanding already exists, it is considered that the proposal would not cause any unacceptable adverse impacts upon the amenities enjoyed by occupiers of residential properties.

Nature conservation

The Council’s Ecologist has advised that a search of local records of protected and priority species and designated sites within 500m of the proposed development identified 27 records of protected and priority species, however no records relate to the site itself. The Clawdd Llesg Road Verge Nature Reserve (RVNR) is within 500m of the proposed development and having reviewed the location of the proposed development in relation to the RVNR as well as the nature of the proposed development, the Ecologist has advised that it is considered that the proposed works would not result in a negative impact to the RVNR of the features for which it was designated. There are no other statutory or non-statutory designated sites within 500m of the proposed works.

The Ecologist has further advised that the site of the proposed development has negligible potential to support protected species or habitats and that the proposed development would not result in negative impacts or loss of biodiversity and no ecological surveys are considered necessary.

7 Page 91

Part 1 Section 6 of the Environment (Wales) Act 2016 requires Local Authorities to Maintain and Enhance biodiversity through all of its functions – this includes the planning process. Therefore, the Ecologist has recommended that a biodiversity enhancement plan is secured through an appropriately worded condition to ensure net biodiversity benefits (biodiversity enhancements) through the proposed development. On the basis of the advice from Natural Resources Wales and the Council’s Ecologist, it is recommended that a condition requiring the submission, approval and implementation of a Biodiversity Enhancement Plan is attached to any consent granted in accordance with UDP Policy ENV3 as well as the requirements of The Environment (Wales) Act 2016.

RECOMMENDATION

It is concluded that the proposal complies with the relevant local and national planning policies and guidance. Therefore, the recommendation is one of conditional consent as set out below.

Conditions:

1. The development to which this permission relates shall be begun no later than the expiration of five years from the date of this permission. 2. The development shall be carried out strictly in accordance with the plans stamped as approved on xxxx (drawing no's: RJC-MZ54-01, RJC-MZ54-02, RJC-MZ54-03). 3. Prior to commencement of development, a Biodiversity Enhancement Plan shall be submitted to the Local Planning Authority and implemented as approved and maintained thereafter. 4. The building hereby permitted shall be used for agricultural purposes only as defined by Section 336 of The Town and Country Planning Act 1990.

Reasons 1. Required to be imposed by Section 91 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990. 2. To ensure adherence to the plans stamped as approved in the interests of clarity and a satisfactory development. 3. To comply with Powys County Council's Unitary Development Plan Policies SP3, ENV2 and ENV3 in relation to The Natural Environment and to meet the requirements of TAN 5: Nature Conservation and Planning, Welsh government strategies, and Section 6 of the Environment (Wales) Act 2016. 4. To safeguard the visual amenity of the area in compliance with Powys Unitary Development Plan Policy EC9.

Informative Notes

Public right of way

Public Footpath number 80 passes very close to the development. The applicant/developer is reminded it is an offence to interfere with the surface of a public right of way and should be minded when undertaking works to not obstruct the above footpath.

The Countryside Services department of the Council has advised that the applicant can apply

8 Page 92 for a diversion of the footpath. The Countryside Services department can be contacted via email: [email protected] or telephone: 01597 827500.

Wales and West Utilities

9 Page 93 Page 94 PTLRW83 - 20167

Planning, Taxi Licensing and Rights of Way Committee Report

Application No: TREE/2016/0024 Grid Ref: 322289.43, 296361.25

Community Montgomery Valid Date: Officer: Council: 05/07/2016 Bryn Pryce

Applicant: Powys County Council

Location: Junction of Back Lane and Bishops Castle Street, Montgomery, Powys, SY15 6PP.

Proposal: Works to trees in a conservation area.

Application Works to trees subject to a TPO and/or Notification of proposed works to Type: trees in conservation areas

The reason for Committee determination

This application is to be determined by the Planning, Taxi Licensing and Rights of Way Committee as the applicant is Powys County Council.

Site Location and Description

This application proposes works to three trees located within Montgomery Conservation Area. The site is located adjacent to Back Lane (U4800) off Bishops Castle Street (B4385). The works proposed are as follows:

 192 – Norway Maple – Remove deadwood in the crown, strip ivy and arrange for a further inspection.  193 – Norway Maple – Remove Deadwood in the crown  194 – Willow – Repollard as there are cavities in the pollard head with decay present.

Consultee Response

Montgomery Community Council

No comments received by Development Management at the time of writing this report.

County Ecologist

No comments received by Development Management at the time of writing this report.

Councillor S Hayes – Local Member

No comments received by Development Management at the time of writing this report.

Planning History

1 Page 95

TREE/2012/0026

Principal Planning Constraints

Historic Landscapes Register

Principal Planning Policies

National Planning Policy

Planning Policy Wales (2016)

Technical Advice Note 5 – Nature Conservation and Planning (2005) Technical Advice Note 10 – Tree Preservation Orders (1997)

Local Planning Policy

Powys Unitary Development Plan 2010

GP1 – Development Control ENV2 – Safeguarding the Landscape ENV3 – Safeguarding Biodiversity and Natural Habitats ENV7 – Protected Species ENV 8 – Tree Preservation Orders ENV11 – Development in Conservation Areas

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

Officer Appraisal

Introduction

Proposed Tree Works

On receipt of an application confirming the applicants’ intention to carry out works to trees in a Conservation Area, the planning authority, (1) may allow the 6 weeks period to expire or, (2) inform the applicant that the works can go ahead or, (3) make a Tree Preservation Order (TPO).

Planning Authorities are able to make TPOs in the interest of public amenity, however the key issues in considering the making of a TPO relate to: visibility, individual impact, wider impact and expediency.

2 Page 96

The proposed works seek to remove deadwood and re-pollard the identified trees in order to support their future growth and health. Given the nature of work proposed and the location of the trees within the Conservation Area and amenity value, the proposed works are supported by Development Management.

RECOMMENDATION

It is considered that the proposed works to the trees are acceptable and the recommendation is therefore one of consent.

Informative Notes

Bats - Wildlife & Countryside Act 1981 (as amended) and The Conservation of Habitats and Species Regulations 2010 (as amended)

It is an offence for any person to:

 Intentionally kill, injure or take any bats.  Intentionally or recklessly damage, destroy or obstruct access to any place that a bat uses for shelter or protection. This is taken to mean all bat roosts whether bats are present or not. Under the Habitats Regulations it is an offence to:  Damage or destroy a breeding site or resting place of any bat. This is an absolute offence - in other words, intent or recklessness does not have to be proved.

The applicant is therefore reminded that it is an offence under the Wildlife and Countryside Act 1981 (as amended) and The Conservation of Habitats and Species Regulations 2010 (as amended) that works to trees or buildings where that work involves the disturbance of a bat is an offence if a licence has not been obtained from Natural Resources Wales. If a bat is discovered while work is being undertaken, all work must stop and advice sought from Natural Resources Wales and the Council's Ecologist. You can also call the National Bat helpline on 0345 1300 228 or email [email protected]

Birds - Wildlife and Countryside Act 1981 (as amended)

All nesting birds, their nests, eggs and young are protected by law and it is an offence to:

 intentionally kill, injure or take any wild bird  intentionally take, damage or destroy the nest of any wild bird whilst it is in use or being built  intentionally take or destroy the egg of any wild bird  intentionally (or recklessly in England and Wales) disturb any wild bird listed on Schedule 1 while it is nest building, or at a nest containing eggs or young, or disturb the dependent young of such a bird.

The maximum penalty that can be imposed - in respect of a single bird, nest or egg - is a fine of up to 5,000 pounds, six months imprisonment or both.

3 Page 97 The applicant is therefore reminded that it is an offence under the Wildlife and Countryside Act 1981 (as amended) to remove or work on any hedge, tree or building where that work involves the taking, damaging or destruction of any nest of any wild bird while the nest is in use or being built, (usually between late February and late August or late September in the case of swifts, swallows or house martins). If a nest is discovered while work is being undertaken, all work must stop and advice sought from Natural Resources Wales and the Council's Ecologist. ______Case Officer: Bryn Pryce- Planning Officer Tel: 01597 82 7126 E-mail:[email protected]

4 Page 98 Page 99 This page is intentionally left blank PTLRW84 - 2016

Delegated List

03/08/2016 09 23/08/2016 09 For the purpose of the Local Government (Access to Information) Act 1985, the background papers relating to each individual planning application constitute all the correspondence on the file as numbered in the left hand column.

FOR INFORMATION Decisions of the Head of Regeneration, Property & Commissioning on Delegated Applications

Application Valid Decision Decision notice Proposal Location No. Date sentdate

Boxbush Farm P/2015/1102 01/12/2015 00REFUSE 04/08/2016 Change of use of land Three Cocks FULL to touring caravan park, conversion and extension of existing Brecon buildings to provide sanitary, office, retail LD3 0SH (site users only) storage and garaging facilities. Creation of a new access to serve dwellinghouse and

P/2016/0648 09/06/2016 00REFCADW 04/08/2016 Listed building consent LBC for refurbishment works including repairs to 11 Llanfair Road chimney, windows and Newtown guttering; paint front door and windows, SY16 2DQ repairs to ceiling and fireproofing of internal wall and installation of secondary glazing to 3 front elevation windows

Page 101 1 Application Valid Decision Decision notice Proposal Location No. Date sentdate

Land at Clwydyronen Farm ng P/2015/1063 02/11/2015 00CONSENT 05/08/2016 Erection of an (adjoinig Ashgrove) Guilsfield FULL S106 affordable dwelling, detached garage, formation of vehicular Welshpool access, installation of a septic tank and SY21 9DG provision of passing bay

Talcen Llwydiarth P/2015/1124 18/11/2015 00CONSENT 05/08/2016 Change of use of Tylwch FULL agricultural building to boarding kennels (sui generis) (retrospective) Llanidloes

SY18 6JP

Caecappin P/2016/0193 22/02/2016 00CONSENT 05/08/2016 Erection of a poultry unit Tregynon FULL to include feed bins, new access and associated works Newtown

SY16 3PB

The Maesydd P/2016/0209 23/03/2016 00CONSENT 05/08/2016 Erection of an Pool Quay FULL anaerobic digestion plant, construction of vehicular access and Welshpool track and all associated works (part SY21 9LA retrospective)

The Old Mill P/2016/0483 29/04/2016 00CONSENT 05/08/2016 Erection of car port and HOUS boundary walls Mill Road Knighton

LD7 1HF

Page 102 2 Application Valid Decision Decision notice Proposal Location No. Date sentdate

Applegreen Service Station P/2016/0522 12/05/2016 00CONSENT 05/08/2016 Erection of extensions FULL to existing building for a mixed A1 and A3 use Salop Road Welshpool

SY21 7ES

Bramley Edge P/2016/0631 09/06/2016 00CONSENT 07/08/2016 Section 73 application REM for removal of conditions 3, 4 & 5 Churchill Close (code for sustainable Newtown homes) of planning permission SY16 2PU P/2011/0590

School Farm P/2016/0610 13/06/2016 00CONSENT 08/08/2016 Erection of nissen style Old Radnor FULL barn (retrospective) Presteigne

LD8 2RR

Twyn yr Onnen P/2016/0623 13/06/2016 00REFUSE 08/08/2016 Conversion of barn to Llandeffalle FULL residential dwelling as replacement for the existing farmhouse, Brecon installation of a septic tank, improvements to LD3 0ND existing access and associated works

Penstrowed Hall P/2016/0626 13/06/2016 00CONSENT 08/08/2016 Construction of a 20m x Penstrowed FULL 40m Manege with an "all purpose" surface. Including the installation Caersws of ground drainage, stone sub base with top SY17 5SG surfacing and fencing od the area

Page 103 3 Application Valid Decision Decision notice Proposal Location No. Date sentdate

Trebarried Farm P/2016/0403 14/06/2016 00CONSENT 09/08/2016 Application to errect a Llandefalle FULL roof structure to an approved silage clamp Brecon

LD3 0NB

The Courtyard P/2016/0647 16/06/2016 00CONSENT 09/08/2016 Conversion of part of an Four Crosses FULL agricultural building to a private dwelling and Domgay Lane installation of a sewerage treatment plant SY22 6SL

Caryleen P/2016/0264 06/04/2016 00CONSENT 10/08/2016 Temporary consent for Llandeilo Graban FULL removal of surplus loose material from site in order to facilitate Builth Wells restoration LD2 3SX

Bwlch Gorllwyn Uchaf P/2016/0625 15/06/2016 00CONSENT 10/08/2016 Erection of extension to Abergwesyn HOUS existing garage Llanwrtyd Wells

LD5 4TP

The Old Nursery P/2016/0696 30/06/2016 00CLAWSPLITD 10/08/2016 Section 191 application CLA1 EC for lawful development certificate for the siting and occupation of a Meifod chalet as a dwellinghouse and SY22 6YF erection of an extension

Page 104 4 Application Valid Decision Decision notice Proposal Location No. Date sentdate

P/2016/0532 16/06/2016 00CONSENT 11/08/2016 Erection of a two storey HOUS side extension and alterations 50 Churchill Drive Newtown

SY16 2LH

Woodside P/2016/0565 20/05/2016 00CONSENT 11/08/2016 First floor extension to New Radnor HOUS rear

LD8 2TG

P/2016/0581 14/06/2016 00CONSENT 11/08/2016 Replacement of existing HOUS windows. 19 Woodside Welshpool

SY21 7NF

Tan-y-Dderwen P/2016/0600 17/06/2016 00CONSENT 11/08/2016 Rear extension to Forden HOUS dwelling and insertion of new window 3 Withy Avenue Welshpool

SY21 8NJ

Page 105 5 Application Valid Decision Decision notice Proposal Location No. Date sentdate

15 Daulwyn P/2016/0666 16/06/2016 00CONSENT 11/08/2016 Installation of a dormer Llanwrin HOUS window and balcony to first floor Machynlleth

SY20 8QJ

St Michaels Hall P/2016/0269 08/03/2016 00CONSENT 12/08/2016 Erection of a two storey Llanbister Road HOUS side extension onto existing dwelling and construct a new double Llandrindod Wells garage LD1 5UW

Gilfach P/2016/0660 17/06/2016 00CONSENT 12/08/2016 Demolition of pig sty Sennybridge FULL and erection of agricultural open barn and alterations to roof Brecon of adjacent building LD3 8TY

Ashby House First And P/2016/0664 17/06/2016 00CONSENT 12/08/2016 Change of use of Second FULL existing flat to Floor Flat Middleton Street office/storage space (A2) Llandrindod Wells

LD1 5ET

Land at Pontithel P/2015/1114 14/12/2015 00CONSENT 15/08/2016 Erection of an FULL affordable dwelling, formation of vehicular access and installation Brecon of septic tank LD3 0SA

Page 106 6 Application Valid Decision Decision notice Proposal Location No. Date sentdate

P/2016/0580 20/06/2016 00CONSENT 15/08/2016 Erection of extension HOUS and installation of roof lights. 31 Commercial Street Ystradgynlais

SA9 1JH

Bryn-Bedwen P/2016/0587 27/05/2016 00CONSENT 15/08/2016 Highways Dolfor FULL improvements on private land between Newtown and Dolfor

SY16 4AE

Clayton Engineering P/2016/0598 01/06/2016 00CONSENT 15/08/2016 Extension to the weld FULL department Ludlow Road Knighton

LD7 1LP

Part field SN9033/9312 P/2016/0612 09/06/2016 00CONSENT 15/08/2016 Construction of Pentre Bach FULL bungalow and installation of septic tank Brecon

LD3 8UD

Hawthorns P/2016/0621 20/06/2016 00CONSENT 15/08/2016 Conversion of garage to Pontdolgoch HOUS living space and erection of new garage / store Caersws

SY17 5NJ

Page 107 7 Application Valid Decision Decision notice Proposal Location No. Date sentdate

H S B C P/2016/0644 15/06/2016 00CONSENT 15/08/2016 Installation of an AC FULL condenser 23 Broad Street Welshpool

SY21 7RN

H S B C P/2016/0646 15/06/2016 00CONSENT 15/08/2016 Installation of an AC LBC condenser 23 Broad Street Welshpool

SY21 7RN

Caregynfol Farmhouse P/2016/0545 26/05/2016 00CONSENT 16/08/2016 Listed building consent Llanwrthwl LBC to render north east stone faced chimney Llandrindod Wells

LD1 6NT

Cullen House P/2016/0434 25/04/2016 00CONSENT 17/08/2016 LBC: internal and LBC external alterations and demolition of outside Broad Street store Montgomery

SY15 6PL

P/2016/0628 08/06/2016 00CONSENT 17/08/2016 Replacement HOUS windows/doors in a conservation area 13 Russel Street

LD7 1EU

Page 108 8 Application Valid Decision Decision notice Proposal Location No. Date sentdate

Celtic Minor Golf Club P/2016/0699 01/07/2016 00CONSENT 17/08/2016 Section 73 application Upper Cwmtwrch REM to vary condition 2 of permission P/2015/1030 to revise Swansea approved drawings SA9 2QQ

Ogof Fach P/2016/0103 23/05/2016 00CONSENT 18/08/2016 Erection of an extension HOUS and alterations to dwelling, to include Aberystwyth Road demolition of part of Machynlleth existing building (part retrospective) SY20 8TL

18 Bethel Street P/2016/0448 26/05/2016 00REFUSE 18/08/2016 Installation of UPVC HOUS windows Llanidloes

SY18 6BS

P/2016/0505 12/05/2016 00CONSENT 18/08/2016 Erection of an extension HOUS and alterations to outbuilding 64 Maengwyn Street Machynlleth

SY20 8DY

P/2016/0507 12/05/2016 00CONSENT 18/08/2016 Erection of an extension LBC and alterations to outbuilding 64 Maengwyn Street Machynlleth

SY20 8DY

Page 109 9 Application Valid Decision Decision notice Proposal Location No. Date sentdate

Sheephouse P/2016/0665 27/06/2016 00CONSENT 18/08/2016 Creation of a new field Hay-On-Wye FULL access Hereford

HR3 1XX

Land near Cefn-y-Maes TEL/2016/0002 23/06/2016 00PP 18/08/2016 Application for prior Newbridge-On-Wye TELE NOTNEEDED notification under Part 24 of the Town & Country Planning Llandrindod Wells General Permitted Development Order LD1 6ND 1995 for installation of telecommunication apparatus; installation of a 15m mast, 2 x antennas, 2 x mast

Page 110 10 PTLRW85 - 2016

Penderfyniad ar yr Apêl Appeal Decision

Ymweliad â safle a wnaed ar 25/07/16 Site visit made on 25/07/16 gan Aidan McCooey BA MSc MRTPI by Aidan McCooey BA MSc MRTPI Arolygydd a benodir gan Weinidogion Cymru an Inspector appointed by the Welsh Ministers

Dyddiad: 10/08/16 Date: 10/08/16

Appeal Ref: APP/T6850/A/16/3148542 Site address: Cae Du, Eithinog Lane, Llanfair Caereinion, Welshpool, SY21 9ED The Welsh Ministers have transferred the authority to decide this appeal to me as the appointed Inspector.  The appeal is made under Section 106B of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 against a refusal to discharge a planning obligation.  The appeal is made by Mr & Mrs Evans against the decision of Powys County Council.  The development to which the planning obligation relates is a 3 bedroom dwelling and garage.  The planning obligation, dated 10 August 2005, was made between Powys County Council and Mr Evans.  The application Ref Var/2015/0029, dated 20 July 2015, was refused by notice dated 7 April 2016.  The application sought to have the planning obligation discharged.

Decision

1. The appeal is dismissed. The planning obligation, dated 2005, made between Powys County Council and Mr Evans shall continue to have effect.

Main Issues

2. The main issue is whether the obligation meets the tests specified in Welsh Office Circular 13/97 Planning Obligations (the Circular), particularly the tests of necessity and relevance to planning; and, if it meets the tests, whether the obligation continues to serve a useful planning purpose.

Reasons

3. The planning obligation was entered into in connection with the grant of outline planning permission on 6 September 2005 for the erection of a dwelling (Ref: M/2004/1238). The Council states that the original applicant was considered to have a local need for housing in this location. Restrictions were placed on the applicant and subsequent occupiers by means of a s106 obligation.

4. The restrictions on the subsequent occupation of the dwelling as set out in paragraph 2 of the Second Schedule are as follows:

“Upon any subsequent disposal or demise of the said dwelling occupation thereof shall at all times be limited to a person (“the occupier”) who:

Page 111

Appeal Decision APP/T6850/A/16/3148542

(a) At the date of the said disposal or demise have either been resident within the District of Montgomeryshire (“the District”) (as conclusively defined by the Council) for a period of not less than three years or are employed within the District or coming into the District to take up full employment or were last employed within the District; and (b) they or their spouses or co-habitees do not own a dwelling in fee simple or a leasehold interest for a term exceeding 7 years at the date immediately before their first occupation of the said dwelling built on the land; and (c) they or their spouses or co-habitees have not owned a dwelling as aforesaid at any time during the period of five years immediately before the date of their first occupation of the said dwelling (whether or not subject to a mortgage or legal charge)”.

Paragraph 3 states that “Any dwelling constructed on the land shall not exceed a gross floor space of 130 square metres (excluding garages)”.

5. The Council accepts that clause 2 (a) does not serve a useful planning purpose and does not seek to defend that clause. I agree with the conclusions reached in the appeal decisions that were drawn to my attention by the Council i.e. that this clause does not meet the tests in the Circular. The Council claims that the other clauses restrict occupancy to first time buyers who are less likely to be able to compete in the housing market and therefore these clauses meet the planning policy objective of securing affordable housing to meet local needs. The Council also argues that control on the size of the dwelling seeks to restrict the value of the dwelling and make it more affordable. The approved plans indicate that the dwelling falls within this size restriction, which is an appropriate mechanism to control future affordability, as advocated in Policy HP10 of the Unitary Development Plan.

6. The house lies outside the settlement limit near the edge of Llanfair Caereinion. Policy HP8 of the UDP allows affordable housing in such locations subject to various criteria including that the housing remains affordable in perpetuity and complies with certain criteria in Policy HP7. These include the need for a planning obligation to be entered into and the need to comply with Policy HP10 which restricts the floorspace of affordable houses to a maximum gross area of 130 square metres, measured internally and including garages where designed as an integral part of the dwelling. The obligation is necessary and relevant as the occupation of the property without any form of restriction would be in conflict with the Unitary Development Plan.

7. The third paragraph quoted above aims to keep the value of the property relatively low by restricting its size. This is a factor that is relevant to planning and, along with restrictions on permitted development rights, is a tool that is commonly used to secure the provision of modestly priced housing. The Appellants main argument is that they wish to extend the property to meet the needs of their growing young family and this is the sole reason why discharge of the obligation is sought. They do not want to sell the house. However, they have not put forward any real argument that this part of the obligation does not meet the prescribed tests, and my conclusion is that it does. Notwithstanding this conclusion, I express no views on the merits of any increase in size, which could be the subject of a further application to the Council

Page 1122

Appeal Decision APP/T6850/A/16/3148542

8. A valuation from an independent chartered surveyor was supplied on behalf of the appellants. The Council sought an opinion from its own Valuer, which broadly agrees with the valuation figure of around £200,000. The appellants’ basic argument is that this price is well beyond the means of those seeking affordable housing. The second clause would not affect the affordability either, it was claimed. As the house is not affordable then no useful planning purpose is served by the obligation is the appellants’ conclusion.

9. No evidence of local need for affordable housing or attempts to market the property for sale or rent was provided. The proposition that the valuation price would be out of the reach of those requiring affordable housing has not therefore been tested as required by Unitary Development Plan and national policies. In the absence of any evidence regarding the need for affordable housing or of the supply of affordable or rented housing in the area, I conclude that the obligation still fulfils a useful purpose in accord with Policies HP7 and HP8 of the Unitary Development Plan.

10. I have considered the other appeal decisions that were raised. The appeals involving similar circumstances to this case were all dismissed and the obligations endorsed. The successful appeals related to variation or removal of the paragraph 2 (a) clause restricting occupancy to local residents. The removal of this clause is not an option before me, as the application seeks to discharge the obligation in its entirety. The agent refers to recent Council decisions without providing any details of the same. I have no information to compare the circumstances of those cases with this one.

Conclusion

11. I appreciate that the size restriction prevents the family from extending the property to provide accommodation for their children. As I stated above, this matter could be tested by the submission of an application to the Council. Having taken into account all the matters raised, I conclude that the obligations in paragraphs 2 (b), 2 (c) and 3 meet the tests of the Circular and serve a useful planning purpose. I therefore dismiss the appeal.

A L McCooey

Inspector

Page 3113

This page is intentionally left blank

Penderfyniad ar yr Apêl Appeal Decision

Ymweliad â safle a wnaed ar 13/07/16 Site visit made on 13/07/16 gan Nicola Gulley MA MRTPI by Nicola Gulley MA MRTPI Arolygydd a benodir gan Weinidogion Cymru an Inspector appointed by the Welsh Ministers

Dyddiad: 09.08.2016 Date: 09.08.2016

Appeal Ref: APP/T6850/A/16/3149367 Site address: Land South of Tai Gwalia, Upper Cwmtwrch, Powys, SA9 2UP The Welsh Ministers have transferred the authority to decide this appeal to me as the appointed Inspector.  The appeal is made under section 78 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 against a refusal to grant outline planning permission.  The appeal is made by Mr Andy Pulman against the decision of Powys County Council.  The application Ref P/2015/0753, dated 27 July 2015, was refused by notice dated 5 November 2015.  The development proposed is 3 no. 4 bedroom dwellings, associated access, parking and landscaping.

Decision

1. The appeal is allowed and planning permission is granted for 3 no. 4 bedroom dwellings, associated access, parking and landscaping on Land South of Tai Gwalia, Upper Cwmtwrch, Powys, SA9 2UP in accordance with the terms of application Ref P/2015/0753, dated 27 July 2015, and the conditions set out in the attached schedule.

Preliminary Matters

2. Since the determination of the application, planning permission, under application ref P/2016/0184, has been granted for the construction of a single dwelling at the appeal site. This permission is a material consideration in the determination of this appeal.

Main Issue

3. The impact of the proposed development on highway safety.

Reasons

4. The appeal site is situated in a residential estate of some 50 dwellings and located in an elevated position on the edge of the small settlement of Upper Cwmtwrch. The site comprises an irregularly shaped area of scrub woodland which slopes steeply down from Tai Gwalia to the road frontage with the main road through the settlement, the A4068. The site and surrounding area has a history of coal mining activity.

5. The development proposes the construction of 3 no. detached dwellings which, the illustrative plan indicates, would be laid out in a linear arrangement and set back from the road by means of a private drive and garden area. In addition, the appellant

Page 115

Appeal Decision APP/T6850/A/16/3149367

proposes the provision of a new footway and parking/turning area for the use of nearby residents.

6. The Council raises no objection to the proposed development on the basis of amenity, ground stability or land contamination. However, it contends that the proposal would result in the generation of between 18 and 30 additional vehicular movements per day and that this increase would exacerbate conditions on the highway network.

7. In terms of traffic generation, as I indicated in my preliminary matters, planning consent has recently been granted for the erection of a single dwelling at the appeal site. This consent would, effectively, reduce the level of additional traffic generated by the proposed development to between 12 and 20 vehicular movements per day. With regard to the existing highway network, the proposed development would be accessed directly from Tai Gwalia, with access to the settlement and the wider highway network afforded by Glyncynwal Road, a steep, narrowly aligned rural road, which joins with the A4068 at points to the north and south of the appeal site. No evidence has been presented to show that the existing highway network is near or over capacity, that there is a prevalence of road traffic accidents at the junctions with Glyncynwal Road and the A4068 or at the junction with of Tai Gwalia and Glyncynwal Road, or to demonstrate that the proposed development would exacerbate existing highway conditions.

8. Whilst I note the Council’s concerns, I consider that the increase in vehicular movements associated with this development would, when considered in conjunction with the existing residential development around Tai Gwalia, not materially alter the volume of traffic or exacerbate the existing problems on the highway network. As, such I consider that the proposed development accords with the requirements of Policy GP4 of the Adopted Powys Unitary Development Plan (2010).

Other Matters

9. In reaching my decision, I have had regard to the concerns expressed by local residents in relation to parking, construction noise, land stability and amenity. Whilst I note these concerns, I consider that the issues identified can be satisfactorily addressed by the imposition of conditions.

10. Insofar as conditions are concerned, I have had regard to the guidance contained in Welsh Government Circular 16/2014 – The Use of Planning Conditions for Development Management. A condition is necessary which requires details in respect of access, appearance, landscaping, layout and the scale of the development to be submitted for approval. Conditions in relation to land contamination and Japanese Knotweed are necessary in order to manage risks to human health and property. A condition is required in relation to the hours of operation at the site in the interests of residential amenity, and a condition is necessary requiring the submission of a scheme for foul and surface water is necessary in order to safeguard the capacity of the drainage network. I do not however, consider requiring the provision of a footway and vehicular turning area would be necessary in the interests of highway safety or reasonably related to the development.

11. For the reasons outlined above, I conclude that the appeal should be allowed. Nicola Gulley

INSPECTOR

Page 1162

Appeal Decision APP/T6850/A/16/3149367

Schedule of Conditions

1. Details of the access, 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.

2. Any application for approval of the reserved matters shall be made to the local planning authority not later than three years from the date of this permission.

4. No development shall commence until an assessment of the nature and extent of contamination affecting the application site area has been submitted to and approved in writing by the local planning authority. This assessment must be carried out by or under the direction of a suitably qualified competent person (a contaminated land specialist with proven experience within the contaminated land industry) in accordance with BS10175 (2011) Investigation of Potentially Contaminated Sites Code of Practice and shall assess any contamination on the site, whether or not it originates on the site. The report of the findings shall include: (i) a desk top study to identify all previous uses at the site and potential contaminants associated with those uses and the impacts from those contaminants on land and controlled waters. The desk study shall establish a ‘conceptual site model’ (CSM) which identifies and assesses all identified potential source, pathway, and receptor linkages; (ii) an intrusive investigation to assess the extent, scale and nature of contamination which may be present, if identified as required by the desk top study; (iii) an assessment of the potential risks to:  human health,  groundwater and surface waters  adjoining land,  property (existing or proposed) including buildings, crops, livestock, pets,  woodland and service lines and pipes,  ecological systems,  archaeological sites and ancient monuments; and  any other receptors identified at (i)

(iv) an appraisal of remedial options, and justification for the preferred remedial option(s).

All work and submissions carried out for the purposes of this condition must be conducted in accordance with Welsh Local Government Association and the Environment Agency Wales’ ‘Development of Land Affected by Contamination: A guide for Developers’ (2012).

5. No development shall take place until a site investigation of the nature and extent of contamination has been carried out in accordance with a methodology which has previously been submitted to and approved in writing by the local planning authority. The results of the site investigation shall be made available to the local planning

Page 3117

Appeal Decision APP/T6850/A/16/3149367

authority before any development begins. If any contamination is found during the site investigation, a report specifying the measures to be taken to remediate the site to render it suitable for the development hereby permitted shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the local planning authority. The site shall be remediated in accordance with the approved measures before development begins. If during the course of development any contamination is found that has not been identified in the site investigation, additional measures for the remediation of this source of contamination shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the local planning authority. The remediation of the site shall incorporate the approved additional measures before the development is occupied.

6. A monitoring and maintenance scheme to include monitoring the long-term effectiveness of the proposed remediation over a period to be agreed with the local planning authority, and the provision of reports on the same shall be submitted to and approved by the local planning authority, prior to the occupation of any approved building.

7. Following completion of the measures identified in that scheme and when the remediation objectives have been achieved, reports that demonstrate the effectiveness of the monitoring and maintenance carried out shall be submitted to the local planning authority at the end of every subsequent 12 month period and approved in writing to demonstrate the effectiveness of the monitoring and maintenance carried out. In the event that the remediation objectives are not achieved within the monitoring period, a revised remediation scheme and verification plan shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the local planning authority within two months following the end of the monitoring period. Any further works necessary shall be undertaken within an agreed timescale until the remediation objectives are achieved and reports confirming the same have been submitted to and approved in writing by the local planning authority.

8. No development shall take place until a scheme for the removal and effective disposal of Japanese Knotweed for the site has been submitted to and approved by the local planning authority.

9. Construction works shall not take place outside the hours of 8.00 to 17.00 Monday to Friday and 8.00 to 12.00 on Saturdays and at no time on Sundays or Public Holidays.

10 No development shall commence until a scheme for foul and surface water drainage has been submitted to and approved by the local planning authority.

Page 1184

Penderfyniad ar yr Apêl Appeal Decision Ymweliad â safle a wnaed ar 02/08/16 Site visit made on 02/08/16 gan P J Davies BSc (Hons) MA MRTPI by P J Davies BSc (Hons) MA MRTPI Arolygydd a benodir gan Weinidogion Cymru an Inspector appointed by the Welsh Ministers Dyddiad: 22.08.2016 Date: 22.08.2016

Appeal Ref: APP/T6850/D/16/3152076 Site address: North Barn, Glanirfon, Station Road, Llanwrtyd Wells LD5 4RR The Welsh Ministers have transferred the authority to decide this appeal to me as the appointed Inspector.  The appeal is made under section 78 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 against a refusal to grant planning permission.  The appeal is made by Mrs Christine Stokes against the decision of Powys County Council.  The application Ref P/2016/0376, dated 4 April 2016, was refused by notice dated 26 May 2016  The development proposed is the erection of a porch to the front elevation of North Barn across the existing front entrance door.

Decision

1. The appeal is dismissed.

Main Issue

2. This is the effect of the proposal on the character and appearance of the area.

Reasons

3. The proposal relates to a converted agricultural building which has retained much of its original scale and appearance including the window openings, ventilation slits and arched doorways. The openings tend to be small albeit numerous and the building is largely stone and slate. As a consequence it has a modest and muted appearance commensurate with the rural character of its countryside setting. Facing the appeal building across a courtyard is another converted barn of similar character.

4. The proposed porch amends a previously refused scheme and amongst other things is smaller in scale. Nonetheless, relative to the simple façade of the existing building, and given that it would be predominantly glazed, it would visibly interrupt the architectural integrity of the converted barn. In particular, the extent of glazing and the suburban style of the proposal would introduce a visually dominant and unsympathetic feature. Owing to the proposed obscure glazing, there would be limited effects on the privacy of residents living opposite. However because of the proximity of the proposal to one of the principal elevations of the opposing dwellings, the unacceptable effects that I have identified would be readily apparent. This would cause unacceptable harm to the visual amenities of the residents’ concerned.

Page 119

Appeal Decision APP/T6850/D/16/3152076

5. For these reasons, I conclude that the proposal would cause material harm to the character and appearance of the existing building with consequent adverse effects on the character and appearance of its surroundings and the visual amenities of the area. This would be contrary to policies GP1 and HP16 of the Powys Unitary Development Plan, which provide the general development control context for all development proposals, including, amongst other things, that house extensions are designed to complement or enhance the character of the existing building.

6. My attention is drawn to a number of other schemes, but these are located in differing locations and contexts, and none have had any direct influence on the individual context of the appeal proposal which I have therefore determined on its own merits.

7. I accept that the proposal would assist in providing better insulation, but by itself this would not be sufficient to outweigh the identified harm.

8. For the above reasons, and having regard to all other matters raised, I conclude that the appeal is dismissed. P J Davies

INSPECTOR

Page 1202

Penderfyniad ar yr Apêl Appeal Decision

Ymchwiliad a gynhaliwyd ar 18-20/04/2016 & 6- Inquiry held on 18-20/04/2016 & 6-7/06/2016 7/06/2016 Site visit made on 20/04/16 Ymweliad â safle a wnaed ar 20/04/16 gan Aidan McCooey BA MSc MRTPI by Aidan McCooey BA MSc MRTPI Arolygydd a benodir gan Weinidogion Cymru an Inspector appointed by the Welsh Ministers Dyddiad: 23/08/16 Date: 23/08/16

Appeal Ref: APP/T6850/A/15/3133966 Site address: Blaen y Glyn, Llangurig, Llanidloes, Powys SY18 6SL The Welsh Ministers have transferred the authority to decide this appeal to me as the appointed Inspector.  The appeal is made under section 78 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 against a failure to give notice within the prescribed period of a decision on an application for planning permission.  The appeal is made by Bryn Blaen Wind Farm Ltd against Powys County Council.  The application Ref P/2014/1102, is dated 13 October 2014.  The development proposed is to construct and operate 6 wind turbines with a maximum tip height of 100m and maximum hub height of 59m, together with ancillary development comprising substation, control building, new and upgraded access points and tracks, new alternative recreational track, hardstanding and temporary compound and associated works.

Decision

1. The appeal is allowed and planning permission is granted to construct and operate 6 wind turbines with a maximum tip height of 100m and maximum hub height of 59m, together with ancillary development comprising substation, control building, new and upgraded access points and tracks, new alternative recreational track, hardstanding and temporary compound and associated works at Blaen y Glyn, Llangurig, Llanidloes, Powys SY18 6SL in accordance with the terms of the application, Ref P/2014/1102, dated 13 October 2014, and the plans submitted with it, subject to the conditions set out in the attached annex.

Procedural Matters

2. At the Inquiry applications for costs were made by the Council against the appellant and the appellant against the Council. These applications are the subject of separate decisions.

3. The Environmental Statement (ES) that accompanied the planning application has been the subject of an assessment by The Planning Inspectorate dated 26 November 2015. The conclusions were that the ES be confirmed as containing the level of information identified in Parts I & II of Schedule 4 of the Town and Country Planning

Page 121 Appeal Decision APP/T6850/A/15/3133966

(Environmental Impact Assessment) (England & Wales) Regulations 19991. The new 2016 Regulations2 consolidate all earlier amendments to the 1999 Regulations and raise the thresholds for certain types of development. They make no material difference to the assessment in respect of this proposal. The ES was supplemented by further information, supplied to address the putative reasons for refusal, which will be considered below. I have taken the Environmental Information into account in arriving at my decision.

4. In addition to the accompanied site visit on 20 April 2016, I conducted unaccompanied site visits before and after the public Inquiry. The weather conditions for the accompanied site visit were favourable and excellent long distance views were available in all directions. The weather conditions for the unaccompanied site visits were favourable.

5. Although this is an appeal against the Council’s failure to give notice within the prescribed period of a decision, the appropriate Committee resolved on 3 December 2015 that it would have refused planning permission for the proposal for 8 reasons related to its adverse impacts on the character and appearance of the area and on the setting of heritage assets. It was further resolved that insufficient information had been provided to assess the effects on highway safety, residential amenity, public rights of way and nature conservation. Delegated powers were granted to withdraw and amend these reasons for refusal should they be addressed by the submission of further information. The Council confirmed to the Inquiry that the concerns in relation to the effects on highway safety, public rights of way and nature conservation had been addressed subject to conditions and a legal agreement to provide and maintain a recreational track near the site as an alternative to existing bridleways and footpaths in the area.

6. An amended site location plan was submitted at the appeal stage. The site area was amended slightly to move the access track a small distance away from the public highway to address a putative reason for refusal. The appellant confirmed that the landowner had been notified and was aware of the revision. I am satisfied that this minor amendment does not change the character of the scheme and that there would be no prejudice to any party. I will consider the proposal on the basis of the amended plan.

7. The appellant and landowners have completed an agreement with the Council under s.106 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990. The signed agreement was submitted to the Inquiry and covers the provision of a recreational track near the proposed turbines. This involves land in the same ownership as the appeal site. I am satisfied that the agreement meets the requirements of Circular 13/97 – Planning Obligations and the statutory tests set out in Regulation 122 (and others) of the Community Infrastructure Regulations 2010 (as amended). I therefore give it significant weight in this decision.

1 These were the Regulations in force at the time of the assessment.

2 The Town and Country Planning (Environmental Impact Assessment (Wales) Regulations, 2016

Page 122 Appeal Decision APP/T6850/A/15/3133966

Main Issues

8. I consider that the main issues are:

 The landscape and visual impact of the proposed turbines on the character and appearance of the area;

 The effect of the proposal on the living conditions of the occupiers of dwellings nearby;

 The effect of the proposal on heritage assets and the cultural heritage of the area; and

 Whether any harm identified in relation to the foregoing is outweighed by the benefits of the scheme in terms of its contribution to renewable energy production and the economy (“the planning balance”).

The Proposal

9. The appeal site is located around 1.6 km north of Llangurig and 3.5 km south west of Llanidloes. The A44 meets the A470 near Llangurig to the south of the site and then runs west, whilst the A470 runs east then north towards Llanidloes. The Wye valley lies to the south and the Severn valley to the north of the site. The area where the proposed turbines are to be located is part of a plateau rising to around 450m AOD. The Cambrian Mountains lie to the east with the highest point of Plynlimon to the north east of the site. Most of the settlements are concentrated in the valley floors with isolated farms and dwellings at higher elevations.

10. The site is described as an area of upland pasture in the ES. Fields are large with mostly post and wire fences and very occasional hedgerows. There are isolated small geometric conifer plantations in the area around the site and a few larger plantations to the west. There is an existing bridleway known as the Prince Llewelyn Way running through the site.

11. Access would be gained from the A470 around 1.5 km east of Llangurig. The track would be around 5.4 km long and would run west and north to the site. It would pass close to the public road near the entrance to Llanerch farm before crossing it near Cae Wen. The access road would run across a slope and pass near the dwelling known as Hirbrysg and on to the upland. The 6 proposed turbines would each have a maximum capacity of 2.5 MW and an associated crane hardstanding. A substation building is proposed between turbines 1 and 2. A temporary compound would be located south of turbine 4.

Planning Policy

12. The development plan for the area is the Powys Unitary Development Plan, which was adopted in March 2010. The Plan has amongst its core aims that development take account of the high quality landscape of Powys and that development is appropriate and sensitive to its surroundings. Strategic Policy 19 states that opportunities to create energy from renewable resources will be encouraged provided that they meet the requirements of other plan policies. More detailed policy is contained in Policy E3 which states that wind farm development will be approved if the impacts do not unacceptably adversely affect: the environmental and landscape quality of Powys (including cumulative effects); wildlife habitats or species; residential amenity by virtue of noise, vibration, shadow flicker or reflected light; any buildings or features of

Page 123 Appeal Decision APP/T6850/A/15/3133966

conservation or archaeological interest; or enjoyment and safe use of highways and public rights of way. The policy also requires that an acceptable means of access is provided, that land management schemes to mitigate adverse impacts are adequate and that ancillary structures adequately blend into their setting. I do not consider that the policy can be construed as containing a presumption in favour of wind power development. The need for renewable energy development is acknowledged in the policy, but it is a conditional policy allowing proposals where the impacts are not unacceptable.

13. The other main Unitary Development Plan policies referred to included Policy ENV2 which requires that development take account of the high quality landscape of Powys and that development is appropriate and sensitive to its surroundings. Nature conservation policies related to the protection of internationally and nationally important sites and protected species were quoted. Policies ENV14, ENV16 and ENV17 set out criteria for assessing proposals affecting listed buildings and their settings, registered historic landscapes and the site or setting of ancient monuments. Policy RL6 supports proposals that improve access to and enjoyment of the countryside.

14. The general development control Policy GP1 states that proposals will only be permitted if it takes a number of matters into account. The criteria of most relevance to the proposal are set out as follows: the design and scale of the proposal shall complement and where possible enhance the character of the area. Other matters to be taken into account include the amenities of nearby residents, heritage assets and highway matters.

15. The UK Government is committed to tackling climate change by increased use of renewable energy. The National Policy Statements (NPS) for energy include the Overarching NPS (EN-1) and Renewable Energy Infrastructure (EN-3), both dated July 2011. NPS apply directly to Nationally Significant Infrastructure Projects determined under the Planning Act 2008. Having regard to a recent judgement3 dealing with the materiality of the NPS to proposals for renewable energy schemes in Wales that seek planning permission under the 1990 Act, it was agreed that they are not material considerations in the determination of planning applications in Wales. However, in terms of UK energy policy, I accept that EN-1 sets out the urgent need for new renewable electricity generation projects (3.4.5) and to dramatically increase the amount of capacity, much of which is likely to be wind generation in the short and medium term (3.3.10).

16. The parties referred to many expressions of energy policy favouring the development of renewable energy infrastructure and especially wind energy. There was also reference to government reports and updates on the progress being made towards the achievement of renewable energy targets4.

17. Planning Policy Wales sets out the land use planning policies of the Welsh Government. Climate change is one of the most important challenges facing the world and the government has made commitment to tackling climate change (paragraph 4.5.1). The Welsh Government’s aim in terms of renewable energy is to promote the generation and use of energy from renewable and low carbon energy

3 Powys County Council v The Welsh Ministers and RES UK & Ireland, [2015] EWHC 3284 (Admin)

4 Set out in the list of core documents in the policy context section

Page 124 Appeal Decision APP/T6850/A/15/3133966

sources at all scales. Planning Policy Wales5 confirms that the UK is subject to the requirements of the European Union Renewable Energy Directive 2009, which includes a UK target of 15% of energy from renewables by 2020. The Welsh Government is committed to playing its part by delivering an energy programme which contributes to reducing carbon emissions as part of the approach to tackling climate change. Planning policy at all levels should facilitate delivery of the ambition set out in Energy Wales6 and UK/EU targets on renewable energy. Planning Policy Wales7 states that wind energy continues to offer the greatest potential for delivering renewable energy. The Welsh Government’s aim is to secure an appropriate mix of energy provision for Wales which maximises benefits to communities, whilst minimising potential environmental and social impacts. It is accepted that the introduction of new, often very large structures needs careful consideration to avoid and where possible minimise their impact. However, the need for wind energy is a key part of meeting the Welsh Government’s vision for future renewable electricity production as set out in the Energy Policy Statement (2010) and should be taken into account by decision makers when determining such applications.

18. PPW identifies a range of matters that local planning authorities should take into account in determining applications for renewable energy development, including the contribution a proposal would make to meeting identified targets and potential for renewable energy and cutting greenhouse emissions; the wider environmental, social and economic benefits and opportunities; the impact on the natural heritage, coast and historic environment8. PPW also makes reference to the need to consider the impacts of development proposals on a range of historic heritage assets, including listed buildings, scheduled ancient monuments, conservation areas, landscapes and parks/gardens of special historic interest, and the respective settings of such features.

19. TAN8 provides a spatial dimension to the consideration of onshore wind energy schemes in Wales, identifying 7 Strategic Search Areas where large scale (over 25MW) schemes should be concentrated. For smaller schemes, TAN 8 states that local planning authorities are best placed to assess detailed locational requirements within and outside SSAs in the light of local circumstances9. The appeal site is neither within, nor close to, a SSA. TAN 8 indicates that there is a balance to be struck between the desirability of renewable energy and landscape protection10. There is an implicit objective in TAN 8 in the rest of Wales outside SSAs, to maintain the landscape character, i.e. no significant change. The strategy adopted was a means of concentrating the impact of wind turbine development in a relatively small part of the country in areas that are, on balance, technically practically and environmentally better able to accommodate such impacts than other parts of Wales11.

5 Planning Policy Wales Edition 8, paragraphs 12.8.1 and 12.8.2

6 Energy Wales: A Low Carbon Transition 2012

7 Paragraphs 12.8.6 and 12.8.12

8 PPW Para 12.10.1

9 TAN 8 Para 2.3

10 TAN 8 Para 2.13

11 TAN 8 Annex D para 8.4 and 8.5

Page 125 Appeal Decision APP/T6850/A/15/3133966

20. The Minister for National Resources letter of 14 August 2015 confirmed the Welsh Government’s vision for future energy generation based on embracing Wales’ abundant renewable energy resources, and its view that onshore wind is currently the most commercially mature form of renewable energy. Despite recent announcements in England concerning onshore wind, the Welsh Government continues to see renewable energy as a key element in ensuring that Wales achieves sustainable development for future generations. His letter of 15 March 2016 reminds local planning authorities of the duty to tackle climate change and deliver sustainable development and to take the economic benefits of proposals into account when making decisions on applications for renewable energy development. Visual and amenity impact on surrounding communities and properties is an important issue and discussions can be quite emotive on this issue, but planning decisions need to be taken in the wider public interest and in a rational way.

21. The Powys Local Development Plan has been submitted to the Welsh Government for examination. The public examination of the Plan had not started at the time of the Inquiry and consequently its soundness has not been established. The policies may be material considerations but are to be accorded little weight in advance of the Inspectors’ report on the examination and adoption of the Plan.

Reasons

Landscape and visual effects

22. The ES included a Landscape and Visual Impact Assessment (LVIA) prepared using best practice guidance. This was supplemented by further visualisations and a Residential Visual Amenity Study submitted by the appellant. The Council also supplied 4 additional visualisations from viewpoints chosen to fill gaps in the appellant’s LVIA. The visual impact assessment incorporated assessment based on photomontages and wireframes at a range of illustrative, representative and specific viewpoints and zone of theoretical visibility (ZTV) analysis. It also included consideration of visual effects on residential amenity and cumulative visual impacts. The information on cumulative impacts has been updated to reflect recent decisions and implementations. Whilst there was some criticism of the LVIA in downplaying the significance of effects I detected no suggestion that it was not (as supplemented) a proper basis for my consideration of those impacts. I have considered the additional information provided by the appellant and the additional views provided by the Council. The landscape witnesses produced a Statement of Common Ground (SOCG), which I have drawn on in my summary of the parties’ positions. There is a consistent theme in the findings, which I would categorise as broad agreement in relation to the landscape and visual impacts of the proposal. However, the Council’s consultant considered that the impacts would be greater (mostly by one degree or level).

23. The LANDMAP methodology of landscape assessment is endorsed in Planning Policy Wales at paragraph 5.3.13. It is agreed that the LANDMAP data and information on access land and long distance recreational routs has been provided accurately in the ES. The visual and sensory aspect areas around the site were used to provide information on the landscape impacts of the proposal. In terms of receptors or those experiencing views of the proposals, it was agreed that residents and users of recreational routes (such as public rights of way) would be high sensitivity. Workers and motorists (non-tourists) sensitivity would be lower. There are several promoted

Page 126 Appeal Decision APP/T6850/A/15/3133966

routes in the area such as the long distance Glyndwr’s Way. The AECOM study12 was produced as part of the evidence base to the emerging Local Development Plan. It is a strategic level study to inform policy making for wind energy in Powys. The assumptions and factors taken into account are broad brush, incomplete and formulaic. It is not a landscape sensitivity survey and does not consider landscape, heritage and other impacts in any detail. I therefore ascribe little weight to its conclusion that the site is in an area identified as unconstrained for wind energy development.

24. There are no protected designated landscapes that would be adversely affected by the proposal. The site is within the Wye Valley Uplands VSSA, which consists of two upland areas on either side of the Wye valley. It has a moderate overall LANDMAP evaluation. The introduction of 6 large turbines into the host landscape would have a significant adverse impact on landscape character in the local area. The landscape experts were in broad agreement that the impact would be of major or major/moderate significance for up to around 2km from the proposal. In views up to around 3 to 4 km, the significance was major/moderate and moderate. There would be some views of the proposal from a small part of the large Plynlimon Moorlands, which has an outstanding overall evaluation. It is characterised as exposed, open wild and spiritual. The significance of landscape impacts for views from up to around 4 km would be major or moderate plus, according to the landscape witnesses. The Clywedog Upland grazing VSAA is on the other side of the upper Severn valley to the north of the site. Where there would be visibility from around 2-3.5 km the experts agreed that the significance of landscape impacts for views would be major or moderate plus decreasing with distance. The Council contend that there would be significant impacts at 4-6 km distances. There would be less of an effect on the Old Chapel Hill Mosaic VSSA, which is mostly at least 4km from the site. Although the Council considers the landscape impact to be significant. These impacts on the landscape character of the area must weigh against the proposal.

25. In terms of visual impact, I agree with the Council that these would be very substantial in the vicinity of the site at viewpoints 1 and 2 for example. Viewpoint 1 includes the Prince Llewelyn Ride (PLR) a promoted bridleway which runs through the site itself. The appellant’s approach was to downplay the impact at this point because the proposed turbines would not occupy a large arc of view. I note that this approach is not adopted by many other landscape architects and I do not favour it.

26. The impacts obviously lessen with distance. But I consider that the visual impacts at viewpoints PRV A and PRV D on the PLR at around 2.5 km to 4 km would be major given the sensitivity of receptors. The extent of these views would be limited by vegetation at PRV A. There would be major/moderate effects to views from some stretches of upland roads such as at VP4 and VP7 (also Sustrans routes); VP8, VP9 and PRV B. Other major or major/moderate visual effects would be experienced at some open access land and public right of way locations such as PRV C, VP10 and VP12. There would be significant visual effects at Pen-y-Gaer hillfort and defined important scenic viewpoints, principally VP15 and the views identified by Natural Resources Wales within the Registered Historic Landscape. The ZTV illustrations show that the majority of available views of the proposal would be from higher

12 Renewable and Low Carbon Energy Assessment AECOM for PCC 2012

Page 127 Appeal Decision APP/T6850/A/15/3133966

ground. Views from the populated valley floors are limited by the terrain and vegetation.

27. I agree with the parties that views at greater distances (beyond 4 km for the appellant and 6-7 km for the Council) would not be significant, including the views from Plynlimon.

Visual Impact on Residential Properties and Effect on Living Conditions

28. There are 16 residential properties within 1.5km of the site, included in the Residential Visual Amenity Study. The parties were agreed that 8 nearby properties would experience significant adverse visual effects as a result of the proposal. The affected properties are: Foel-Uchaf, Pen y Cae, Nant Gwylt, Waenwen, Cae Wen, Nantygeifr (2 residential units), Maes-yr-Haul and Pantyllidiardu. These adverse effects would be clear disbenefits of the proposal to be taken into account in the planning balance.

29. One of these properties, a house known as Pen y Cae would be particularly affected because of its location, orientation and design, such as to bring into question whether the presence of the proposed turbines would be unpleasant, overwhelming and oppressive, so that the dwelling would become an unacceptably unattractive (albeit not uninhabitable) place in which to live. This issue arises because the main open plan living room of the house (which is L-shaped) has full height glazing facing turbines 1 to 4 at distances of 960m, 1050m, 1200m and 1150m respectively. The towers and hubs of the 4 turbines would be visible. The blades of the other 2 turbines would be seen in association with the blades of turbine 3. I was informed that an extension to the dwelling to provide a new utility room and bathroom had commenced construction. The existing bathroom at the rear of the ground floor would then become part of the living accommodation. I note that there are other windows in the property facing in the other direction. However, some of these windows are to bedrooms and not the main living area. I conclude that given the distances involved and the fact that the turbines would be at a similar elevation to Pen y Cae, the visual impact would not mean that the dwelling would become an unacceptably unattractive place to live.

30. There would also be a visual impact as a result of the construction of the access across slopes, particularly near the dwelling Hirbrysg. I agree that the access will have an impact but this will be ameliorated by the passage of time and the mitigation proposed by the appellant, which can be secured by conditions.

31. It was agreed by all parties that despite the presence of existing and proposed large windfarms within 10-15 km of the proposal, the cumulative impact of the proposal would not elevate any of the identified impacts to a significant degree. The assessment includes Mynydd y Gwynt windfarm, which has been refused planning permission, because the decision has been challenged. I have no reason to disagree and give cumulative impact no further consideration in this decision.

32. These identified landscape and visual effects must weigh substantially against the proposal. In particular the impacts on the views of residents of Pen y Cae and the 7 other significantly affected properties must count against the proposal in the final balance. To this extent there is conflict with the Policy E3 and the other relevant development plan policies that must be weighed in the planning balance.

Page 128 Appeal Decision APP/T6850/A/15/3133966

Impact on Heritage Assets

33. It is appropriate to set out the statutory and policy tests for heritage assets at the outset. Scheduled Ancient Monuments (SAMs), listed buildings and Conservation Areas are of national significance as heritage assets. Planning Policy Wales and Circular 60/96 contain similar tests in relation to the desirability of preserving SAMs and their settings and a presumption in favour of their physical preservation in situ and against proposals which would have a significant impact on the setting of visible remains13. Sections 16 (2) and 66 (1) of the Planning (Listed Buildings and Conservation Areas) Act 1990 requires the decision maker to have special regard to the desirability of preserving the listed building or its setting or any features of special architectural or historic interest which it possesses. Section 72 requires that special attention is paid to desirability of preserving or enhancing the character or appearance of a Conservation Area. These tests are echoed in chapter 6 of Planning Policy Wales and policies ENV14 and ENV17 of the Unitary Development Plan. The effect of a proposal on a landscape on the Register of Landscapes of Historic Interest in Wales or Registered Historic Landscape (RHL) or on its setting may be a material consideration in the determination of planning applications. They should be taken into account by local planning authorities in considering the implications of developments which are of such a scale that they would have a more than local impact on an area on the Register14. Policy ENV16 of the Unitary Development Plan seeks the protection of the special historic interest of RHLs.

34. The definition of setting of a heritage asset in Cadw’s Conservation Principles (2011) is the surroundings in which an historic asset is experienced. Elements of a setting may make a positive or negative contribution to the significance of an asset and may affect the ability to appreciate that significance or may be neutral. I was also referred to English National Planning Practice Guidance on setting by the Council. I consider that the effect of a proposed development on the significance of a heritage asset is a very important consideration, as set out in the “What is the setting of a heritage asset and how should it be taken into account?” section of the guidance. This accords with the English Heritage Guidance in “The Setting of Historic Assets” 15. This document sets out a logical approach to the assessment process i.e. firstly, identify the heritages assets affected and their settings then assess the degree to which these settings contribute to the significance of the asset and then assess the effect of the proposed development on the significance. It is important to emphasise that the setting is not itself a heritage asset. The experts agreed that the terminology for effects on heritage assets used in the Design Manual for Roads and Bridges (CD-CH-7) was appropriate for the assessments. The Council raised shortcomings in the ES in relation to this issue. I have further information in terms of the evidence presented to this Inquiry by the Council, appellant and consultees. I consider that this is adequate to enable me to assess the effects and I have considered the Council’s comments in regard to methodologies employed by the appellant carefully.

13 Paragraph 6.5.1 of PPW and paragraph 17 of circular 60/96 Planning and the Historic Environment: Archaeology

14 Paragraph 6.5.25 of PPW

15 Inquiry Doc CD-CH-1, 6 and 11

Page 129 Appeal Decision APP/T6850/A/15/3133966

Scheduled Ancient Monuments (SAMs)

35. There is a SAM near the site known as Domen Giw cairn. It is described as a mound around 15m in diameter and 1.5m high. There is a fence running through the cairn associated with a modern field boundary. The evidence suggests that the SAM dates from the Bronze Age and is a funerary monument. It is not readily discernable in the landscape until one is close by and even then it would not be obvious to the lay person what it is. I consider that its main value is evidential, which would be enhanced by further knowledge of the buried archaeology. In terms of its setting, the cairn is sited close to the heads of two streams in a position that was clearly important to the people at that time. It has commanding views in most directions and it was claimed that inter-visibility with cairns at Esgair Wen and on top of Plynlimon. The access track would surround the cairn in a broad u-shape and this part of the proposal would also contain 4 turbines, the closest of which would be T2 around 220m away.

36. I note that Cadw objected to the proposal on the basis of the impact on the setting of Domen Giw. Cadw indicates that the SAM is a well-preserved probable Bronze Age cairn. Both Cadw and the Council are concerned that all 6 turbines would be visible in views from and to the monument. The undeveloped upland landscape forming its setting would be comprehensively altered. Clwyd-Powys Archaeological Trust also objected to the proposal on these grounds. Cadw and the Council consider that the impact would be large/very large rather than the appellant’s moderate/large.

37. I agree that there will be extensive change to the setting of the cairn. This would affect the ability to appreciate views to the north, north-east, north-west and west of the monument. It was agreed that these views were an important consideration in the cairn’s siting. I consider that the inter-visibility with cairns around 5km (and further) away has been over-stated. The cairn is not readily visible at short distances and the cairns at Esgair Wen are not visible as they are in an area of forestry. The significance of the asset is evidential and this would be improved with the proposed removal of the fence line and non-intrusive investigation. The proposal itself would not affect the evidential value of the asset, which is the most important element of its significance. Nevertheless, I consider that the introduction of the proposed turbines would have a large adverse effect on the setting of the monument, which must weigh against the proposal.

38. The other important group of SAMs were 4 Hillforts within the Clywedog Valley RHL: Pen-y-Gaer, Pen y Clun, Dinas and Pen y Castell. They are a group of sometimes imposing monuments located around the large 1960s Clywedog reservoir. The Bryn Tail, Van and other lead mines are also located nearby. Lead mining in the area dates to prehistoric and Roman times.

39. Pen-y-Gaer is an imposing high fort or camp perched above the reservoir. It has commanding views all around. There are many turbines in those views but all parties (including NRW) were agreed that they are small objects in distant views. The other three SAMs are to the north and further away from the proposal. The close proximity of the forts to the lead mines and their spacing around them implies an element of security and protection of that resource. The inter-relationship and inter-visibility of the forts is an important element of their significance. The commanding position yielding wide-ranging views is also an important element of its significance. The proposal will intrude on those views at a distance of around 4 km. There are already significant numbers of turbines in view albeit at a greater distance. The context of the

Page 130 Appeal Decision APP/T6850/A/15/3133966

area has changed with the construction of the adjoining dam and associated reservoir. The effect on the SAM would be moderate according to the SOCG, given the distance of the proposal. The extent of that effect would be limited to a small part of the view and would not affect an appreciation of the relationship with the other hill forts and the associated lead mining. My judgement therefore is that there would be a moderate/minor adverse effect on the setting of Pen-y Gaer.

40. As the other SAMs are further away from the proposal and it was agreed that the greatest impact would be on Pen-y-Gaer, my conclusion must be that the adverse effect on them would be minor. I note that the Council has approved an extension to Carno windfarm involving 126m high turbines. These turbines would be as close to Dinas as the proposal and their impact was not considered to be sufficient to justify refusal of planning permission. Cadw as the statutory consultee made no objection to the appeal proposal in respect of these SAMs. This stance was not changed following the Council’s questioning of it in correspondence from Mr Sabel. Indeed it was explained that the Cadw Inspector was familiar with the hill forts in question.

41. The other consideration in this regard is the impact on the Clywedog Valley RHL as a whole. The ES included an ASIDOHL2 carried out in accordance with the relevant guidance. There was no real dispute with the assessment itself, but it was suggested by Clwyd-Powys Archaeological Trust, NRW and the Council that the scores had under-estimated the impact of the proposal on the RHL because the RHL was rated as being of medium value. All parties agree now that all RHLs (whether on Part 1 or 2 of the Register) are nationally important and of high value. There was also a lack of visualisations to illustrate available views of the proposal from the RHL. This was addressed in the appellant’s submissions to the appeal. NRW objected on the basis that the siting and scale of the proposal would significantly affect a number of publicly available views of the RHL, harming the integrity of the area’s historic landscape character. The appellant provided visualisations from the viewpoints identified by NRW as part of its objection. I have taken these views and visualisations into account. It is important to distinguish between the impacts on the individual SAMs and the RHL in order to avoid double counting.

42. The site is between 3 and 12 km from the RHL and so the impact of the proposal would be upon the setting of the RHL. The concerns of NRW related to the broad area around and above the Clywedog reservoir (to the east of the reservoir). The identification of these views was not explained in terms of how they relate to the key characteristics of the RHL. Views of wind turbines are already part of the views from the RHL. Carno windfarm was in existence when the RHL was first registered and so was part of the baseline setting. The ASIDOHL guidance sets out that landscapes change over time and the intention is not to fossilize them or prevent them being altered, but rather to manage them in ways that will allow the key historic elements or characteristics to be retained while still meeting modern needs16. This is a changing landscape that has evolved through pre-history to the early industrial revolution when the Van lead mine was the largest in the world to the modern elements of change, such as the reservoir. The commanding vistas and views of the RHL itself would not be significantly changed. The key characteristics and reasons for registering the landscape would not be affected. I conclude that the impact on the RHL would be minor.

16 Guide to Good Practice on using the Register of Landscapes of Historic Interest in Wales in the Planning and Development Process, Cadw/CCW/ICOMOS 2007, paragraph 1.5

Page 131 Appeal Decision APP/T6850/A/15/3133966

43. All parties in their submissions acknowledge that cumulative effects in combination with other windfarms would not be an issue. NRW states that the existing windfarms lie to the periphery and on the distant horizon and do not catch the eye unless looking specifically for them. To claim that the area is on the brink and that the proposal would tip the balance (as several Council witnesses appeared to at the Inquiry) is to overstate the effect on the historic landscape of often distant wind power development and the proposal. In this regard I note that the Council approved an extension to Carno windfarm a similar distance from the RHL as this proposal; allowing 126m high turbines in positions closer to the RHL than the existing development. NRW did not object to that proposal. I agree with NRW that the Carno development affects a different part of the RHL.

44. The Rhyd-yr-Onen castle is within a valley with restricted views of the site nearby. These views only make a small contribution to its significance and are well-screened by trees. There was evidence that the landowner has no intention to remove these trees. I agree with the parties that the effects of the proposal on the monument and its setting would not be significant.

Listed Buildings

45. The Church of St Curig in Llangurig is a grade 2* listed building and is the highest significance listed building affected by the proposal. It is on an ancient site of a 6th century monastery. The tower may be 12th century. The listing describes it as a large medieval church retaining significant original fabric and some detail, also for the social-historical interest of the high quality Victorian restoration funded by local patronage (Chevalier J Lloyd, Clochfaen Hall), undertaken by two notable church architects (Sir George Gilbert Scott and Arthur Baker), and with good contemporary fittings. The spire on top of the tower dates from the Victorian re-modelling. Its significance lies in its historic/evidential value, its aesthetic value and its prominent cultural and spiritual role. It is a landmark building within the village, especially the tower and spire.

46. The proposal is at the top of the hill to the north. The turbines would not be seen from the church, churchyard or the village. The important views of the church that exist within the village would be unaffected. The only impact on the setting would be in views from the south. The proposal has been set back from the edge of the hill, so it is only views from further away that are affected. These were principally, confined to a minor road and part of the Wye Valley Walk. I discount the view from the A470 to the south because this is only available in the main to motorists and is a distant view for a short duration. The figures supplied by the appellant indicate the impact of the proposal on the Church. It is not until one is some distance south on the minor road that there would be potential views of three blade tips. The hub of a turbine would be screened by trees. This is an important point as the road is lined by trees and so all views are intermittent. I do not agree with the Council that these limited impacts in a small number of viewpoints amount to a large adverse impact. All other aspects of the significance of the church would be maintained. There was no evidence that the view from the south with the hill behind was more significant than other views (within the village or to the east). It was advanced as more significant by the Council’s witness because it was considered to be the best available view of the church. I note that Cadw had no objection to the proposal on these grounds. The Council explained that this was due to the desk-based assessment and shortcomings in the ES. However, even when questioned on this matter by the Council, Cadw did

Page 132 Appeal Decision APP/T6850/A/15/3133966

not change its opinion. I conclude that there would be a moderate adverse effect on the setting of the listed building that would be limited in extent.

47. Glan yr Rhyd (Glanrhyd) contains two listed buildings: a cottage and farm range. The information suggests that it was built as a house for guests of the estate who were fishing at the adjacent artificial lake known as Marsh’s Pool. All three are thought to be contemporaneous. The listed buildings and their curtilage are surrounded by trees, which, together with the local landform screen views of the proposal. The Council’s witness sought to argue that the extensive lake and the listed buildings were all part of a designed landscape. His opinion was that the clear views of the proposal from the lake (PRV A) would intrude into a designed view and therefore the proposal would harm the setting of the listed buildings. I consider this to overstate the case for a modest cottage and farm range next to a large fishing pond. The setting of the listed buildings is the immediate environs and views from the listed buildings would not be affected. The impact would not therefore be significant.

48. Oleu Ffynnon is a listed farmhouse to the north of the site. It is listed as a small upland farmhouse with attached outbuildings, retaining 19th century character and detail. The proposal would not be seen with the farmhouse from its curtilage or surrounding area. The Council’s case relied on the fact that the proposal would be seen behind the listed building in views from the other side of the valley. It was claimed that the principal elevation faced in that direction then it was designed to be seen in association with its historic farmland. I consider that this is a possible interpretation, but it ascribes too much importance to this view. The farmhouse is a small feature almost obscured by modern farm buildings in this view. I do not consider that this view is an important part of the setting of the listed building and conclude that the impact of the proposal would be slight.

49. The SOCG assesses the effect on the listed former farmhouse and building known as Blaenbythygion as slight. Having visited and assessed the views of the listed buildings in relation to the proposal, I agree.

50. The proposal would not be visible from within Llangurig Conservation Area. The impact would be on the setting of the Conservation Area. The Council’s concerns in relation to the impact on the setting echo its concerns in relation to the Church. I have expressed my opinion on the extent and importance of the Council’s critical views above. The impact of modern residential development on the setting of the Conservation Area (and the listed buildings) is clear in views from the south of the village. The impact of the proposal on the Conservation Area would be minor/moderate adverse, in my opinion. Views of the proposal from Llanidloes would be limited in extent and the expert witnesses agreed that its impact on the setting of the Conservation Area would be slight. Thus the proposal would meet the statutory tests. I have considered the information supplied on the other heritage assets in the study area and agree with the assessments of the negligible impact on them as result of the proposal for the reasons provided therein. The impact on the Quaker burial ground would be similar to that expressed above for nearby viewpoint PRV D. There are some trees around the small burial ground that also screen views. The burial ground is not a designated heritage asset, although important to the local community, it does not have the same statutory protections as listed buildings and SAMs.

51. In summary the large adverse effects on the setting of Domen Giw Cairn must count against the proposal. The removal of the fence line, protection and investigation of the SAM, and provision of interpretative information would be benefits in favour of the

Page 133 Appeal Decision APP/T6850/A/15/3133966

proposal. The moderate effects on pen-y-Gaer SAM and lesser effects on other SAMs also count against the proposal. I also afford significant weight to the moderate adverse effects on the Grade 2* listed Church of St Curig and the associated Llangurig Conservation Area. I conclude that the impact on other heritage assets would not be significant. Having appropriate regard to the statutory duties outlined above, I afford these adverse effects significant weight. The adverse effects also mean that there would be a degree of conflict with Policies E3, ENV14 and ENV17 that must weigh in the planning balance.

The Planning Balance

The benefits of the proposal

52. The 2013 update to the UK Renewable Energy Roadmap indicates that the UK had by that time achieved only one third of its 2020 target17. More recent indications18 confirm expectations that the 2020 target will not be met. Moreover, maintaining progress in electricity generation from renewable sources is of increased importance due to the shortfall in progress in respect of meeting renewable energy targets for energy used in the heating and transport sectors. The proposal would have an installed capacity of up to 15 MW. The stated capacity factor is about 30-32% of the theoretical maximum power output. The ES states that the proposal would provide

enough energy for over 8,400 homes and displace up to 23,126 tonnes of CO2 per annum. The availability of a realistic grid connection is another advantage of the proposal.

53. This would be a substantial contribution towards the increased share of energy production from renewable sources and the reduction in greenhouse gas emissions sought by the UK Government’s energy policy and required by relevant legally-binding targets. Such contribution is a significant consideration, given the challenges posed by climate change and the commitment of the UK and Welsh Governments to address this through, amongst other things, greater energy production from renewable sources.

54. The ES estimates the amount of capital investment represented by the development at £20M. The total investment at development and construction stage to the local economy is put at £1.24M and for the whole Wales economy some £5.14M. During its life the operation and maintenance of the wind farm would generate local expenditure of an estimated £230,000 per annum and total benefit throughout Wales of £510,000 per annum. Decommissioning could require work in the order of £300,000. In addition, a Community Benefit fund (possibly £75,000 per annum) would benefit local groups and projects. TAN8 is clear that such benefits are not necessary for the scheme to proceed and their provision is purely voluntary. I cannot take them into account when assessing the planning merits of the proposal. A number of representatives of local businesses attended the Inquiry to support the proposal and give evidence on its potential benefits to their businesses. A large number of letters of support were submitted and several local residents gave evidence in support of the proposal.

17 Inquiry Doc CD-POL-33

18 Inquiry Doc CD-POL-12

Page 134 Appeal Decision APP/T6850/A/15/3133966

The harmful effects of the proposal

55. The landscape and visual impact of the proposal has been assessed. It would obviously be greatest in magnitude close to the proposal and would diminish with distance. This is to be expected with large structures in the landscape. There would be significant adverse effects on available upland views as discussed above. Some of these views are on PROW, where the sensitivity of the receptor would be higher. TAN8 does not preclude wind farms outside the identified Strategic Search Areas and accepts a degree of landscape change to be inevitable. The significant landscape and visual impacts of the proposal must be weighed in the planning balance in that context.

56. An important element of the visual impact of the proposal that merits particular care is the impact on local residents. It is agreed that there would be significant adverse impacts on 8 nearby properties as noted above. In addition, whilst not amounting to an effect on the living conditions of its occupiers, one dwelling would be particularly affected. These adverse impacts must count against the proposal.

57. The harmful effects of the proposal on heritage assets are a very important consideration. As explained above the various statutory duties mean that I give the most significant impacts i.e. those on the settings of the Church of St Curig and Domen Giw very great weight. I note that the statutory heritage body – Cadw, object to the proposal on the grounds of the impact on Domen Giw SAM. The evidential value of the monument would not be affected and there would be some mitigation in terms of investigation and interpretation. The impact on its setting would be substantial. The SAM is barely perceptible in the landscape at the moment, except in close views. It would still be possible to gain views in some directions after construction of the proposal.

58. The impact on the setting of the Church of St Curig would be limited in extent to a particular direction. There would be no views of the proposal from the church, the churchyard, the Conservation Area or the village itself. The available views to the south would be at some distance and partially screened by vegetation. As one moves further away more of the proposed turbines would be seen, but the church then is a correspondingly smaller element of the view.

59. The impact on the setting of other SAMs and listed buildings would be of less significance for the reasons given above. I have considered the group and rarity value of the SAMs within the Clywedog Valley RHL and concluded above that the impacts would not be significant.

60. My overall conclusion is that the impacts on heritage assets would be moderate or slight, which I give considerable weight to in my decision commensurate with the level of impact assessed.

The overall balance

61. The Welsh Government has stated that good progress is being made towards meeting the 2015/17 targets. Whatever the progress towards meeting that target, the subsequent 2020 targets and beyond are more challenging. It is clear that targets for other forms of renewable energy will not be met. There will be a need for more renewable energy projects to meet them. I therefore accept that there is a clear need for further wind energy development nationally and in this area. This is a clear policy

Page 135 Appeal Decision APP/T6850/A/15/3133966

imperative of both the UK and Welsh Government in order to meet the challenge of climate change.

62. There is considerable local support for the scheme, as evidenced by the letters of support and attendees at the Inquiry. Several local businesses referred to the economic benefits to the local area. The evidence also referred to the wider benefits to the Welsh economy. There was also considerable local opposition from residents, CPRW, the Cambrian Mountain Society and others.

63. The benefits of the proposal in meeting the acknowledged need for further onshore wind energy, which is a policy imperative for Welsh Government, are set out above. I attach weight to the fact that the site is well-placed to speedily contribute to the target for wind energy production, as well as the potential shortfall across Wales in achieving future Welsh Government targets in this respect.

64. I consider that the degree of harm arising from the identified landscape and visual impacts, and impacts on heritage assets and their settings would be outweighed by the environmental and economic benefits of the scheme, especially in terms of wind energy generation. I find that, on balance, the scheme would accord with Unitary Development Plan Policy E3 and therefore the plan as a whole including the other policies referred to above. It would also accord with national planning policies, on balance.

Other Matters

Ecology

65. Significant concerns had been raised by NRW and other nature conservation bodies in relation to the ecology section of the ES. Further information was required on the potential impacts of the proposal on European sites and European Protected Species and important habitats. This lack of information therefore formed the basis for a putative reason for refusal. Discussions have been ongoing between the relevant bodies and the appellant. The Council’s evidence was that NRW has confirmed that its concerns can be satisfactorily addressed through management plans, which can be secured by conditions. On this basis the Council withdrew the two putative reasons for refusal related to the concerns of NRW and other wildlife organisations. Having reviewed the evidence and suggested conditions, I consider that the effects on nature conservation interests can be controlled and would be acceptable.

66. I have carefully considered the evidence of those discussions and the outcomes. The appellant submitted information the Habitats Regulations Assessment19 Test of Likely Significant Effect. This is the screening stage of that assessment process. If the conclusion reached is that the project will not have likely significant effects then no further action is required. The appellant’s report concludes that the proposal (alone or cumulatively with other approved schemes) would not have likely significant effects on the Afon Gwy (River Wye) SAC and Otter species or the Elenydd – Mallaen SPA in terms of the potential for collision risk with SPA bird features (Red Kite). Conditions on any planning permission to require a Construction Environmental Management Plan (CEMP) and other control measures would be necessary to secure this outcome. The

19 Under the Conservation of Habitats and Species Regulations 2010

Page 136 Appeal Decision APP/T6850/A/15/3133966

evidence of the outcomes of discussions with NRW is that NRW agreed with the conclusions reached. I conclude (in agreement with NRW and the appellant) that the proposal would not be likely to have significant effects on the above SAC and SPA and further assessment is not therefore necessary.

Public Rights of Way

67. There is a bridleway that runs through and near the site. The Council had raised concerns regarding the proximity of the proposal to this bridleway and included a putative reason for refusal. The British Horse Society had also objected on this basis. An alternative recreational route, appropriate signage and a Public Rights of Way (PROW) contribution has been secured by the planning obligation referred to in the introductory paragraphs of this decision. The appellant has confirmed that the issue of soft spots on the bridleway, where horses currently experience difficulty, will be addressed by the proposals. The Council has confirmed that following discussions and the completion of the planning obligation, there is no remaining objection to the proposal in terms of the impact on PROW. The British Horse Society has also confirmed that it now has no objection. There remain other objections on the grounds of the impact on riders and that the improvements to the bridleway were unnecessary. There was also evidence from local businesses of support for the proposed improvements to the bridleway. In the context of no objections from the Council and the British Horse Society, I consider that the impact on PROW would not be so severe as to warrant a reason for refusal of the proposal. However, I agree with objectors that any micro-siting allowance must be controlled to prevent siting closer to PROW.

Noise

68. The Council’s environmental health section was content that the noise impacts would not be unacceptable and could be controlled by suitable conditions. In response to a specific query from the appellant environmental health confirmed that the anticipated construction noise would meet the appropriate guidelines. This is based on the hours of operation being controlled by condition. The Council has confirmed that no properties should be affected by shadow flicker due to the distances involved, but a condition would address any unforeseen issues.

Water Supplies

69. Several objections relate to the impact of the proposal on private water supplies near the application site. The ES conclusions on the matter are not correct as there are wells in closer proximity to the proposed access road than 395m. The appellant has submitted information on this matter. The conclusion is that the private water supplies would not be affected. Several of the agreed conditions would protect private water supplies and subject to these, I consider that the matter has been adequately addressed.

Access

70. As noted above (paragraph 6) the application site was amended slightly to address the concerns of the local highway authority in respect of the junction of the access and the highway near the property shown as Waen Wen on the site location plan. The Council has now confirmed that the revised plan has addressed its remaining concerns in relation to highways matters and the putative reason for refusal has been overcome. Welsh Government has confirmed that the access onto the A470 would be

Page 137 Appeal Decision APP/T6850/A/15/3133966

acceptable subject to conditions. A direction was issued to that effect. I have a concern that the conditions requiring a survey of the entire road to be used for the delivery of 6 turbines would be unduly onerous and out of proportion to the scale of the scheme and the class of road involved. There is little evidence to suggest that the passage from Swansea on the M4 and trunk road network would cause significant problems. I am not including this condition because it would not be reasonable or fairly related to planning purposes. The other suggested conditions would address traffic management of abnormal loads and damage to the highway, amongst other things. I consider that these conditions would be sufficient to resolve any issues that may arise.

Grid Connection

71. The grid connection route that was initially indicated by the appellant was reliant on the Mynydd y Gwynt scheme proceeding as planned. This windfarm has been refused planning permission by the relevant Secretary of State. The appellant is pursuing an alternative grid connection. The favoured connection offered by the Distribution Network Operator (DNO) is to the south via a new 66 kV line on wooden trident poles to the existing network. The grid connection is not part of this application. A separate planning application must be made by the DNO and the impacts would be considered as part of that application. The appellant also confirmed that another grid connection offer was available from the DNO. There was no convincing evidence of any impediment to grid connection. NRW were satisfied subject to a condition prohibiting the commencement of development until the proposed grid connection had received consent. Overall, I am satisfied that there would be a probable grid connection for the proposal.

Effect on Tourism

72. The ES refers to studies of the potential effects of the presence of wind turbines on tourism. These studies all conclude that there is no discernable effect. This is also the conclusion of recent Welsh Government research on this topic. Whilst general concerns were raised, there was no convincing evidence to dispute the conclusions of these studies.

73. I judge that none of the other matters raised materially affect my assessment of the overall planning balance.

Planning Conditions

74. I have considered the suggested conditions in the light of the legal tests for conditions and the advice in Welsh Government Circular 016/2014. The conditions were the subject of intensive discussion between the parties before and during the Inquiry. I conducted a round table discussion (without prejudice) towards the end of the Inquiry. Any suggested condition not mentioned below is either a standard requirement or was agreed to be deleted by the parties.

75. The first suggested condition is not a condition but a series of definitions, which is appropriate to set the context for what follows. The condition requiring a photographic record of the site is necessary in case of any disputes regarding site restoration. A scheme for decommissioning is necessary and the model condition 112 addresses the issue. NRW required an ecological survey to inform decommissioning. I consider that the adverse impacts are justified by the benefits of the scheme; and so it is necessary that if the proposed turbines do not generate electricity for more than

Page 138 Appeal Decision APP/T6850/A/15/3133966

6 months, they should be removed. A micro-siting allowance is accepted practice. The agreed condition does not allow turbines to be sited closer to PROW or dwellings as noted above. It is appropriate for details of the final positions to be submitted to the Local Planning Authority. The overall height of the proposed turbines and their detailed design and cabling, together with the design and lighting of the proposed substation must be controlled by conditions.

76. I have concluded that conditions to control construction times are essential. I impose the conditions required by Welsh Government as highway authority save those related to surveying the condition of the highway network for the reasons given above. The CEMP is an essential component of managing the impacts of construction on the environment as discussed above. The employment of an ecological clerk of works to monitor compliance with the CEMP, etc. would appear to be necessary. The condition regarding surface water and private water supplies has been considered above. The conditions required by NRW have been imposed, I consider that they are necessary to protect species and habitats and ensure that the proposal would not be likely to have significant effects on the relevant SAC and SPA, as discussed above.

77. There may be important undiscovered archaeological remains on the site. It would be important that a watching brief and recording of any finds is undertaken. The appellant proposed enhancement and investigation of Domen Giw must be ensured by condition. The noise immissions from the proposal must be controlled by suitable conditions. Those suggested have been used on many wind farm approvals. I consider that a community liaison scheme for the construction and decommissioning periods is essential, given the proximity of dwellings to the proposed access. Conditions to address interference with TV reception and inform the Ministry of Defence of the proposals are reasonably necessary.

Conclusion

78. Having considered all the evidence, I conclude that the balance is in favour of approval of the proposal for the reasons given and I therefore allow the appeal.

A L McCooey

Inspector

Page 139 Appeal Decision APP/T6850/A/15/3133966

ANNEX – CONDITIONS ATTACHED TO THE PLANNING PERMISSION

Preamble: terms and time limits

In these conditions, unless the context otherwise requires:

“AIL” means abnormal indivisible loads;

“approved plans” means those plans listed in Condition 4;

“commencement”, in relation to the authorised development, means the date on which the authorised development begins by the carrying out of a material operation as defined in section 56 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 and “commence” and “commenced” shall be construed accordingly;

“construction environmental management plan” means the plan as described in Condition 44;

“Construction Period” means the period from work commencing on the Development until the date 18 months after first export;

"dB" refers to the Decibel noise measurement unit;

"dB(A)" refers to a Decibel noise measurement unit, with the inclusion of the A- weighting filter in the measurements as referred to in ETSU-R-97;

“development” means the works that are permitted to take place as a result of this permission. This includes;

(a) 6 (up to 100m tip height) wind turbines (up to 2.5MW each) and associated infrastructure including crane hard standing areas;

(b) new site entrance to the east off the A470;

(d) construction of circa 5.4km of new access track;

(e) the upgrade of 420m of existing track;

(f) construction of a temporary site compound;

(g) hard standing areas for use during construction, maintenance and decommissioning works;

(h) construction of a new on-site substation which includes a control building; and

(i) 2 alternative recreational tracks.

"emergency” means circumstances in which there is reasonable cause for apprehending imminent injury to persons, serious damage to property or danger of serious pollution to the environment;

Page 140 Appeal Decision APP/T6850/A/15/3133966

“expiry of this permission” means the date 25 years from the date of the erection of the first turbine on site;

“ETSU-R-97” means the ETSU Report number ETSU-R-97 ‘The Assessment and Rating of Noise from Wind Farms’ published in September 1996;

“first export” means the date the authorised development first exports electricity to the Grid on a commercial basis;

"LA90" means the decibel (dB) level exceeded for 90% of each sample period;

“Local Planning Authority” means Powys County Council;

“NRW” means Natural Resource Wales, a Welsh Government sponsored body and statutory consultee on environmental protection; regulation; and maintenance of natural resources;

“peat management plan” means the plan as described in Condition 48;

“Public Holiday” means a day that is, or is to be observed as a public holiday;

“Schedule 1 birds” means the species of birds listed in Schedule 1 to the Wildlife and Countryside Act 1981 as amended;

“site” means land within the development boundary; and

“wind turbines” means the wind turbines forming part of the development and “wind turbine” shall be construed accordingly.

1. The development shall begin not later than five years from the date of this decision.

2. Subject to the conditions attached to this permission, the development shall be set out in accordance with the approved plans and be constructed in accordance with the application documents:

Approved Plans (a) Revised Application Boundary and Access Track dated 4 April 2016

(b) ES Figure 1.2.1 – version E

(d) ES Figure 1.2.3 – version E

(e) ES Figure 1.2.4 – version E

(f) ES Figure 1.2.5 – version E

(g) ES Figure 1.2.6 – version E

(h) ES Figure 1.2.7 – version E

Page 141 Appeal Decision APP/T6850/A/15/3133966

(i) ES Figure 1.2.8 – version E

(j) ES Figure 1.2.9 – version E

Application Documents (a) Environmental Statement Volume I – Main text dated October 2014

(b) Environmental Statement Volume II – Figures dated October 2014

(d) Environmental Statement Volume IV – LVIA Figures dated October 2014

(e) Transport Management Plan dated October 2014

3. The permission hereby granted shall endure for a period of 25 years from the first export. Written confirmation of the first export date shall be sent to the Local Planning Authority within one month of the first export date.

Site Recording

4. No development shall commence until all areas that will be disturbed by the development have been photographically recorded and these photographs, alongside a plan detailing the precise location and bearing of these photos have been submitted to the Local Planning Authority in writing.

Site decommissioning and restoration

5. At least 24 months prior to the expiry of this permission, details and methodologies for a full ecological survey to be undertaken to inform a site decommissioning and restoration scheme shall be submitted to and agreed in writing by the Local Planning Authority.

6. Within the 18 months prior to decommissioning of the site, but no later than 12 months prior to decommissioning, a full ecological survey of the site shall be undertaken to inform decommissioning, as required by condition 6. A survey report shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority prior to the commencement of decommissioning and then implemented as approved. The report shall include ecological mitigation measures, as appropriate, based on the ecological assessment findings to be followed during decommissioning, and beyond.

7. No later than 12 months before the expiry date of this permission hereby granted a decommissioning and site restoration scheme shall be submitted in writing to the Local Planning Authority. The site decommissioning and restoration scheme shall be implemented as approved and be completed within 12 months from the expiry date of this permission. The site decommissioning and restoration scheme shall include, but not be limited to:

Page 142 Appeal Decision APP/T6850/A/15/3133966

(a) details of the removal of all the wind turbines and the surface elements of the development plus one metre of the wind turbine bases below ground level;

(b) details of means of the removal, including how this will avoid effects on protected species and habitats;

(d) earth moving and soil replacement;

(e) restoration of the landscape;

(f) temporary protective fencing around landscape features to be retained on-site (and when the fencing is to be removed);

(g) reinstatement of any public rights of way, paths and footpaths; and

(h) monitoring and remedial actions.

Wind Turbine Failure

8. In the event of a wind turbine failing to produce electricity to the grid for a continuous period of 6 months or more, other than required by Conditions 41, 58 and 62, a scheme for the repair or removal of that turbine shall be submitted to the Local Planning Authority for its written approval within 2 months of the end of that 6 month period and implemented within 6 months of approval unless a longer period is agreed in writing by the Local Planning Authority.

Development micro-siting

9. No development shall commence until a micro-siting protocol has been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. It shall set out a protocol for deciding on micro siting of all development to minimise the development’s impact on environmental constraints. The protocol shall be implemented as approved and include, but not be limited to, the following criteria:

(a) Take account of peat, blanket bog habitat, curlew, protected species, watercourses, public and permissive rights of way, heritage asset, bats, health and safety and any other identified environmental or engineering constraint.

(b) Turbines, crane pads and directly associated infrastructure may be located up to 30m from the positions shown on the approved plans.

(d) Notwithstanding the above allowances, the substation and track adjacent to it shall be constructed in the location shown on the approved plans to avoid areas of deep peat.

Page 143 Appeal Decision APP/T6850/A/15/3133966

10. Within 3 months of the first export date, a plan showing the exact location of all aspects of the development (including tracks, hard standings, access areas, turbines and substation) shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority.

Detailed development design and appearance

11. No development shall take place until details of the external finish of the turbines hereby permitted have been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. Development shall be carried out in accordance with the approved details.

12. The wind turbines hereby approved shall have a hub height of no greater than 59 metres and a height to blade tip of no greater than 100 metres.

13. All wind turbine blades shall rotate in the same direction.

14. All electricity cables connecting the wind turbines and the substation, and other services within the site boundary shall be installed underground and alongside tracks which are constructed on the site as part of the development. Any variation shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority before development commences. The development shall be carried out in accordance with the approved details.

15. No development shall commence until detailed design of the layout, external treatment, design, materials, and orientation and screening of the on-site substation have been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The substation shall be constructed in accordance with the approved details.

16. No development shall commence until details of any permanent outdoor lighting provision have been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. Any outdoor lighting shall be provided in accordance with the approved details.

17. No symbols, signs, logos or other lettering, other than those required by law for health and safety reasons, shall be displayed on any part of the wind turbines nor any building or structures without written approval from the Local Planning Authority.

Construction hours

18. No construction work (other than the delivery of abnormal loads) shall take place outside the hours of 07:30 and 19:30 Monday to Friday inclusive, 07:30 and 13:00 on Saturdays with no construction work at all on Sundays and public holidays. Outside these hours, works at the site shall be limited to emergency works, erection of turbines, dust suppression, and the testing and maintenance of plant and equipment, or construction work that is not audible from any noise sensitive property, unless otherwise approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The Local Planning Authority shall be informed in writing of emergency works within three days of occurrence.

Page 144 Appeal Decision APP/T6850/A/15/3133966

19. Notwithstanding the provisions of Condition 18, delivery of wind turbine and crane components may take place outside the times specified in Condition 18 subject to such deliveries first being approved by the Local Planning Authority.

20. All activities associated with the construction of the development shall be carried out in accordance with British Standard BS5228:2009: Code of Practice for noise and vibration control on construction and open sites - Part 1: Noise and Part 2: Vibration.

Grid Connection

21. No authorised development is to commence until planning permission, as required, has been granted for all stages of the grid connection from the substation to the National Grid.

Highways and transport

22. Prior to the commencement of development works, a scheme to provide for the remediation of any incidental damage directly attributable to the development to the parts of the highway network which will be utilised during the construction of the development including street furniture, structures, highway verge and carriageway surfaces shall be prepared in consultation with the Welsh Government as Welsh trunk road highway authority and Powys County Council as the local highway authority and submitted to and approved by the Local Planning Authority. The scheme shall be implemented as approved throughout the construction phase of the development.

23. AILs associated with the development shall be delivered strictly in accordance with a AIL Traffic Management Plan (AILTMP). In this respect, the AILTMP shall be prepared in consultation with the Welsh Government as Welsh trunk road highway authority and Powys County Council as the local highway authority prior to the commencement of any works. The AILTMP shall include:

(a) proposals for transporting AILs from their point of entry to the Welsh trunk road network to the site that minimise any impact on the safety and free flow of trunk road traffic;

(b) management and maintenance of layover areas, passing places and welfare facilities while AIL deliveries take place;

(d) details of any alterations to any works that are carried out to enable AIL movements proposed to be implemented after such movements;

(e) management of junctions and crossings and any other public rights of way while AIL deliveries take place;

(f) evidence of trial runs that mimic the movement of the worst case AILs along the access route;

(g) number and size of AILs, including loaded dimensions and weights;

Page 145 Appeal Decision APP/T6850/A/15/3133966

(h) number and composition of AIL convoys, including anticipated escort arrangements;

(i) methodology for managing trunk road traffic during AIL deliveries, including identification of passing places and holding areas as necessary;

(j) convoy contingency plans in the event of incidents or emergencies;

(k) estimated convoy journey durations and timings along the route, including release of forecast traffic queues;

(l) swept path analysis modelling the movement of the worst case AILs at all potential horizontal and vertical constraints along the access route;

(m) proposals for the temporary or permanent modification of any affected street furniture along the access route and details of how this would be managed;

(n) plans for the reinstatement of any temporary works after completion of the construction phase;

(o) land ownership must be clarified on all drawings showing proposed highway modifications. The developer shall be responsible for the acquisition and reinstatement of all third party land including re-instatement of boundary features;

(p) proposals to liaise with all relevant stakeholders (including the relevant highway and planning authorities, Police, members of the public and local communities, hauliers, developers and landowners) prior to the submission of notifications for AIL deliveries and applications for special orders for AIL deliveries;

(q) consideration of the cumulative impact of other wind farm schemes proposing to use all of part of the same access route and coordination with those schemes where possible;

(r) the appointment and role of a transport coordinator to administer the abnormal indivisible load delivery strategy;

(s) means of control of timing of delivery of AIL movements;

(t) temporary traffic diversions and traffic hold points; and

(u) details of banksmen and escorts for abnormal loads.

24. AILs associated with the maintenance and decommissioning of the development shall leave the site strictly in accordance with a Traffic Management plan prepared in consultation with the relevant highway authority. The Traffic Management Plan shall be submitted to and approved in writing by Local Planning Authority prior to commencement of any removal, replacement of decommissioning works.

Page 146 Appeal Decision APP/T6850/A/15/3133966

25. No development works shall be undertaken until full details of any highway works associated with the construction of layover areas, passing places and highway improvements including:

(a) the detailed design of any works;

(b) geometric layout;

(d) drainage; and

(e) street lighting;

have been prepared in consultation with the Welsh Government as Welsh trunk road highway authority and Powys County Council as the local highway authority and submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The highway works shall be completed in accordance with the approved details prior to the commencement of any AIL deliveries to the development site.

26. No development works shall be undertaken until the developer demonstrates rights of access to all proposed works that are not part of the highway network to the satisfaction of the Local Planning Authority.

27. Full details of the highway works associated with any new access onto the trunk road including the detailed design, geometric layout, construction and drainage, shall be prepared in consultation with the Welsh Government as Welsh trunk road highway authority and submitted to and approved by the Local Planning Authority prior the commencement of any works on the site.

28. No development shall commence until full construction details, detailed design drawings and calculations for the foundations and access track have been prepared in consultation with the Welsh Government as Welsh trunk road highway authority and submitted to and approved by the Local Planning Authority.

29. Adequate provision shall be made within the development to enable vehicles to turn around, so they may enter and leave the site in a forward gear.

30. No drainage from the site shall be connected to or allowed to discharge into the trunk road drainage system or onto the trunk road carriageway.

31. Wheel-washing facilities, or an alternative method to be approved by the Local Planning Authority in consultation with the Welsh Government, shall be provided at the site exit before any other development commences. Such facilities shall thereafter remain available during the construction period and be used by all vehicles exiting the site.

32. No construction works shall take place on site until a Construction Traffic Management Plan (CTMP) for non-abnormal indivisible load vehicles has been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The Traffic management plan shall be implemented as approved and will include, but not be limited to:

Page 147 Appeal Decision APP/T6850/A/15/3133966

(a) construction vehicle routing, including specific measures to ensure that construction traffic uses the proposed haul road and proposals for dealing with any infraction;

(b) means of monitoring vehicle movements to and from the site including the use of liveried construction vehicles displaying the name of the developer, the vehicle number and a telephone number for complaints to be logged. The procedures for dealing with complaints must be provided to the Local Planning Authority;

(d) proposals for appropriate management of junctions and crossings of highways and other public rights of way on site and between the site and the trunk road network;

(e) contractual arrangements for the control of construction traffic offsite and to ensure that complaints and breaches of the TMP requirements are able to be remedied;

(f) a travel Plan aimed at maximising the use of sustainable travel by the construction workforce associated with the development;

(g) vehicle movements during the Royal Welsh Show;

(h) communications with members of the public and local communities; and

(i) provision for pre-commencement update surveys for protected species which must include a provision requiring consultation with NRW, including the issue by it of written advice, and provision for the identification of avoidance and mitigation measures.

33. No development shall take place until detailed plans of all highway works on the C2176 have been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The details submitted shall include:

(a) drainage details;

(b) road markings and signage proposals;

(d) the works shall be implemented in accordance with the approved details.

Construction environmental management plan

34. No development, including site clearance, scrub and vegetation removal and tree felling works, shall commence until a detailed, site specific Construction Environmental Management Plan is prepared in consultation with NRW and submitted to and approved by the Local Planning Authority. The Construction Environmental Management Plan must be implemented as approved and include, but not be limited to:

Page 148 Appeal Decision APP/T6850/A/15/3133966

(a) the mitigation measures to be implemented to avoid harm to protected species and minimise damage to species and habitats;

(b) the timing of construction works, including the timing of vegetation removal to avoid the potential for effects on reptiles, amphibians and nesting birds;

(d) the timing of works and methods of working for cable trenches, foundation works and erection of the wind turbines;

(e) the timing of works and construction of the substation / control building;

(f) the cleaning of site accesses, site tracks and the adjacent public highway and the sheeting of all heavy goods vehicles taking spoil or construction materials to / from the site to prevent spillage or deposit of any materials on the highway;

(g) the pollution control and prevention measure to be implemented including:

i. sediment control;

ii. the bunding of fuel, oil and chemical storage areas;

iii. sewage disposal;

iv. measures for the protection of water courses and ground water and soils; and

v. a programme for monitoring private water supplies, water courses and water bodies before and during the authorised development, including details of the action to be taken if monitoring indicates adverse effects on private water supplies, water courses or water bodies;

(h) the disposal of surplus materials;

(i) the management of construction noise and vibrations (including identification of access routes, locations of materials lay-down areas, details of equipment to be employed, operations to be carried out, mitigation measures and a scheme for the monitoring of noise);

(j) the handling, storage and re-use on site of site-derived soil;

(k) the handling, storage and management of any peat excavated in accordance with the peat management plan;

(l) the location, design and construction methods of the access tracks including drainage provisions, and the pollution prevention measures to be implemented to ensure there are no polluting discharges from tracks and disturbed areas including provision to ensure that no polluting discharge from the access tracks and disturbed areas enters any watercourse;

(m) the landscaping of the access track;

Page 149 Appeal Decision APP/T6850/A/15/3133966

(n) the nature, type and quantity of materials to be imported on site for backfilling operations or construction of the access track;

(o) the management of ground and surface water (including mitigation to protect private water supplies);

(p) the management of dust;

(q) the proposed temporary site compound for storage of materials, machinery and parking within the sites clear of the highway, including the siting of the temporary buildings and all means of enclosure, oil/ fuel and chemical storage and any proposals for temporary lighting, and details of proposals for restoration of the sites of the temporary compound and works within 12 months of the first export date;

(r) the design and construction of any culverts (to include the use of open bottomed culverts);

(s) the restoration of all areas of the site which will be temporarily used for construction;

(t) methods, timing and location of archaeological investigations;

(u) protocols and programme for any required environmental monitoring to be made publicly available on an annual basis;

(v) proposed communications protocol and mechanism for investigating complaints, including the action to be taken where complaint investigations indicate materially adverse effects have occurred as a result of the construction of the authorised project;

(w) routeing strategy to ensure that construction vehicles use agreed routes;

(x) a protocol for ecological compliance auditing;

(y) measures to prevent the importation or export of alien or invasive plant or animal species, as well as measures to prevent the spread of animal or plant diseases;

(z) measures to restore the contractor’s compound and revegetation of crane hard standing areas and to stabilise of all verges, embankments and cuttings;

(aa) the landscape mitigation measures to be implemented including:

i. measures to ensure the retention and re-use of site derived materials including the stockpiling of site derived subsoil and topsoil for reuse when reinstating any temporary works;

ii. temporary protective fencing around landscape features to be retained on- site;

iii. measures to ensure all construction works are at least 2 metres from all existing hedge lines and not within the root protection zone of any tree;

Page 150 Appeal Decision APP/T6850/A/15/3133966

iv. the use of locally sourced aggregate for the surfacing of the access track;

v. placement of soil bunds on the downhill side of sections of the access track;

vi. seeding of all restored and reinstated areas, including the temporary contractor’s compound, crane hard standing areas, verges, embankments, cuttings and reinstated sections of the access track;

vii. reinstating of sections of the access track after the construction period;

viii. reduction in width of the access track after the construction period;

ix. planting of hedgerows on the site; and

x. proposed conifer plantation to be planted around the substation.

The construction environmental management plan must be implemented as approved unless otherwise agreed in writing by the Local Planning Authority.

35. Before any wind turbine is removed or replaced a revised Construction Environmental Management Plan dealing solely with that removal or replacement shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority, and implemented as approved.

Ecological clerk of works

36. No development shall commence, including vegetation clearance and tree felling, until a suitably qualified Ecological Clerk of Works (ECoW) has been employed. The ECoW shall be appointed at least one month prior to the commencement of any tree felling, site/vegetation clearance works or development. The scope of the ECoW shall include, but not be limited to:

(a) monitoring compliance with and reporting on the success or failure of the approved mitigation works and in the event of failures advising on remedial mitigation measures; (b) advising the developer on the implementation of the approved mitigation proposals and the protection of important nature conservation interests on the site; (c) directing and consulting on the micro-siting and placement of turbines, roads and other infrastructure; (d) monitoring and reporting on the compliance with the Construction Environmental Management Plan, peat management plan and other associated environmental plans; and (e) attending liaison meetings with and reporting compliance with conditions and plans and mitigation measures to the Local Planning Authority and other parties as necessary.

Page 151 Appeal Decision APP/T6850/A/15/3133966

Surface water drainage & drinking water supplies

37. No development shall commence until:

(a) a surface water management plan containing details of the surface water drainage system (including means of pollution control) has been prepared in consultation with NRW and submitted to and approved by the Local Planning Authority; and

(b) a water quality monitoring strategy (including monitoring at sources of private drinking water supplies) has been prepared in consultation with NRW and submitted to and approved by the Local Planning Authority.

The plans must be implemented as approved unless otherwise agreed in writing by the Local Planning Authority.

Peat management plan

38. No development shall commence until a Peat Management Plan has been prepared in consultation with NRW and been submitted to and approved by the Local Planning Authority. The Peat Management Plan shall be implemented as approved and include, but not be limited to:

(a) the timing of works and methods of working for cable trenches, foundation works and erection of the wind turbines;

(b) the timing of works and construction of the substation / control building and meteorological mast;

(d) mitigation measures to be implemented including the micro-siting of wind turbines and the access track; and

(e) the handling, storage and management of any peat excavated.

Bat protection plan

39. No development shall commence until a pre-construction bat survey has taken place.

40. No development shall commence until the results of the pre-construction bat survey and a Bat Protection Plan prepared in consultation with NRW have been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The bat protection plan must be implemented as approved and include details of:

(a) any necessary mitigation measures to ensure the protection of the species during site clearance works and construction of the development;

(b) a monitoring procedure to record bat activity and weather conditions;

Page 152 Appeal Decision APP/T6850/A/15/3133966

(d) a requirement for the annual reporting of the results of monitoring, and where necessary details of any remedial action to reduce bat mortality;

(e) a procedure for agreeing and implementing remedial measures aimed at reducing or avoiding bat mortality, such measures must include wind turbine curtailment and/or land management changes; and

(f) an agreed timeframe for monitoring, sufficient to determine the impact of the operation of the authorised development on bats and the efficacy of any remedial measures to be implemented.

Badgers

41. No development shall commence until pre-construction badger surveys have been carried out at all development infrastructure locations. The results of the surveys and any necessary mitigation measures shall be prepared in consultation with NRW and submitted to and approved by the Local Planning Authority before any development commences.

42. If any badger setts are located within 30 metres of any development infrastructure, the infrastructure shall be moved. If infrastructure cannot be moved then a plan to construct replacement setts shall be prepared in consultation with NRW and submitted to and approved by the Local Planning Authority. Alternative setts shall be constructed at least six months prior to exclusion.

Great crested newts

43. No development shall commence until environmental DNA surveys to determine the presence of great crested newts on the site have been undertaken and provided to the Local Planning Authority and NRW. The results of the surveys and any necessary mitigation measures shall be prepared in consultation with NRW and submitted to and approved by the Local Planning Authority before any development commences. The approved mitigation measures shall be implemented as approved.

Dormice

44. No development shall commence until surveys to determine the presence of dormice on the site have been undertaken and provided to the Local Planning Authority and NRW. The results of the surveys and any necessary mitigation measures shall be prepared in consultation with NRW and submitted to and approved by the Local Planning Authority before any development commences. The approved mitigation measures shall be implemented as approved.

Schedule 1 birds

45. No development shall commence until a pre-construction survey on Schedule 1 birds has been undertaken and the results and any suggested mitigation have been prepared in consultation with NRW and submitted to and approved by the Local Planning Authority.

46. If the pre-construction survey identifies that construction will occur during the breeding season of any Schedule 1 bird then a buffer shall be adopted to ensure that construction does not take place within the vicinity of any Schedule 1 bird nest sites

Page 153 Appeal Decision APP/T6850/A/15/3133966

until the chicks have fledged or breeding has failed. The size of the buffer must be approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority subject to prior consultation with NRW and the buffer must remain in place until written confirmation is given by the Local Planning Authority that construction can take place within the buffer.

Curlew

47. No development shall commence until a two year Pre-Construction Curlew Survey has taken place.

48. No development shall commence until the results of the Pre-Construction Curlew Survey and Breeding Bird Protection Plan have been prepared in consultation with NRW and submitted to and approved by the Local Planning Authority.

49. If the pre-construction survey identifies that construction will occur during the curlew breeding season then an 800 metre buffer shall be adopted to ensure that construction does not take place within the vicinity of any curlew nest sites until the chicks have fledged or breeding has failed. The buffer must remain in place until written confirmation is given by the Local Planning Authority that construction can take place within the buffer.

Otters

50. No development shall commence until a Pre-Construction Otter Survey has taken place. The methodology for the Pre-Construction Otter Survey is to be prepared in consultation with NRW and submitted to and approved by the Local Planning Authority.

51. No development shall commence until the results of the Pre-Construction Otter Survey and an Otter Protection Plan prepared in consultation with NRW have been submitted to and approved by the Local Planning Authority. The otter protection plan shall include:

(a) updated construction drawings and plans showing otter holts and resting places within 100 metres of specific working locations;

(b) details of proposed mitigation including:

i. construction activities will be 100 metres outside of known holts for otters and 30 metres of known resting places to minimise disturbance and risk to species;

ii. appropriate exclusion zones will be created around holts and resting places, using temporary fencing or some similar method to delineate and highlight the area;

iii. construction activities involving heavy machinery and blasting within 100 metres from a resting place / holt will not commence until one hour after sunrise, ceasing one hour before sunset;

iv. all open excavations will be ramped to enable easy exit by otter;

Page 154 Appeal Decision APP/T6850/A/15/3133966

v. culvert pipes stored on site will be capped or if caps are not available, stored vertically, to prevent entrapment;

vi. work on culverts will only take place during the day and at the end of each working day the watercourse will be cleared of any construction material so otters can pass through unobstructed;

vii. design of any permanent or temporary lighting will be such that it will be directed away from watercourses;

viii. all felling and construction personnel will be provided with an emergency telephone contact for the ecological clerk of works; and

ix. a site speed limit of 19 mph for all construction traffic will be imposed across the site.

Rights of Way

52. No development shall commence until an Access Management Plan (AMP) has been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The AMP shall be implemented as approved and include:

(a) details of the temporary re-routing of public rights of way during construction of the authorised development;

(b) details of the provision of signage and other information alerting the public to construction works;

(d) details as to how public rights of way, paths and roads will be inspected prior to and monitored during the construction period;

(e) details of how public rights of way and newly created routes will cross the access track;

(f) details of alternative routes for any public rights of way that need to be diverted;

(g) details of permissive routes to be provided within the site;

(h) details of improvements to Public Rights of Way within the site;

(i) details of how the AMP shall not conflict with the ecological provisions contained in these conditions;

(j) details of opening and maintenance of all Public Rights of Way (including repairs to any damage caused at the construction stage) to an acceptable standard;

(k) provision of suitable interpretation boards; and

(l) details of a promotional day to be held on site after first export and all Public Rights of Way improvements on site have been completed.

Page 155 Appeal Decision APP/T6850/A/15/3133966

Cultural Heritage

53. No development or site clearance shall commence until the Local Planning Authority have been informed in writing of the name of a professionally qualified archaeologist who is to be present during the undertaking of any excavations in the development area so that a watching brief can be conducted. No work shall commence 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 archaeological fieldwork being completed.

54. The developer shall afford access at all reasonable times to any archaeologist nominated by the Local Planning Authority, and shall allow him/her to observe the excavations and record items of interest and finds.

55. No development shall take place until the developer, or their agents or successors in title, has secured agreement for a written scheme of historic environment mitigation which has been submitted by the application and approved by the Local Planning Authority. Thereafter, the programme of work will be fully carried out in accordance with the requirements and standards of the written scheme.

56. No development shall take place until a scheme of works in relation to the Domen Giw Cairn (Scheduled Ancient Monument No.MG267) has been approved by the Local Planning Authority. The scheme of works shall include:

(a) realignment of the modern post and wire fence that currently runs across the top of the mound so that the whole mound can be explored;

(b) a non-intrusive survey of the mound and surrounding area using geophysics;

(c) details of a signboard to be erected nearby to explain the archaeological/cultural context and significance of the mound to visitors; and

(d) A timetable for the completion of the approved scheme of works.

Shadow Flicker

57. Prior to the erection of any wind turbine a scheme shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority setting out a protocol for the assessment of shadow flicker in the event of any complaint alleging shadow flicker effects to the Local Planning Authority from the owner or occupier of any dwelling within 10 diameter blade lengths of a turbine. The written scheme shall include remedial measures to alleviate any effects of shadow flicker attributable to the development. Operation of the wind turbines shall take place in accordance with the approved scheme.

Television interference

58. Prior to the erection of any wind turbine a scheme providing for a baseline survey and the investigation and alleviation of any interference to television reception caused by the operation of the wind turbines shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The scheme shall provide for the investigation by a qualified independent television engineer of any complaint of

Page 156 Appeal Decision APP/T6850/A/15/3133966

interference with television reception, where such complaint is notified to the developer by the Local Planning Authority. Where impairment is determined by the qualified television engineer to be attributable to the development, mitigation works shall be carried out in accordance with the scheme which has been approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority.

Aviation

59. No wind turbine shall be erected before the following information has been provided to the Defence Geographic Centre of the Ministry of Defence:

(a) the date construction starts and ends;

(b) the maximum height of construction equipment; and

Community Liaison

60. No development shall commence until a community liaison scheme for the construction and decommissioning period has been submitted to and approved by the Local Planning Authority. The community liaison scheme shall be implemented as approved and include:

(a) details of developer liaison with the local community to ensure residents are informed of how the construction or decommissioning of the development is progressing;

(b) a mechanism for dealing with complaints from the local community during the construction or decommissioning of the development; and

(c) a nominated representative of the developer who will have the lead role in liaising with local residents and the relevant planning authority.

Noise

61. The rating level of noise immissions from the combined effects of the wind turbines (including the application of any tonal penalty) when determined in accordance with the attached Guidance Notes (to this condition), shall not exceed the values for the relevant integer wind speed set out in, or derived from, the tables attached to these conditions at any dwelling which is lawfully existing or has planning permission at the date of this permission and:

(a) The wind farm operator shall continuously log power production, wind speed and wind direction, all in accordance with Guidance Note 1(d). These data shall be retained for a period of not less than 24 months. The wind farm operator shall provide this information in the format set out in Guidance Note 1(e) to the Local Planning Authority on its request, within 14 days of receipt in writing of such a request.

(b) No electricity shall be exported until the wind farm operator has submitted to the Local Planning Authority for written approval a list of proposed independent

Page 157 Appeal Decision APP/T6850/A/15/3133966

consultants who may undertake compliance measurements in accordance with this condition. Amendments to the list of approved consultants shall be made only with the prior written approval of the Local Planning Authority.

(c) Within 21 days from receipt of a written request from the Local Planning Authority following a complaint to it from an occupant of a dwelling alleging noise disturbance at that dwelling, the wind farm operator shall, at its expense, employ a consultant approved by the Local Planning Authority to assess the level of noise immissions from the wind farm at the complainant’s property in accordance with the procedures described in the attached Guidance Notes. The written request from the Local Planning Authority shall set out at least the date, time and location that the complaint relates to and any identified atmospheric conditions, including wind direction, and include a statement as to whether, in the opinion of the Local Planning Authority, the noise giving rise to the complaint contains or is likely to contain a tonal component.

(d) The assessment of the rating level of noise immissions shall be undertaken in accordance with an assessment protocol that shall previously have been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The protocol shall include the proposed measurement location identified in accordance with the Guidance Notes where measurements for compliance checking purposes shall be undertaken, whether noise giving rise to the complaint contains or is likely to contain a tonal component, and also the range of meteorological and operational conditions (which shall include the range of wind speeds, wind directions, power generation and times of day) to determine the assessment of rating level of noise immissions. The proposed range of conditions shall be those which prevailed during times when the complainant alleges there was disturbance due to noise, having regard to the written request of the Local Planning Authority under paragraph (c), and such others as the independent consultant considers likely to result in a breach of the noise limits.

(e) Where a dwelling to which a complaint is related is not listed in the tables attached to these conditions, the wind farm operator shall submit to the Local Planning Authority for written approval proposed noise limits selected from those listed in the Tables to be adopted at the complainant’s dwelling for compliance checking purposes. The proposed noise limits are to be those limits selected from the Tables specified for a listed location which the independent consultant considers as being likely to experience the most similar background noise environment to that experienced at the complainant’s dwelling. The rating level of noise immissions resulting from the combined effects of the wind turbines when determined in accordance with the attached Guidance Notes shall not exceed the noise limits approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority for the complainant’s dwelling.

(f) The wind farm operator shall provide to the Local Planning Authority the independent consultant’s assessment of the rating level of noise immissions undertaken in accordance with the Guidance Notes within 2 months of the date of the written request of the Local Planning Authority for compliance measurements to be made under paragraph (c), unless the time limit is extended in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The assessment shall include all data collected for the purposes of undertaking the compliance

Page 158 Appeal Decision APP/T6850/A/15/3133966

measurements, such data to be provided in the format set out in Guidance Note 1(e) of the Guidance Notes. The instrumentation used to undertake the measurements shall be calibrated in accordance with Guidance Note 1(a) and certificates of calibration shall be submitted to the Local Planning Authority with the independent consultant’s assessment of the rating level of noise immissions.

(g) Where a further assessment of the rating level of noise immissions from the wind farm is required pursuant to Guidance Note 4(c), the wind farm operator shall submit a copy of the further assessment within 21 days of submission of the independent consultant’s assessment pursuant to paragraph (d) above unless the time limit has been extended in writing by the Local Planning Authority.

Page 159 Appeal Decision APP/T6850/A/15/3133966

Table 1 – Between 07:00 and 23:00 – Noise limits expressed in dB LA90,10 minute as a function of the standardised wind speed (m/s) at 10 metre height as determined within the site averaged over 10 minute periods.

V10,std Malgwy Dieldref Henfaes Hirbrysg Rhyd-yr Maes yr Pen y Nant Nantyge Graiglas Penymai [m/s] n Farm Uchaf onen Haul Cae Gwylt ifr s

4 39.9 35.0 37.0 35.5 39.2 38.0 35.5 35.5 38.0 39.2 39.2

Page 160 Page 5 40.7 35.7 38.2 36.5 39.3 38.0 36.5 36.5 38.0 39.3 39.3

6 42.1 37.8 40.4 38.4 39.6 38.0 38.4 38.4 38.0 39.6 39.6

7 43.6 40.2 43.1 40.8 40.2 38.0 40.8 40.8 38.0 40.2 40.2

8 45.2 42.7 45.9 43.3 41.0 38.0 43.3 43.3 38.0 41.0 41.0

9 46.4 45.4 48.3 45.6 42.0 38.0 45.6 45.6 38.0 42.0 42.0

10 46.9 48.2 49.9 47.4 43.3 38.0 47.4 47.4 38.0 43.3 43.3

11 46.9 50.9 49.9 47.4 44.8 38.0 47.4 47.4 38.0 44.8 44.8

12 46.9 53.6 49.9 47.4 46.6 38.0 47.4 47.4 38.0 46.6 46.6

Note to Table 1: The above noise limits shall be subject to a lower limiting value, i.e. any noise limits shall not be set lower than 40 dB in the case of any dwelling with a financial interest in the scheme, and not lower than 35dB otherwise.

Appeal Decision APP/T6850/A/15/3133966

Table 2 – Between 23:00 and 07:00 – Noise limits expressed in dB LA90,10-minute as a function of the standardised wind speed (m/s) at 10 metre height as determined within the site averaged over 10 minute periods.

V10,std Malgwy Dieldref Henfaes Hirbrysg Rhyd-yr Maes yr Pen y Nant Nantyge Graiglas Penymai [m/s] n Farm Uchaf onen Haul Cae Gwylt ifr s

4 43.0 43.0 43.0 43.0 43.0 43.0 43.0 43.0 43.0 43.0 43.0

5 43.0 43.0 43.0 43.0 43.0 43.0 43.0 43.0 43.0 43.0 43.0

6 43.0 43.0 43.0 43.0 43.0 43.0 43.0 43.0 43.0 43.0 43.0

Page 161 Page 7 43.2 43.0 43.0 43.0 43.0 44.3 43.0 43.0 44.3 43.0 43.0

8 44.7 43.0 44.6 43.6 43.0 45.1 43.6 43.6 45.1 43.0 43.0

9 46.4 44.5 46.9 46.6 43.0 45.0 46.6 46.6 45.0 43.0 43.0

10 48.3 47.9 48.7 49.8 43.0 43.7 49.8 49.8 43.7 43.0 43.0

11 48.3 51.2 48.7 49.8 43.2 43.0 49.8 49.8 43.0 43.2 43.2

12 48.3 54.4 48.7 49.8 45.4 43.0 49.8 49.8 43.0 45.4 45.4

Appeal Decision APP/T6850/A/15/3133966

Table 3: Coordinate locations of the properties listed in Tables 1 and 2.

Number Name Easting Northing

1 Malgwyn 289890 283416

2 Dieldref Farm 291030 280776

3 Henfaes Uchaf 289843 280742

4 Hirbrysg 291096 281236

5 Rhyd-yr onen 292180 282209

6 Maes yr Haul 291945 283583

7 Pen y Cae 290817 280963

8 Nant Gwylt 290805 281085

9 Nantygeifr 291867 283155

10 Graiglas 292165 282453

11 Penymais 292211 282736

Note to Table 3: The geographical coordinate references are provided for the purpose of identifying the general location of dwellings to which a given set of noise limits applies.

Guidance Notes for Noise Conditions

These notes are to be read with and form part of the noise condition. They further explain the condition and specify the methods to be employed in the assessment of complaints about noise immissions from the wind farm. The rating level at each integer wind speed is the arithmetic sum of the wind farm noise level as determined from the best-fit curve described in Guidance Note 2 of these Guidance Notes and any tonal penalty applied in accordance with Guidance Note 3. Reference to ETSU-R-97 refers to the publication entitled “The Assessment and Rating of Noise from Wind Farms” (1997) published by the Energy Technology Support Unit (ETSU) for the Department of Trade and Industry (DTI).

Guidance Note 1

(a) Values of the LA90,10 minute noise statistic should be measured at the complainant’s property, using a sound level meter of EN 60651/BS EN 60804 Type 1, or BS EN 61672 Class 1 quality (or the equivalent UK adopted standard in force at the time of the measurements) set to measure using the fast time weighted response as specified in BS EN 60651/BS EN 60804 or BS EN 61672-1 (or the equivalent UK adopted standard in force at the time of the measurements). This should be calibrated in accordance with the

Page 162

Appeal Decision APP/T6850/A/15/3133966

procedure specified in BS 4142: 1997 (or the equivalent UK adopted standard in force at the time of the measurements). Measurements shall be undertaken in such a manner to enable a tonal penalty to be applied in accordance with Guidance Note 3.

(b) The microphone should be mounted at 1.2 – 1.5 metres above ground level, fitted with a two-layer windshield or suitable equivalent approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority, and placed outside the complainant’s dwelling. Measurements should be made in “free field” conditions. To achieve this, the microphone should be placed at least 3.5 metres away from the building facade or any reflecting surface except the ground at the approved measurement location. In the event that the consent of the complainant for access to his or her property to undertake compliance measurements is withheld, the wind farm operator shall submit for the written approval of the Local Planning Authority details of the proposed alternative representative measurement location prior to the commencement of measurements and the measurements shall be undertaken at the approved alternative representative measurement location.

(c) The LA90,10 minute measurements should be synchronised with measurements of the 10-minute arithmetic mean wind and operational data logged in accordance with Guidance Note 1(d), including the power generation data from the turbine control systems of the wind farm.

(d) To enable compliance with the conditions to be evaluated, the wind farm operator shall continuously log arithmetic mean wind speed in metres per second and wind direction in degrees from north at hub height for each turbine and arithmetic mean power generated by each turbine, all in successive 10-minute periods. Unless an alternative procedure is previously agreed in writing with the Local Planning Authority, this hub height wind speed, averaged across all operating wind turbines, shall be used as the basis for the analysis. All 10 minute arithmetic average mean wind speed data measured at hub height shall be ‘standardised’ to a reference height of 10 metres as described in ETSU-R-97 at page 120 using a reference roughness length of 0.05 metres . It is this standardised 10 metre height wind speed data, which is correlated with the noise measurements determined as valid in accordance with Guidance Note 2, such correlation to be undertaken in the manner described in Guidance Note 2. All 10-minute periods shall commence on the hour and in 10- minute increments thereafter.

(e) Data provided to the Local Planning Authority in accordance with the noise condition shall be provided in comma separated values in electronic format.

(f) A data logging rain gauge shall be installed in the course of the assessment of the levels of noise immissions. The gauge shall record over successive 10-minute periods synchronised with the periods of data recorded in accordance with Note 1(d).

Guidance Note 2

(a) The noise measurements shall be made so as to provide not less than 20 valid data points as defined in Guidance Note 2 (b).

(b) Valid data points are those measured in the conditions specified in the agreed written protocol under paragraph (d) of the noise condition, but excluding any periods of rainfall measured in the vicinity of the sound level meter. Rainfall shall be assessed by use of a

Page 163

Appeal Decision APP/T6850/A/15/3133966

rain gauge that shall log the occurrence of rainfall in each 10 minute period concurrent with the measurement periods set out in Guidance Note 1. In specifying such conditions the Local Planning Authority shall have regard to those conditions which prevailed during times when the complainant alleges there was disturbance due to noise or which are considered likely to result in a breach of the limits.

(c) For those data points considered valid in accordance with Guidance Note 2(b), values of the LA90,10 minute noise measurements and corresponding values of the 10- minute wind speed, as derived from the standardised ten metre height wind speed averaged across all operating wind turbines using the procedure specified in Guidance Note 1(d), shall be plotted on an XY chart with noise level on the Y-axis and the standardised mean wind speed on the X-axis. A least squares, “best fit” curve of an order deemed appropriate by the independent consultant (but which may not be higher than a fourth order) should be fitted to the data points and define the wind farm noise level at each integer speed.

Guidance Note 3

(a) Where, in accordance with the approved assessment protocol under paragraph (d) of the noise condition, noise immissions at the location or locations where compliance measurements are being undertaken contain or are likely to contain a tonal component, a tonal penalty is to be calculated and applied using the following rating procedure.

(b) For each 10 minute interval for which LA90,10 minute data have been determined as valid in accordance with Guidance Note 2 a tonal assessment shall be performed on noise immissions during 2 minutes of each 10 minute period. The 2 minute periods should be spaced at 10 minute intervals provided that uninterrupted uncorrupted data are available (“the standard procedure”). Where uncorrupted data are not available, the first available uninterrupted clean 2 minute period out of the affected overall 10 minute period shall be selected. Any such deviations from the standard procedure, as described in Section 2.1 on pages 104-109 of ETSU-R-97, shall be reported.

(c) For each of the 2 minute samples the tone level above or below audibility shall be calculated by comparison with the audibility criterion given in Section 2.1 on pages 104- 109 of ETSU-R-97.

(d) The tone level above audibility shall be plotted against wind speed for each of the 2 minute samples. Samples for which the tones were below the audibility criterion or no tone was identified, a value of zero audibility shall be used.

(e) A least squares “best fit” linear regression line shall then be performed to establish the average tone level above audibility for each integer wind speed derived from the value of the “best fit” line at each integer wind speed. If there is no apparent trend with wind speed then a simple arithmetic mean shall be used. This process shall be repeated for each integer wind speed for which there is an assessment of overall levels in Guidance Note 2.

(f) The tonal penalty is derived from the margin above audibility of the tone according to the figure below.

Page 164

Appeal Decision APP/T6850/A/15/3133966

Guidance Note 4

(a) If a tonal penalty is to be applied in accordance with Guidance Note 3 the rating level of the turbine noise at each wind speed is the arithmetic sum of the measured noise level as determined from the best fit curve described in Guidance Note 2 and the penalty for tonal noise as derived in accordance with Guidance Note 3 at each integer wind speed within the range specified by the Local Planning Authority in its written protocol under paragraph (d) of the noise condition.

(b) If no tonal penalty is to be applied then the rating level of the turbine noise at each wind speed is equal to the measured noise level as determined from the best fit curve described in Guidance Note 2.

(c) In the event that the rating level is above the limit(s) set out in the Tables attached to the noise conditions or the noise limits for a complainant’s dwelling approved in accordance with paragraph (e) of the noise condition, the independent consultant shall undertake a further assessment of the rating level to correct for background noise so that the rating level relates to wind turbine noise immission only.

(d) The wind farm operator shall ensure that all the wind turbines in the development are turned off for such period as the independent consultant requires to undertake the further assessment. The further assessment shall be undertaken in accordance with the following steps:

(e) Repeating the steps in Guidance Note 2, with the wind farm switched off, and determining the background noise (L3) at each integer wind speed within the range requested by the Local Planning Authority in its written request under paragraph (c) and the approved protocol under paragraph (d) of the noise condition.

(f) The wind farm noise (L1) at this speed shall then be calculated as follows where L2 is the measured level with turbines running but without the addition of any tonal penalty:

Page 165

Appeal Decision APP/T6850/A/15/3133966

(g) The rating level shall be re-calculated by adding arithmetically the tonal penalty (if any is applied in accordance with Note 3) to the derived wind farm noise L1 at that integer wind speed.

(h) If the rating level after adjustment for background noise contribution and adjustment for tonal penalty (if required in accordance with note 3 above) at any integer wind speed lies at or below the values set out in the Tables attached to the conditions or at or below the noise limits approved by the Local Planning Authority for a complainant’s dwelling in accordance with paragraph (e) of the noise condition then no further action is necessary. If the rating level at any integer wind speed exceeds the values set out in the Tables attached to the conditions or the noise limits approved by the Local Planning Authority for a complainant’s dwelling in accordance with paragraph (e) of the noise condition then the development fails to comply with the conditions.

Page 166

Appeal Decision APP/T6850/A/15/3133966

APPEARANCES

FOR THE APPELLANT

Mr Richard Kimblin QC instructed by Aaron & Partners LLP

He called:

Kay Hawkins BSc (Hons) BLD CMLI Director Hawkins Bell Associates (on Landscape matters)

Charles Le Quesne MA MCIFA Principal Heritage Consultant BA (Hons) MCIfA ERM (on Heritage matters)

Mr Peter Frampton Director – Frampton’s (on Planning matters) BSc (Hons) TP MRTPI MRICS

FOR THE LOCAL PLANNING AUTHORITY Mr Tom Cosgrove, Barrister instructed by the Solicitor for Powys County Council He called: Mr Philip Russell-Vick Director, Enplan UK Ltd DipLA CMLI (on Landscape & Visual matters)

Mr Kenneth Sabel Associate Director, Atkins Ltd BA MA (on Heritage matters)

Mr Martin Carpenter Director, Enplan UK Ltd BA (Hons) MRTPI (on Planning matters)

OBJECTORS

Mr Richard Sumner Regional Landscape Advisor BA Hons Dip LA CMLI Natural Resources Wales Mrs Kibble Campaign for the Protection of Rural Wales Mrs B. Newbury Hirbrysg Mrs Grant Local Resident Mr Foulkes Cambrian Mountain Society Mr Mosse Mr Novak

SUPPORTERS

Mr Roberts Local Resident Mr P. Davies Mayor of Llanidloes Mr H. Jenkins Local Businessman Mr W. Jerman Landowner of the appeal site Mr G. Hughes Deildref Farm Mr I Jones Local Businessman Mr. M. Williams Local Businessman Ms Hartland Local Businesswoman Mr K. Brown Local Businessman & Chairman of Llanidloes FC

Page 167

Appeal Decision APP/T6850/A/15/3133966

Documents submitted to the Inquiry

Appellant

Opening statement of the Appellant

ES Figures 1.2.1 to 1.2.9 – version E

Drawing SPA001 Version B

Drawing SPA001-2 Version B

LVIA Figures List

Mr Frampton’s Proof of Evidence on the Planning Balance

List of suggested conditions

Plan of the proposed recreational route showing soft spots on the existing bridleway

Information on the measures to be taken to protect private water supplies

Information on construction noise in relation to the proposed access

Signed Section 106 agreement – Public Rights of Way

Closing from Appellant

Council

Opening statement of the Council

Updated summary and missing appendix from Ken Sabel

Documents from Ken Sabel (Historic Wales Report on Blaenbythigion and viewpoint locations of plates 9 and 10)

Closing from Council

Appellant and Council

Statement of Common Ground – LVIA

Signed statement of common ground in relation to historic environment

Table of suggested conditions

Supporters

Statement of Adrian Roberts

Page 168

Appeal Decision APP/T6850/A/15/3133966

Objectors

Note of Ms Kibble’s representations on behalf of CPRW

Note of Mr Foulkes’ representations on behalf of the Cambrian Mountain Society

Letter from Richard George & Jenkins Solicitors on behalf of Stephen and Elizabeth Hamer

Letter from Richard George & Jenkins Solicitors on behalf of Gillian O’Connor

Letter from Richard George & Jenkins Solicitors on behalf of John Bound and Marilyn Bound

Letter from Richard George & Jenkins Solicitors on behalf of Thomas Geraint Williams and Thomas Adrian Williams

Email from the British Horse Society withdrawing its objection to the proposal

Letter from Mr and Mrs Sephton of Pen y Cae

Letter from Michael Moss

Letter from T. Adrian Williams

The list of core documents is not reproduced here as it is very extensive and most of the documents referred to were not referenced in the course of the Inquiry.

Page 169

This page is intentionally left blank

Penderfyniad ar gostau Costs Decision

Ymchwiliad a gynhaliwyd ar 18-20-/04/2016 & Inquiry held on 18-20/04/2016 & 6-7/06/2016 6/7/06/2016 Site visit made on 20/04/16 Ymweliad â safle a wnaed ar 20/04/16 gan Aidan McCooey BA MSc MRTPI by Aidan McCooey BA MSc MRTPI Arolygydd a benodir gan Weinidogion Cymru an Inspector appointed by the Welsh Ministers Dyddiad: 23/08/16 Date: 23/08/16

Costs application in relation to Appeal Ref: APP/T6850/A/15/3133966 Site address: Blaen y Glyn, Llangurig, Llanidloes, Powys, SY18 6SL The Welsh Ministers have transferred the authority to decide this application for costs to me as the appointed Inspector.  The application is made under the Town and Country Planning Act 1990, sections 78, 320 and Schedule 6, and the Local Government Act 1972, section 250(5).  The application is made by Powys County Council for a partial award of costs against Bryn Blaen Wind Farm Ltd.  The Inquiry was in connection with an appeal against the failure of the Council to issue a notice of their decision within the prescribed period on an application for planning permission for 6 wind turbines together with ancillary development.

Decision

1. The application for an award of costs is refused.

The submissions for Powys County Council

2. The Council’s application relates to the events after its report to Committee and before the exchange of proofs of evidence. The Council’s submissions were that the late submission of material related to the impact of the proposal on residential amenity, landscaping of the proposed access and the impact on heritage assets. This information should have been part of the original Environmental Statement (ES) and the evidence base for the assessment of the proposal. The Statement of Case referred to reliance solely on the content of the ES. The appellant produced this material immediately prior to the exchange of proofs of evidence, which led to extra expense for the Council in terms of preparation for the Inquiry. This was considered to be unreasonable behaviour as defined in the relevant guidance on the award of costs. The Council’s comments on the appellant’s response were made in writing at the Inquiry. I also afforded the Council a further opportunity to comment in writing on the appellant’s submitted chronology after the close of the Inquiry. However, the Council made no further submissions.

Page 171

Costs Decision APP/T6850/A/15/3133966

The response by Bryn Blaen Wind Farm Ltd

3. The appellant’s responses were also submitted in writing. The following additional points were made orally. The Council’s chronology has been considerably supplemented in order to provide the context of the application. There was a lengthy pre-application process during which the Council declined to engage any more due to the pressures of work at that time. The correspondence post-submission of the application is provided. The Planning Inspectorate found the ES to be adequate and the Statement of Case was therefore based on the information it contained. Discussions aimed at narrowing the issues and shortening the Inquiry continued, which involved a lot of work on a collaborative basis. The only information provided prior to the exchange of proofs came from the appellant. The issues were narrowed, for example the concerns of NRW related to ecology were addressed.

Reasons

4. Circular 23/93 – Awards of Costs Incurred in Planning and Other Proceedings (the Circular) advises that, irrespective of the outcome of the appeal, costs may only be awarded against a party who has behaved unreasonably and thereby caused the party applying for costs to incur unnecessary or wasted expense in the appeal process. The Council relied on the examples in paragraph 3 (2) of Annex 2: specifically failing to provide the required information in support of an appeal. I consider that this example can be separated from the rest of the paragraph that deals with other situations such as appellants failing to reply to Planning Contravention Notices. The appellant referred to paragraphs 26 and 28 of Annex 3 about the conduct of the Local Planning Authority in the event of a non-determination appeal. The Local Planning Authority is expected to show that it had specific and adequate reasons for not reaching a timely decision. It is also expected to request additional information if it is lacking and not refuse planning permission on the grounds of insufficient information, without requesting that information.

5. The claim relates to the late submission of additional evidence by the appellant. It is claimed that these late submissions were avoidable. The Council experts had endeavoured to chase up all outstanding matters as soon as the committee report was ratified. The failure to respond in a timely manner resulted in the additional work and site visits for the Council’s witnesses.

6. The appellant has worked with the Council and consultees to reduce the areas of dispute and shorten the Inquiry from the original estimate of 15 days to an eventual 5 days. This is a non-determination appeal, where the Council failed to issue a decision and has not provided any explanation as to why, other than pressure of work. I find it wholly surprising that the Council has made any application for costs in these circumstances. The appellant points out that an application for costs related to work in preparation for the exchange of proofs has not been made in any other appeal, as far as its team is aware.

7. The information in question could have been provided at the Inquiry in response to the Council’s proofs. It was not. The information was provided in time for the Council’s witnesses to consider it in their proofs. This is part of the normal process of preparing for an appeal. The Council had discussed the scoping of an ES and then had received the ES in December 2014. At no stage did the Council highlight any shortcomings in the information supplied, until its committee report in November 2015. I consider it is disingenuous to then claim an excessive delay on the appellant’s part in addressing the putative reasons for refusal.

Page 1722

Costs Decision APP/T6850/A/15/3133966

Conclusion

8. I do not consider that this application for costs has any proper foundation. The claimed delay is set against a background of poor performance by the Council in its handling of the application. The claimed extra expense is for work that would be required in preparation for the Public Inquiry in any event. Having considered all the matters raised, I conclude that there is no basis for the application and I dismiss this application for costs.

A L McCooey

Inspector

Page 3173

This page is intentionally left blank

Penderfyniad ar gostau Costs Decision

Costs application in relation to Appeal Ref: APP/T6850/A/15/3133966 Site address: Blaen y Glyn, Llangurig, Llanidloes, Powys, SY18 6SL The Welsh Ministers have transferred the authority to decide this application for costs to me as the appointed Inspector.  The application is made under the Town and Country Planning Act 1990, sections 78, 320 and Schedule 6, and the Local Government Act 1972, section 250(5).  The application is made by Bryn Blaen Wind Farm Ltd for a partial award of costs against Powys County Council.  The inquiry was in connection with an appeal against the failure of the Council to issue a notice of their decision within the prescribed period on an application for planning permission for 6 wind turbines together with ancillary development.

Decision

1. The application for an award of costs is refused.

The submissions for Bryn Blaen Wind Farm Ltd

2. The appellant’s submissions were submitted in writing at the Inquiry. The following additional points were made orally. The context of the application is the lamentable approach of the Council to the determination of renewable energy schemes. The Council may have had difficulties dealing with the significant numbers of applications, but deal with them it must. The appropriate large fees had been paid so the resources were available. The submitted chronology demonstrates that there were extensive opportunities for the Council to address the other issues raised, but they failed to do so.

The response by Powys County Council

3. The Council’s response was also submitted in writing and explained at the Inquiry. No new points were made.

Reasons

Page 175

Costs Decision APP/T6850/A/15/3133966

appellant referred to paragraphs 26 and 28 of Annex 3 about the conduct of the Local Planning Authority in the event of a non-determination appeal. The Local Planning Authority is expected to show that it had specific and adequate reasons for not reaching a timely decision. It is also expected to request additional information if it is lacking and not refuse planning permission on the grounds of insufficient information, without requesting that information.

5. The appellant’s application relates to costs incurred in addressing issues raised by the Council in its Committee report post-appeal that were resolved prior to the Inquiry. If the Council had processed the application properly and raised these issues in a timely manner then the additional costs would have been avoided. The Council’s response focuses instead on the additional material produced close to the deadline for the submission of proofs by the appellant. This is largely irrelevant. I agree that this is information that would have had to have been produced anyway.

6. Turning to the substantive points made by the appellant. It is clear that a lot of discussions took place after the Committee report was ratified by the Council. The Council did produce evidence to substantiate each of the putative reasons for refusal. Issues raised by NRW, the Highway Authority and in relation to Public Rights of Way were discussed at length and further information was provided to enable them to be resolved. Some with the assistance of planning obligations and amendments to the application site. I consider that this is part of the normal application process and unfortunately also part of the preparation for appeals against non-determination. This work would have had to have been done at some stage anyway. In addition, some of the work was with an outside body (NRW) and not in the control of the Council.

7. The table of wind farm applications submitted by the appellant does show lengthy time periods for determination. However, much of the delay centred around the Mid-Wales Conjoined Wind Farm Inquiry and requests from other developers to hold their applications in abeyance pending the outcome of that Inquiry. In any event, I agree with the Council that it does not assist in the consideration of the circumstances of this appeal.

Conclusion

8. For the reasons given above, the appellant has not demonstrated that the Council has behaved unreasonably and thereby caused the appellant to incur unnecessary or wasted expense in the appeal process. Having considered all the evidence, I am therefore dismissing the application for costs.

A L McCooey

Inspector

Page 1762