CITY AND COUNTY OF SWANSEA

NOTICE OF MEETING

You are invited to attend a Meeting of the

AREA 1 DEVELOPMENT CONTROL COMMITTEE

At: THE COUNCIL CHAMBER, Civic Centre, SWANSEA

On: Tuesday 27th January 2009

Time: 2.00p.m.

Members are asked to contact John Lock (Applications Manager) on 635731 or Fran Barnes on 635714 should they wish to have submitted plans and other images of any of the applications on this agenda to be available for display at the Committee meeting. AGENDA

1. Apologies for Absence.

2. Declaration of Interest To receive Disclosures of Personal and Prejudicial Interests from Members in accordance with the provisions of the Code of Conduct adopted by the City and County of Swansea. (NOTE: Members are requested to identify the Agenda Item /minute number/ planning application number and subject matter that their interest relates).

3. Minutes of the meetings of the Area 1 Development Control Committees held on 6th and 20th January 2009.

FOR DECISION

4. Town and Country Planning - Planning Applications.

(a) Items for deferral/withdrawal. (b) Requests for Site Visits. (c) Determination of Planning Applications.

5. Alleged Public Footpath from Park Road to the A4067 Alongside the River Tawe, Community of Morriston.

6. Appeal Decisions.

David M Daycock Head of Legal & Democratic Services 21.1.2009 Contact: Gareth Borsden 01792 636824

ACCESS TO INFORMATION LOCAL GOVERNMENT ACT 1972 (SECTION 100) (AS AMENDED) (NOTE: The documents and files used in the preparation of this Schedule of Planning Applications are identified in the ‘Background Information’ Section of each report. The Application files will be available in the committee room for half an hour before the start of the meeting, to enable Members to inspect the contents)

Item No. 2

Disclosures of Personal Interest from Members

To receive Disclosures of Personal Interest from Members in accordance with the provisions of the Code of Conduct adopted by the City and County of Swansea. You must disclose orally to the meeting the existence and nature of that interest.

NOTE: You are requested to identify the Agenda Item / Minute No. / Planning Application No. and Subject Matter to which that interest relates and to enter all declared interests on the sheet provided for that purpose at the meeting.

1. If you have a Personal Interest as set out in Paragraph 10 of the Code, you MAY STAY, SPEAK AND VOTE unless it is also a Prejudicial Interest.

2. If you have a Personal Interest which is also a Prejudicial Interest as set out in Paragraph 12 of the Code, then subject to point 3 below, you MUST WITHDRAW from the meeting (unless you have obtained a dispensation from the Authority’s Standards Committee)

3. Where you have a Prejudicial Interest you may attend the meeting but only for the purpose of making representations, answering questions or giving evidence relating to the business, provided that the public are also allowed to attend the meeting for the same purpose, whether under a statutory right or otherwise. In such a case, you must withdraw from the meeting immediately after the period for making representations, answering questions, or giving evidence relating to the business has ended, and in any event before further consideration of the business begins, whether or not the public are allowed to remain in attendance for such consideration (Paragraph 14 of the Code).

4. Where you have agreement from the Monitoring Officer that the information relating to your Personal Interest is sensitive information, as set out in Paragraph 16 of the Code of Conduct, your obligation to disclose such information is replaced with an obligation to disclose the existence of a personal interest and to confirm that the Monitoring Officer has agreed that the nature of such personal interest is sensitive information.

5. If you are relying on a grant of a dispensation by the Standards Committee, you must, before the matter is under consideration: (i) disclose orally both the interest concerned and the existence of the dispensation; and (ii) before or immediately after the close of the meeting give written notification to the Authority containing -

- details of the prejudicial interest; - details of the business to which the prejudicial interest relates; - details of, and the date on which, the dispensation was granted; and - your signature

Z:\Committees\A Agenda Pack\Cttees\Area 2\2008-09\08jun24\02 - Disclosures of Personal Interest.doc

CITY AND COUNTY OF SWANSEA

MINUTES OF THE AREA 1 DEVELOPMENT CONTROL COMMITTEE

HELD AT THE CIVIC CENTRE, SWANSEA ON TUESDAY 6TH JANUARY 2009 AT 2.00 P.M.

PRESENT: Councillor A R A Clement (Chairman) presided

Councillor(s): Councillor(s): Councillor(s):

V N Abbott B J Hynes B G Owen W J F Davies M H Jones I M Richard C R Doyle R D Lewis D A Robinson J Evans A Lloyd D G Sullivan J B Hague J Newbury J M Thomas C A Holley H M Morris L G Thomas D T Howells

Non-voting Members:

Councillor(s): Councillor(s): Councillor(s):

J E Burtonshaw W E A Jones R T Lloyd R Francis Davies

82. APOLOGIES

Apologies for absence were received from Councillors D H James, M R Jones, E T Kirchner, P Matthews, S J Rice, R Speht and P B Smith.

83. DECLARATION OF INTEREST

In accordance with the provisions of the Code of Conduct the following interests were declared:

Councillor W E A Jones - Planning Application Nos. 2008/1207 and 2008/1209 - personal, private and financial and left during discussion thereof.

84. MINUTES

RESOLVED that the Minutes of the Area 1 Development Control Committee held on 9th and 23rd December 2008 were agreed as correct records.

Minutes of the Area 1 Development Control Committee (06.01.2009) Cont’d

85. ITEMS FOR DEFERRAL

NOTED that the undermentioned planning applications BE DEFERRED for the reasons outlined:

(Item 5) Application No. 2008/1030

Retention of change of use of ground floor and part of first floor of residential flat (Class C3) to a design studio (Class B1) at 1 Grove Place, 160 Clydach Road, Morriston.)

(NOTE: This was deferred by Head of Planning Services to enable further on site monitoring to be carried out, in order to fully assess the impact of the design studio use on on-street parking in the vicinity of the site).

Item 10 Application No. 2008/0827

Change of use from agricultural land to recycling of green waste and composting treatment at Abergelli Farm, Felindre.

(NOTE: This was deferred by the Head of Planning Services to clarify the legality of the proposed access).

86. ITEMS DEFERRED FOR SITE VISITS

RESOLVED that the undermentioned planning applications BE DEFERRED for site visits:

(Item 4) Application No. 2007/1114

Detached dwelling (details of the siting, design and external appearance of the building(s), means of access and landscaping pursuant to Condition 01 of planning permission 2006/0473 granted on 13th February 2007) on land adjoining 434 Clydach Road, Ynysforgan.

(NOTE: The reason given for this site visit was to assess the impact of the proposal on residential and visual amenity).

Minutes of the Area 1 Development Control Committee (06.01.2009) Cont’d

(Item 8) Application No. 2008/1435

Siting of refrigeration compound to front of premises at 160 St Helen’s Road, Swansea.

(NOTE: The reason given for this site visit was to assess the visual impact of the proposal.

87. SCHEDULE OF PLANNING APPLICATIONS UNDER THE TOWN & COUNTRY PLANNING ACT 1990

The Head of Planning Services submitted a schedule of outline applications, reserved matters and planning applications. Amendments to this schedule were reported and are indicated below by (#).

RESOLVED that:

(1) the undermentioned planning applications BE APPROVED subject to the conditions in the report and/or indicated below:

(Item 1) Application No. 2008/0106

Detached dormer bungalow on land adjoining 194 Mynydd Garnllwyd Road, Morriston.

(NOTE: Councillor V Abbott, Vice Chairman presided for this item.)

(Item 2) Application No. 2008/1358

Detached dwelling with integral garage at Bryn Rhos, New Quarr Road, Treboeth.

(NOTE: Councillor V Abbott, Vice Chairman presided for this item.)

(Item 3) Application No. 2008/0382

Demolition of existing dwelling and construction of three link dwellings/details of siting design, external appearance and landscaping pursuant to Condition 01 of planning permission 2007/1415 granted on 11th January 2008) at 1 Pengwern Road, Clase.

Minutes of the Area 1 Development Control Committee (06.01.2009) Cont’d

(NOTE: Councillor V Abbott, Vice Chairman presided for this item.)

(NOTE: Four non-voting Members were present for these items).

(Item 6) Application No. 2008/1207

Single storey side extension, four storey rear extension to provide a lift and fenestration alterations to the existing building at April Court Nursing Home, 137-144 St Helen’s Road, Swansea.

(2) the undermentioned planning application BE APPROVED subject to the conditions indicated in the report and any direction following referral to CADW:

(Item 7) Application No. 2008/1209

Single storey side extension, four storey rear extension to provide a lift and fenestration alterations to the existing building (application for Listed Building Consent) at April Court Nursing Home, 137-144 St Helen’s Road, Swansea.

(3) that a Certificate of Appropriate Alternative Development for the re-development of the site be issued for the uses falling within Class B8 (Storage & Distribution only) and subject to the conditions in the report:

(Item 9) Application No. 2008/2047

Development within Class C3 (Residential) and/or Class B8 (Storage & Distribution) of the Town & Country Planning Act (Use Classes Order 1987) on land at Maliphant Street, Hafod.

(NOTE: Clarification was given of information in the appraisal).

The meeting ended at 2.20 p.m.

CHAIRMAN

S: Area 1 Development Control Committee - 6 January 2009 (JT/KL) 7th January 2009

CITY AND COUNTY OF SWANSEA

MINUTES OF THE AREA 1 DEVELOPMENT CONTROL COMMITTEE SITE VISITS

HELD ON SITE ON TUESDAY 20TH JANUARY 2009 AT 2.00PM

PRESENT: Councillor ARA Clement (Chairman) presided

Councillor(s): Councillor(s): Councillor(s):

J Davies(b only) R Lewis D Phillips(a only) D Howells A Lloyd(a only) I Richard MR Jones

1. APOLOGIES

Apologies for absence were received from Councillors V Abbott, R Doyle, J Hague, MH Jones, R Kinzett, E Kirchner, P Matthews, B Owen, A Robinson, P Smith, R Smith and J Thomas.

2. TOWN AND COUNTRY PLANNING SITE VISIT

Following deferment for site visits at the meeting of the Area 1 Development Control Committee held on 6th January 2009, Members visited the undermentioned sites prior to their determination at the Committee scheduled for 27th January 2009:

(a) Planning Application No 2008/1435 - Siting of refrigeration compound to front of premises at 160 St Helens Road, Swansea.

(b) Planning Application No2007/1114 - Detached dwelling (details of the siting, design and external appearance of the building(s), means of access and landscaping pursuant to condition 01 of planning permission 2006/0473 granted on 13th February 2007) at Land adjoining 434 Clydach Road, Ynysforgan, Swansea.

The meeting ended at 3.08 p.m.

CHAIRMAN

CITY AND COUNTY OF SWANSEA DINAS A SIR ABERTAWE

Report of the Head of Planning Services to the Chairman and Members

of

Area 1 Development the Control Committee

DATE: 27TH JANUARY 2009

19 30

4

16 21 2. BONYMAEN 3. CASTLE 17 4. CLYDACH 6. CWMBWRLA 22 15. LANDORE 26 16. LLANGYFELACH 17. LLANSAMLET 19. MAWR 6 15 2 21. MORRISTON 22. MYNYDDBACH 33 26. PENDERRY 30. PONTARDDULAIS 34 3 31 31. ST. THOMAS 33. TOWNHILL 34. UPLANDS

BRYAN GRAHAM B.A. (HONS); Dip. T.P.; M.R.T.P.I. HEAD OF PLANNING SERVICES CONTENTS

ITEM APP. NO. SITE LOCATION OFFICER REC.

1 2007/1114 Land adjoining 434 Clydach Road, Ynysforgan, Swansea APPROVE Detached dwelling (details of the siting, design and external appearance of the building(s), means of access and landscaping pursuant to condition 01 of planning permission 2006/0473 granted on 13th February 2007)

2 2008/1435 160 St Helens Road Swansea SA1 4DQ APPROVE Siting of refrigeration compound to front of premises

3 2008/2410 Land Adjacent to Lidl Store, Trallwn Road, Llansamlet, APPROVE Swansea, SA7 9WL Installation of a 12m high streetworks monopole with 3 antennas (overall height 13.4m) and associated equipment cabinet (application for the Prior Approval of the Local Planning Authority)

4 2008/1065 Land adjacent to 6 Plough Road, Landore, Swansea, APPROVE SA1 2QA Construction of a two storey block of four self- contained flats & associated parking

5 2007/1261 Site of former 22 Trewyddfa Road, Plasmarl, Swansea APPROVE Three terraced houses with associated parking

6 2007/2735 Land at rear of 40 Alltiago Road, Pontarddulais, REFUSE Swansea Retention of detached dwelling and new access way serving 40 Alltiago Road

7 2007/2882 Swansea Marriot Hotel - Maritime Quarter Swansea SA1 APPROVE 3SS Retention of two storage containers for a temporary period of two years

8 2008/1601 Quadrant Gate, Nelson Street, Swansea, SA1 3QE APPROVE Replacement single storey side extension, fenestration alterations and external seating area

AREA 1 DEVELOPMENT CONTROL COMMITTEE – 27TH JANUARY 2009

ITEM APP. NO. SITE LOCATION OFFICER REC.

9 2008/1604 76 Symmons Street, Swansea, SA1 6FT APPROVE First floor rear extension

10 2008/2337 73 - 74 Mansel Street, Swansea, SA1 5TR APPROVE Conversion of premises from a private members club to counselling services and offices (Class D1) second floor rear extension, with fenestration and external alterations including front canopy (amendment to planning permission 2007/2412 granted on 17th December 2007)

11 2008/2232 Site A14A Swansea SA1 APPROVE Construction of 6 storey mixed use development comprising of 1 no. ground floor retail unit (Class A1) and 1 no. ground floor food and drink unit (Class A3) and 132 no. bedroom hotel (Class C1) with 10 no. car parking spaces and delivery/service yard (application for reserved matters approval pursuant to outline planning permission 2002/1000 granted on the 19th August 2003)

AREA 1 DEVELOPMENT CONTROL COMMITTEE – 27TH JANUARY 2009 AREA 1 DEVELOPMENT CONTROL COMMITTEE – 27TH JANUARY 2009

ITEM 1 APPLICATION NO. 2007/1114 WARD: Area 1 Morriston

Location: Land adjoining 434 Clydach Road, Ynysforgan, Swansea Proposal: Detached dwelling (details of the siting, design and external appearance of the building(s), means of access and landscaping pursuant to condition 01 of planning permission 2006/0473 granted on 13th February 2007) Applicant: Mr R Lewis

BACKGROUND INFORMATION

This application was DEFERRED FOR A SITE VISIT at the meeting on the 6th January 2009 to assess the impact of the proposal on residential and visual amenity.

RELEVANT PLANNING POLICIES

Policy EV1 General requirements to ensure new development displays a standard of design and layout sympathetic to the character and amenity of the site, its immediate surroundings and the broader area, and which have proper regard the amenities of the surrounding areas in particular in terms of visual impact, loss of light or privacy, shared activity, traffic and parking implications (City & County of Swansea Unitary Development Plan 2008))

Policy EV2 General requirements to ensure the siting of new development gives preference to the use of previously developed land over Greenfield sites and must have regard to the physical character and topography of the site and its surroundings (City & County of Swansea Unitary Development Plan 2008)

Policy HC2 Proposals for housing development within the urban are will be supported where the site has been previously developed or is not covered by conflicting plan policies and proposals and subject to criteria (City & County of Swansea Unitary Development Plan 2008)

SITE HISTORY

App No. Proposal 78/0694/01 ERECTION OF ONE DWELLING Decision: *HGPC - GRANT PERMISSION CONDITIONAL Decision Date: 28/09/1978

2006/0473 One detached dwelling (outline) Decision: Grant Permission Conditional Decision Date: 13/02/2007

AREA 1 DEVELOPMENT CONTROL COMMITTEE – 27TH JANUARY 2009

ITEM 1 (CONT’D) APPLICATION NO. 2007/1114

2004/0946 Detached dwelling (outline) Decision: Grant Permission Conditional Decision Date: 18/08/2004

2004/1024 First floor rear extension Decision: Grant Permission Conditional Decision Date: 07/09/2004

RESPONSE TO CONSULTATIONS

The application was advertised on site and FOUR neighbouring properties were consulted. EIGHT LETTERS OF OBJECTION were received the main points of which may be summarised as follows:

• The proposal will cut off significant light to our neighbouring property – regard must be had to ancient light laws; • The proposal will exacerbate existing problems with drainage in the immediate area; • The proposal will exacerbate existing parking problems in the area; • The proposal will result in loss of views over valley; • Disruption and disturbance will be inevitable during building work and the amount of landfill required to be brought in, raising the height of the land; • Who will monitor what is in the landfill; • The applicant has encroached onto neighbouring land, damaging my property; • Mature trees have been cut down on the site which protect us from noise and pollution from the nearby motorway; • The dwelling will look incongruous amid older established properties; • The retaining wall and 1.8m fence will obstruct light to our garden;

Amended Plans – dated 2nd July 2008

TWO additional letters of objection were received which repeat the above concerns. Additional points raised may be summarised as follows:

• We object to any trees planted along the shared boundary as this would severely affect sunlight into our garden; • Will land levels be the same length and height of the adjoining property?

Additional Plans – dated 12th November 2008

No response.

Highway Observations – The application is for reserved matters following the granting of outline consent at the site. The principle of outline residential development at the site has therefore already been established.

Two parking spaces have been indicated located adjacent to the boundary with No.434. The drive accords with our recommended width and the access widens out to 6m. AREA 1 DEVELOPMENT CONTROL COMMITTEE – 27TH JANUARY 2009

ITEM 1 (CONT’D) APPLICATION NO. 2007/1114

I recommend that no highway objections are raised to the application subject to:

1. The parking remaining for ever more for use in association with the dwelling. 2. The pavement fronting the length of the site to be renewed including reinstatement of any redundant crossovers. 3. The construction of a vehicular crossing to Highway Authority Specification.

Note: The Developer must contact the Network Manager City and County of Swansea, Highways Division, Players Industrial Estate, Clydach, Swansea, SA6 5BJ. Tel 01792 841601 before carrying out any work.

Amended plans - dated 2nd July 2008

No additional comments to add.

Pollution Control Division – No Comments.

Dwr Cymru Welsh Water – Standard conditions and advisory notes

APPRAISAL

This application is reported to Committee for decision at the request of Councillor Robert Stewart.

This is a reserved matters application for the siting, design, external appearance, means of access and landscaping for one detached dwelling on land adjacent to No. 434 Clydach Road, Ynystawe. Members may recall that outline planning permission for one detached dwelling on this site was approved at Area 1 Committee on the 13th February 2007. The principle of this site being suitable for the infill development of one house has therefore been established, and this application will be considered on its own merits having regard to the type of dwelling and design of layout proposed.

The main issues for consideration in this instance relate to whether the proposed dwelling satisfies the criteria set out in Policies EV1, EV2 and HC2 of the adopted Unitary Development Plan 2008. There are considered to be no additional issues arising from the provisions of the Human Rights Act.

Policy HC2 of the Unitary Development presumes in favour of residential infill development unless there are overriding planning objections resulting from overdevelopment, significant loss of residential amenity, detrimental impact on the character and appearance of the area or highway conditions. Policies EV1 and EV2 require developments to have proper regard to the amenities of surrounding areas, in particular visual impact, loss of light or privacy, shared activity, traffic and parking implications.

This part of Clydach Road is characterised by a mix of sizes and styles of dwellings including traditional two storey terraced and semi-detached dwellings interspersed with sizeable detached dwellings fronting onto the road. AREA 1 DEVELOPMENT CONTROL COMMITTEE – 27TH JANUARY 2009

ITEM 1 (CONT’D) APPLICATION NO. 2007/1114

The application site fronts onto and is level with Clydach Road but it should be noted that there is a change in levels across the site and indeed this stretch of Clydach Road from west to east (i.e. from Clydach Road in the direction of the M4 Junction 45 Ynysforgan interchange). This change in levels means that the houses fronting onto Clydach Road are at a significantly higher level than their rear sloping gardens and occupying a relatively elevated position are subsequently visually quite prominent when viewed from the M4 Junction 45 interchange. With regards the application site, this prominence has been reinforced by the removal of a belt of trees and shrubbery on the southern boundary of the site which aided it’s screening from the interchange. The site has also been cleared of vegetation and a high level of rubble brought into the site.

The proposed dwelling is to be sited 3m from the edge of pavement, slightly set back behind the existing house at No. 434 and the other terraces within the same side of the road. The proposed dwelling would be sited at a distance of 4.4m from the gable wall of No. 434 Clydach Road (some 3.3 to the common boundary). A driveway accommodating space for two vehicles is located to the northern side of the proposed dwelling on the boundary with No. 434 Clydach Road.

The detached two storey dwelling, with additional accommodation within the roof space, would have a footprint measuring 7.1m in width and a maximum depth of 9m. This depth includes a two storey gable projection on the front elevation measuring 1.5m. The eaves measure 4.9m in height with a ridge height of approximately 8.45m. This is comparable with the height of the terrace dwellings due north of the application site. Accommodation would comprise separate kitchen, living and dining rooms with three bedrooms at first floor and an additional bedroom in the roof space. Two velux windows are proposed on the rear roof elevation.

Finishing materials proposed include concrete tiles for the roof, upvc rainwater goods, windows and doors, cement external rendering, stone cills and heads, and a facing brickwork plinth.

To the rear a patio area is proposed, with steps leading down to a lower garden area alongside the motorway interchange. Given the topography and change in levels across the site, the land levels will be required to be raised to provide a flat platform for the house to provide a useable garden area. The finished floor level for the dwelling is within 0.150mm of that of the adjoining house and the garden level would be consistent with the profile of the adjacent garden.

In terms of the design and siting of the house, the application is considered to be acceptable in terms of its impact upon the streetscene and it would not appear as an incongruous or over intensive form of development. Whilst siting details were not considered at the outline application state, an indicative plan was provided and it was considered that any dwelling on this site should conform to the established building line. Whilst located slightly behind the existing building line (some 3m from back edge of pavement) it is considered the siting of the new house within the plot is acceptable and would be broadly consistent with the established pattern of development within the area and therefore complies with Policies EV1, EV2 and HC2 of the Unitary Development Plan.

With regard to impact on the amenity of neighbouring occupiers the proposed house would be located at a distance of approx. 4.4m from the gable elevation of the existing house at No. 434 Clydach Road. AREA 1 DEVELOPMENT CONTROL COMMITTEE – 27TH JANUARY 2009

ITEM 1 (CONT’D) APPLICATION NO. 2007/1114

It is acknowledged that there are a number of existing windows at ground and first floor serving habitable rooms in the gable end of this property facing the application site. The windows at first floor level are a relatively recent addition, following the granting of planning permission in September 2004 for the construction of a first floor rear extension (Application No. 2004/1024 refers). At ground floor the openings serve a lounge/sitting room area and a kitchen. Although it is acknowledged there will be some overshadowing of these windows, on balance it is not considered that it will cause a significant loss of residential amenity.

The openings proposed facing No. 434 consist of at ground floor a kitchen doorway and at first floor a hall landing. A 1.8m high timber fence is proposed to enclose the site including its boundary with No. 434. This is considered to be a suitable means of enclosure sufficient to prevent any direct overlooking from the proposed ground floor doorway serving the kitchen. Notwithstanding the above, a condition can also be imposed to ensure that obscure glass is installed to the first floor hall landing window proposed for the side elevation facing No. 434 to further safeguard the privacy of the adjacent residents.

Similarly it is not considered that the proposed dwelling will adversely affect the rear private amenity space of the neighbouring dwelling by virtue of the alignment of the main rear elevations of the respective dwellings.

With regards to landscaping, a condition is proposed to ensure the eastern elevation of the site is landscaped in accordance with the details submitted to the local planning authority to soften and screen views into the site from the Junction 45 interchange.

Turning to the letters of representation received, concerns raised regarding impact on the character and appearance of the area, together with matters of residential amenity have been addressed above. With regard to concerns raised regarding loss of views, there is no requirement in planning law to retain views from specific properties. Private boundary issues are civil matters separate from planning legislation. It is acknowledged that tree cutting has occurred on the site, however, the trees were not protected by a TPO. A landscaping condition is however proposed to ensure the site is satisfactorily screened from the motorway interchange to the south.

Concern has been expressed regarding the disruption caused by the construction process. However, it is advised that it is inevitable that a certain amount of disturbance would be created in the short term whilst building works commenced and this is not a material planning consideration in the determination of this application. In relation to drainage, no objection is raised by Welsh Water subject to standard informatives.

In respect of highway safety issues, whilst noted, the Head of Transportation has raised no highway objection to the scheme and is satisfied that the proposal accords with adopted guidelines.

In conclusion therefore and having regard to all material considerations, including the Human Rights Act, the proposal is considered to be satisfactory in terms of its design and layout and on balance it is not considered that the proposal would result in any significant material harm to the residential amenities of the surrounding dwellings, or impact on highway safety. As such the proposal does not conflict with the relevant adopted planning policies and is considered to constitute a satisfactory form of residential development. Approval is therefore recommended subject to conditions. AREA 1 DEVELOPMENT CONTROL COMMITTEE – 27TH JANUARY 2009

ITEM 1 (CONT’D) APPLICATION NO. 2007/1114

RECOMMENDATION,

APPROVE, subject to the following conditions:

1 Notwithstanding the provisions of the Town and Country Planning (General Permitted Development) Order 1995, (or any Order revoking or amending that Order), Classes A (as it relates to extensions), B, C and F of Part 1 of Schedule 2 shall not apply. Reason: The development hereby approved is such that the Council wish to retain control over any future development being permitted in order to ensure that a satisfactory form of development is achieved at all times.

2 Samples of all external finishes shall be submitted to and approved by the Local Planning Authority in writing before the development is commenced. The scheme shall be implemented in accordance with the approved details. Reason: In the interests of visual amenity.

3 The parking area shall remain for use in association with the dwelling at all times. Reason: In the interest of highway safety.

4 A crossing over the footpath/verge in the existing highway shall be completed before the development is brought into use in accordance with details to be submitted to and approved by the Local Planning Authority. Reason: In the interests of highway safety.

5 No development shall take place without the prior written approval of the Local Planning Authority of a scheme for the landscaping of the site. The landscaping scheme shall be carried out within 12 months from the completion of the development. Any trees or shrubs planted in accordance with this condition which are removed, die, become seriously diseased within two years of planting shall be replaced by trees or shrubs of similar size and species to those originally required to be planted. Reason: To ensure that the site is satisfactorily landscaped having regard to its location and the nature of the proposed development, and to accord with Section 197 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990.

6 Notwithstanding the submitted plans the ground floor doorway and first floor window in the north elevation facing No. 433 Clydach Road, as indicated on Plan No 1 & 2 dated 15th November 2007 shall be obscure glazed, and shall be retained as such unless otherwise agreed in writing with the Local Planning Authority. Reason: To safeguard the privacy of the occupiers of neighbouring residential properties.

AREA 1 DEVELOPMENT CONTROL COMMITTEE – 27TH JANUARY 2009

ITEM 1 (CONT’D) APPLICATION NO. 2007/1114

INFORMATIVES

1 The development plan covering the City & County of Swansea is the West Glamorgan Structure Plan (Review No. 2), the Swansea Local Plan (Review No.1), the Southern Lliw Valley Local Plan, & the Northern Lliw Valley Local Plan. The following policies were relevant to the consideration of this application (Policy H2 of the West Glamorgan Structure Plan Review No.2, Policies EV1, EV2 and H2 of the Swansea Local Plan Review No.1 and Policies EV1, EV2 and HC2 of the emergent Unitary Development Plan).

2 This consent is issued without prejudice to any other consents or easements that may be required in connection with the proposed development.

3 Any waste excavation material or building waste generated in the course of the development must be disposed of satisfactorily and in accordance with Section 34 of the Environmental Protection Act 1990. Carriers transporting waste must be licensed waste carriers.

4 The activity of importing waste into the site for use as, for example hardcore, must re-registered by the Environment Agency Wales as an exempt activity under the Management Licensing Regulations 1994.

5 To protect the integrity of the Public Sewerage System, foul water and surface water discharges shall be drained separately from the site.

6 To prevent hydraulic overloading of the public sewerage system, to protect the health and safety of existing residents and ensure no detriment to the environment, no surface water shall be allowed to connect (either directly or indirectly) to the public sewerage system unless otherwise approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority.

7 To prevent hydraulic overload of the public sewerage system and pollution of the environment, land drainage run-off shall not be permitted to discharge, either directly or indirectly, into the public sewerage system.

8 If a connection is required to the public sewerage system, the developer is advised to contact Dwr Cymru Welsh Water's Network Development Consultants on Tel: 01443 331155.

9 The Developer is reminded that consent under the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 conveys no approval under the Highways Act 1980 for works to be undertaken affecting any part of the public highway including verges and footways and that before any such works are commenced the developer must: i) obtain the approval of City and County of Swansea as Highway Authority to the details of any works to be undertaken affecting the public highway; ii) indemnify the City and County Council against any and all claims arising from such works; iii) give not less than one calendar month's notice in writing of the date that the works are to be commenced to the Director of Technical Services, at the County Hall, City and County of Swansea, Oystermouth Road, Swansea. Tel. 636000.

AREA 1 DEVELOPMENT CONTROL COMMITTEE – 27TH JANUARY 2009

ITEM 1 (CONT’D) APPLICATION NO. 2007/1114

10 The Developer must contact the Network Manager City and County of Swansea, Highways Division, Players Industrial Estate, Clydach, Swansea, SA6 5BJ. Tel 01792 841601 before carrying out any work.

PLANS

Site location plan received 16th May, 2007, proposed floor plans, proposed elevations received 15th November 2007; amended block plan, existing site levels, landscaping details, description and specification received 2nd July, 2008 amended site layout, existing and proposed sections, sections received 12th November 2008

AREA 1 DEVELOPMENT CONTROL COMMITTEE – 27TH JANUARY 2009

ITEM 2 APPLICATION NO. 2008/1435 WARD: Area 1 Castle

Location: 160 St Helens Road Swansea SA1 4DQ Proposal: Siting of refrigeration compound to front of premises Applicant: Masala Bazaar Ltd

BACKGROUND INFORMATION

This application was DEFERRED FOR A SITE VISIT at the meeting on the 6th January 2009 to assess the visual impact of the proposal.

POLICIES

Policy EV1 General requirements to ensure new development displays a standard of design and layout sympathetic to the character and amenity of the site, its immediate surroundings and the broader area, and which have proper regard the amenities of the surrounding areas in particular in terms of visual impact, loss of light or privacy, shared activity, traffic and parking implications (City & County of Swansea Unitary Development Plan 2008)

SITE HISTORY

App No. Proposal 2007/0232 New shop front, creation of 8 car parking bays, bin store, disabled access ramp and handrail (amendment to planning permission 2006/1869 granted 6th December 2006) Decision: Grant Permission Conditional Decision Date: 04/04/2007

2003/1238 Installation of fixed stainless steel numerals at high level on the side elevation. Decision: Grant Advertisement Consent (C) Decision Date: 25/07/2003

2006/1928 Internally illuminated fascia sign Decision: Grant Advertisement Consent (C) Decision Date: 13/10/2006

2002/2056 Change of use from nursing home (Class D2) to student accommodation on ground, 1st, 2nd and 3rd floor levels and alterations to external elevations Decision: Grant Permission Conditional Decision Date: 10/01/2003

AREA 1 DEVELOPMENT CONTROL COMMITTEE – 27TH JANUARY 2009

ITEM 2 (CONT’D) APPLICATION NO. 2008/1435

2006/0124 Change of use of lower ground floor from nursing home (Class D2) to retail use (Class A1) Decision: Grant Permission Conditional Decision Date: 13/04/2006

2006/1869 New shop front on front elevation, creation of 8 car parking bays, disabled access ramp and handrail, bin store and fire escape door on ground floor side elevation Decision: Grant Permission Conditional Decision Date: 06/12/2006

95/0857 CHANGE OF USE FROM NURSING HOME (CLASS C2) TO STUDENT ACCOMMODATION Decision: *HGPC - GRANT PERMISSION CONDITIONAL Decision Date: 18/10/1995

2002/2055 Change of use of lower ground floor from nursing home (Class D2) to food and drink (Class A3) and or consulting rooms (Class D1) and external alterations Decision: Grant Permission Conditional Decision Date: 10/01/2003

80/1147/03 USE AS CAR PARKING ANCILLARY TO HOTEL Decision: *HGPC - GRANT PERMISSION CONDITIONAL Decision Date: 28/08/1980

81/0159/11 CHANGE OF USE TO PRIVATE HOSPITAL OF 35 BEDS Decision: *HRP - REFUSE PERMISSION Decision Date: 26/03/1981

81/1386/11 CHANGE OF USE TO PRIVATE NURSING HOME/HOME FOR THE AGED Decision: *HGPC - GRANT PERMISSION CONDITIONAL Decision Date: 31/12/1982

RESPONSE TO CONSULTATIONS

The proposal was advertised via direct neighbour consultation to adjacent properties and via a site notice. ONE LETTER OF OBJECTION has been received from the Swansea Civic Society as is summarised as follows:-

1. The siting of a refrigeration compound along St Helens Road is an inappropriate use of a frontage. 2. The unit does not create an attractive environment.

It is considered that all the above points are included within the report and given due regard. AREA 1 DEVELOPMENT CONTROL COMMITTEE – 27TH JANUARY 2009

ITEM 2 (CONT’D) APPLICATION NO. 2008/1435

Highway Observations The application is for the siting of a refrigeration compound. There are no highway safety implications to consider with this application. I recommend no highway objections.

Pollution Control Observations - No objection subject to the following condition:

“The total noise emissions from all plant serving the subject premises when measured at a position one metre from the façade of the nearest noise sensitive receptor should not exceed 5dB(A) below the lowest measured background noise level (LA90, 15min) during night time hours (23.00-07.00hrs). The plant should not produce a tonal element under normal operating conditions.”

APPRAISAL

This application is reported to Committee for decision at the request of Councillors David Phillips and Alan Lloyd.

Full planning permission is sought for the retention and completion of a refrigeration compound, comprising of a freezer unit, a chiller unit and two air conditioning units at 160 St Helens Road. The mechanical units are in situ, however the compound enclosure has not been constructed.

The property is an end of terrace property with an A1 unit at ground floor and residential on upper floors. The application is in association with the ground floor A1 unit. The units are located within the front forecourt of the premises.

The main issues for consideration are the impact of the units and compound on the visual appearance of the streetscene, and impacts upon residential amenity, with regard to Policy EV1 of the Unitary development Plan. There are no overriding issues with regard to the provisions of the Human Rights Act.

The rear of the proposed compound would be constructed of timber panels to match the doors of the existing binstore which is sited in the forecourt adjacent to the refrigeration/air conditioning units. The front elevation of the compound would be constructed of a tubular fencing system with welded mesh coloured oxide red (to match the colour of the brick work). The compound would project 1m above the adjacent side boundary wall and would measure 7.4m in width and 1.2m in depth and would be located 1.7m away from the front elevation of the building. All pipe work associated with the mechanical units will be located within the compound.

The application site is severely restricted with regard to choice of location for the compound due to the absence of any suitable rear yard area. The front courtyard is the only area where the mechanical units and compound can be sited.

In terms of visual impact, the proposed compound would be partially screened by the existing side boundary wall separating the site from the neighbouring commercial building and also by a tree sited on the front boundary facing St Helens Road. The compound is also largely screened from St Helens Road by the brickwork bin store in the forecourt of the building, which was approved under permission ref 2007/0232. AREA 1 DEVELOPMENT CONTROL COMMITTEE – 27TH JANUARY 2009

ITEM 2 (CONT’D) APPLICATION NO. 2008/1435

The compound would be higher than the existing side boundary wall (by 1m) separating the site from the neighbouring commercial property, however the elevation of the compound adjacent to this boundary wall would be timber panels designed to screen the chiller, freezer and air conditioning units. It is noted that under the previous permission granted for the brick bin enclosure, the height of the enclosure measured 1.95m high, but has been completed at a lower level (1.5m high), so that its projection above the boundary wall is now 0.5m. The proposed timber panels would project 1m above the boundary wall (the height previously granted for the bin store) and would be located 7m away from St Helens Road. As indicated, the bin store is located in front of the compound and will partially screen it from the road. On the other side of the boundary wall is a car park for the adjacent commercial building. The 1m projection of the timber screen above this boundary wall is considered to be acceptable in terms of its visual appearance in the street scene and its view from the adjacent car park. The timber panels would screen the mechanical units from views from the street and the car park.

It is noted that there are a variety of boundary walls and fences along St Helens Road, and when looked at in the context with the wider street scene, it is not considered that the mechanical units and the proposed compound would appear as an over dominant feature within the street scene.

The adjacent listed building, St Andrew’s Church is set back from the building line of the application site and is located some 35m away from the proposed site of the compound. The proposal is not therefore considered to have a detrimental impact on the setting of this church.

Turning to the impact of the proposal on the residential amenity of the residential properties, the SCQ Quantum freezer compressor would result in a sound level of 41dbA and the Stealth Sound refrigeration unit would have a noise level of 31dbA. The applicant has chosen the compressors due to the low noise generated. The location of the compound 5m away from the residential windows above aims to minimise the effect on the residential properties. There is a small courtyard within the application site, however due to the fact that it is bound on three sides by a 4 storey residential block, this courtyard would have a tunnelling effect, thus amplifying any sound. Given the siting of the compound some 5m away from the building, combined with its low noise emissions, it is considered to have a minimal impact on the amenity of the residential properties located in close proximity to the site. However, the pollution control division have recommended an appropriate noise controlling condition. The proposal is therefore compliant with Policy EV1 of the Unitary Development Plan.

It is not considered to have any additional impacts on the safety of highway users.

Having regard to all material planning considerations including the Human Rights Act, the proposal is considered to represent an appropriate form of development that is not considered to have an unsatisfactory impact on the residential and visual amenities of the area. The proposal therefore accords with Policy EV1 of the Unitary Development Plan. AREA 1 DEVELOPMENT CONTROL COMMITTEE – 27TH JANUARY 2009

ITEM 2 (CONT’D) APPLICATION NO. 2008/1435

RECOMMENDATION

APPROVE, subject to the following conditions;

1 The proposed compound to screen the refrigeration/freezer and air conditioning units shall be erected within two months of the date of this planning permission and shall be completed in accordance with the said application plans and conditions unless otherwise agreed in writing by the Local Planning Authority. Reason: To comply with the provisions of Section 91 of the Town and Country Planning Act, 1990 and to ensure that the development is completed in accordance with the plans approved by the City and County of Swansea, and so avoid any detriment to amenity or public safety by works remaining uncompleted.

2 The total noise emissions from all plant serving the subject premises when measured at a position one metre from the façade of the nearest noise sensitive receptor should not exceed 5 dB(A) below the lowest measured background noise level (LA90, 15 min) during night time hours (23:00 - 07:00). The plant should not produce a tonal element under normal operating conditions. Reason: To safeguard the amenities of neighbouring residents.

3 Notwithstanding the details shown on the approved plans, full details of the colour finish of the refrigeration compound shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The scheme shall be implemented in accordance with the approved details. Reason: In the interests of visual amenity.

INFORMATIVES

1 The development plan covering the City & County of Swansea is the City & County of Swansea Unitary Development Plan (November 2008). The following policies were relevant to the consideration of this application: Policy EV1 of the City & County of Swansea Unitary Development Plan (November 2008).

PLANS

1797/PA/01 site location plan, specification details received 8th July 2008. Amended plans 1797/PA/02A- site layout plan, 1797/PA/03A- refrigeration compound details received 20th November 2008

AREA 1 DEVELOPMENT CONTROL COMMITTEE – 27TH JANUARY 2009

ITEM 3 APPLICATION NO. 2008/2410 WARD: Area 1 Llansamlet

Location: Land Adjacent to Lidl Store, Trallwn Road, Llansamlet, Swansea, SA7 9WL Proposal: Installation of a 12m high streetworks monopole with 3 antennas (overall height 13.4m) and associated equipment cabinet (application for the Prior Approval of the Local Planning Authority) Applicant: Vodafone UK

BACKGROUND INFORMATION

POLICIES

Policy Policy Description Policy EV1 New development shall accord with a defined set of criteria of good design. (City & County of Swansea Unitary Development Plan 2008).

Policy EV2 The siting of new development shall give preference to the use of previously developed land and have regard to the physical character and topography of the site and its surroundings. (City & County of Swansea Unitary Development Plan 2008).

Policy R10 Applications for planning permissions or prior approval for telecommunications development will be considered in the light of technical and operational requirements and will be permitted subject to compliance with specified criteria. (City & County of Swansea Unitary Development Plan 2008).

SITE HISTORY

App No. Proposal A00/0231 Removal of condition 07 of planning permission 98/0973 granted on 28th September 1998 which prohibits deliveries to the premises outside the hours of 0730 to 1800 Mondays to Saturdays and 0900 to 1600 on Sundays Decision: Grant Variation of Condition (C) Decision Date: 15/05/2001

98/0973 ERECTION OF A SINGLE STOREY RETAIL STORE WITH CAR PARKING AND SERVICING Decision: *HGPC - GRANT PERMISSION CONDITIONAL Decision Date: 28/09/1998

RESPONSE TO CONSULTATIONS

The application was advertised on site. ONE PETITION OF OBJECTION containing 33 signatures has been received, which can be summarised as follows: AREA 1 DEVELOPMENT CONTROL COMMITTEE – 27TH JANUARY 2009

ITEM 3 (CONT’D) APPLICATION NO. 2008/2410

PETITION OF OBJECTION

We, as local residents would like to register our objection to the erection of the Vodaphone monopole at the site of the Lidl store for the following reasons:

1. The site would be less than 55m from the nearest property.

2. It would attract anti social behaviour, particularly graffiti.

3. It would be too near a young children’s play area.

4. Being 12m high it would be an eyesore, especially when viewed from the bungalows opposite.

5. It seems that whilst there is no evidence to prove any danger to health, there is still the absence of results proving pasts are harmless.

6. It is noted that a notice was sent to some residents on 16th September, though neither I or my immediate neighbours received any such communication.

7. Whilst we appreciate the need for masts we feel that there are more suitable locations available, further away from properties which would not pose any problems or result in property devaluation.

Pollution Control You will be aware that much controversy continues to surround the subject of the potential for adverse health effects arising from exposure to radiation emissions from mobile phones and mobile phone base stations [including macro, micro and picocells].

The Independent Expert Group on Mobile Phones [IEGMP], under it’s Chairman Sir William Stewart, recognised, in publishing it’s report [the “Stewart Report”], that “Science can never provide a guarantee of zero risk”, hence the recommendation from the IEGMP that research into this area continue with a view to developing knowledge of any potential effects.

As a consequence of this the Link Mobile Telecommunications and Health Research Programme [MTHR] was established. As of November 2003 there were twenty one projects in progress, seventeen being funded directly by MTHR [www.mthr.org.uk] with a further three being funded by the Department of Trade and Industry and one by the Home Office. These projects range across a wide variety of subject areas and are not necessarily directly related to exposure to emissions from base stations.

In it’s report the IEGMP also concluded that “the balance of evidence indicates that there is no general risk to the health of people living near to base stations where the exposures are only small fractions of guidelines” and that “the balance of evidence to date suggests that exposures to RF radiation below NRPB and ICNIRP guidelines do not cause adverse health effects to the general population”. AREA 1 DEVELOPMENT CONTROL COMMITTEE – 27TH JANUARY 2009

ITEM 3 (CONT’D) APPLICATION NO. 2008/2410

Despite further research being published since the Stewart report was produced, notably the 2003 paper by Zwambourn, Vossen, van Leersum, Ouwens and Mäkel of TNO Physics and Electronics Laboratory of the Netherlands and the Interphone study conducted by Dr Christoffer Johansen of the Danish Cancer Society, the balance of opinion appears to remain that there is an absence of conclusive, replicated evidence that associates detrimental human health affects with exposure to mobile phone base stations. A “Summary of Recent reports on Mobile Phones and Health [2000 – 2004]” produced by the NRPB is available at. The summary includes an overview of the research projects included in the report and provides a project reference, an indication of the frequency range studied, a summary of the conclusions and a summary of the recommendations relevant to the project.

The Advisory Group on Non-ionising Radiation [AGNIR] has, in January 2004, published a report on it’s review of the scientific evidence relevant to an assessment of the effects of exposure to Radiofrequency [RF] fields which has accumulated since the Stewart Report on Mobile Phones and Health was published in 2000. In the overall conclusions to the report it states:

“In aggregate the research published since the IEGMP report does not give cause for concern. The weight of evidence now available does not suggest that there are adverse health effects from exposures to RF fields below guideline level, but the published research on RF exposures and health has limitations, and mobile phones have only been in widespread use for a relatively short time. The possibility therefore remains open that there could be health effects from exposure to RF fields below guideline levels, hence continued research is needed.”

The latest information, provided by the Health Protection Agency Radiation Protection Division at a seminar of Telecommunications and Health in 2007, is that there is no change to the above recommended approach.

With regard to the question of proximity to property there are no specific recommendations regarding this in the Stewart Report.

In line with the recommended procedure the applicant has submitted a statement to the Planning Authority that the installation will comply with the International Commission on Non-Ionizing Radiation Protection [ICNIRP] guideline standards.

The Pollution Control Division of the Environment Department has no objection to this application.

Highways - No highway objection.

APPRAISAL

This application has been reported to Committee for decision at the request of Councillor June Evans.

This application has been submitted for the prior approval of the Local Planning Authority for the installation of a 12m high monopole to support 3 no internal shrouded antenna approximately 1.4m long giving the proposed structure an overall height of 13.4m, together with an associated equipment cabinet. AREA 1 DEVELOPMENT CONTROL COMMITTEE – 27TH JANUARY 2009

ITEM 3 (CONT’D) APPLICATION NO. 2008/2410

The proposed installation is to be located to the rear of the Lidl store, off Trallwn Road, Llansamlet, in a grassed strip adjacent to the existing landscaping belt. Whilst the proposal is to be sited adjacent to the Lidl store, it is in a predominantly residential area, with the nearest dwellings being approximately 35m from the proposed monopole.

The installation would comprise the erection of a 12m galvanised streetworks monopole containing 3 no. internal shrouded antenna, and would be approximately 250mm wide at its base, with the main portion being 180mm wide. The ground based steel equipment cabinet, painted grey, will measure 1.58m x 0.38m x 0.35m.

The main purpose of this proposal is to provide 3G technology to enable Vodafone to offer high speed video and multi media applications to customers in the Trallwn area.

The issue of the impact on health is frequently raised with mobile phone masts and other telecommunications development. The possible health implications of the installation and advice on this issue are given in paragraph 40 of TAN19 (Wales) “Telecommunications”. The National Radiological Protection Board (NRPB), which has a statutory function to provide advice to Government on all radiation matters, gives guidance on limiting exposure to electromagnetic radiation. In connection with telecommunications masts generally, the NRPB has advised that the strength of radio waves at ground level, and in regions generally accessible to the public, tend to be many times below guidance levels and should present no significant health risk. On this matter the Independent Expert Group on Mobile Phones [IEGMP], under it’s Chairman Sir William Stewart, concludes that “the balance of evidence indicates that there is no general risk to the health of people living near to base stations where the exposures are only small fractions of guidelines” and that “the balance of evidence to date suggests that exposures to RF radiation below NRPB and ICNIRP guidelines do not cause adverse health effects to the general population”. Nevertheless a precautionary approach was recommended.

The Stewart Report on Mobile Phones and base stations also recognises that “Science can never provide a guarantee of zero risk”, hence the recommendation from the IEGMP that research into this area continue with a view to developing knowledge of any potential effects.

As a consequence of this the Link Mobile Telecommunications and Health Research Programme [MTHR] was established. As of November 2003 there were twenty one projects in progress, seventeen being funded directly by MTHR with a further three being funded by the Department of Trade and Industry and one by the Home Office. These projects range across a wide variety of subject areas and are not necessarily directly related to exposure to emissions from base stations.

Despite further research being published since the Stewart report was produced, notably the 2003 paper by Zwambourn, Vossen, van Leersum, Ouwens and Mäkel of TNO Physics and Electronics Laboratory of the Netherlands, the balance of opinion appears to remain that there is an absence of conclusive, replicated evidence that associates detrimental human health affects with exposure to mobile phone base stations. The Advisory Group on Non-ionising Radiation [AGNIR] has, in January 2004, published a report on it’s review of the scientific evidence relevant to an assessment of the effects of exposure to Radiofrequency [RF] fields which have accumulated since the Stewart Report on Mobile Phones and Health was published in 2000. AREA 1 DEVELOPMENT CONTROL COMMITTEE – 27TH JANUARY 2009

ITEM 3 (CONT’D) APPLICATION NO. 2008/2410

In the overall conclusions to the report it states “In aggregate the research published since the IEGMP report does not give cause for concern. The weight of evidence now available does not suggest that there are adverse health effects from exposures to RF fields below guideline level, but the published research on RF exposures and health has limitations, and mobile phones have only been in widespread use for a relatively short time. The possibility therefore remains open that there could be health effects from exposure to RF fields below guideline levels, hence continued research is needed.”

The latest information, provided by the Health Protection Agency Radiation Protection Division at a seminar of Telecommunications and Health in November 2005, is that there is no change to the above recommended approach.

With regard to the question of proximity to property there are no specific recommendations regarding this in the Stewart Report. In line with the statutory requirements the applicant has submitted a written statement confirming that the installation will comply with the NRPB and ICNIRP standards.

With regard to perceived health risks, Planning Policy Wales (August 2002) is relevant. In essence this states that “health considerations and public concern can, in principle be material considerations. It is for the decision maker to determine what weight to attach to such considerations in any particular case…it is the Assembly’s view that if a proposed development meets the ICNIRP guidelines…on the limitation of exposure to electromagnetic fields (as recommended by the Stewart Group on a precautionary basis) it should not be necessary in processing an application to consider health effects further.” It adds that the Assembly has accepted the precautionary actions recommended by Stewart and there is no basis for further actions beyond those prepared. It continues, “Local Planning Authorities should not implement their own precautionary policies e.g. imposing a ban on new telecommunications development or insisting on minimum distances between new development and existing development.”

It is also noted that a consistent stance to the above has been taken by the Assembly’s Inspectorate on previous similar applications. The Inspectorate’s view has been that whilst the concern of health risk is a material consideration it is not necessarily based on any objective or scientific evidence, and as the applicants had in those other cases submitted a declaration that the transmissions would comply with the public exposure guidelines of ICNIRP, public safety reasons would not be a sound reason for dismissing any proposal of this type. On the issue of ICNIRP guidelines, it was the view of the Inspector for a recent appeal decision in respect of a site at the junction of Longview Road and Hill View Crescent, Clase, that in “the absence of sound evidence to the contrary ICNIRP guidelines constitute a robust and reliable basis for evaluating the potential health effects of telecommunications development and assessing the proposed siting of base stations in the light of current scientific knowledge. No sound evidence has been produced to oppose this view.”

Having regard to the above, it is considered that the main issue for consideration in this instance is the visual impact of the proposal on the area having regard to Policies EV1, EV2 and R10 of the Swansea Unitary Development Plan and the planning history of the site. There are considered to be no additional issues arising from the provisions of the Human Rights Act. AREA 1 DEVELOPMENT CONTROL COMMITTEE – 27TH JANUARY 2009

ITEM 3 (CONT’D) APPLICATION NO. 2008/2410

Policies R10 seeks to support the provision of essential services and utilities subject to criteria including: there is no reasonable technical possibility of sharing existing facilities, structures or buildings; there being no unacceptable adverse impact on safety, landscape and ecology; and development being sited to minimise its visual impact.

In addition Policies EV1 and EV2 seek to ensure the design and siting of new development respects and is sympathetic to the character and amenity of the site, its immediate surroundings and broader area.

In respect of the requirements of Policy R10 the agent has confirmed that there is no suitable mast in the area for site sharing, nor are there any existing buildings suitable for use. Other sites have been discounted for landlord and technical reasons, and a number of applications have been refused in the area on design and visual amenity grounds. The most recent being on highways land nearby at the junction of Trallwn Road and Lon Enfys (2007/0160) which was refused on grounds of siting and appearance.

As detailed above, the application site is located in the grass verge adjacent to the Lidl Store, to the west of Trallwn Road. The proposed installation also adjoins a mature belt of trees, which are approximately 9m in height, and would partly screen the proposed monopole from the public highway. There are a number of other vertical features in the streetscene, including lighting columns, telegraph poles, road signage and utility storage cabinets. Furthermore it should be noted that there an electricity pylon approximately 100 metres to the south west of the site.

In considering a previous appeal (APP/B6855/A/04/1149652) on land at Newton Road, the Inspector stated “that the mast has been chosen to replicate the features of a typical street column such as those used for street lighting” and confirmed that this was an acceptable design approach. This approach has since been applied consistently by the Planning Inspectorate in determining similar applications for street works monopoles. It has therefore become widely accepted that in visual terms streetworks monopoles have little additional impact over and above typical street furniture. Having regard to the Inspector’s comments and the fact that the current proposal seeks to site the monopole in close proximity to a group of mature trees and existing building, which would further mitigate its visual impact, it is considered that the proposed installation would be visually acceptable.

The associated equipment cabinet would also be effectively screened by the adjacent trees, and is similar in size to a typical roadside utility cabinet and as such is not considered to introduce a visually obtrusive feature into the streetscene.

As such, and in contrast with the more prominent proposal refused in 2007(2007/0160) and referred to above, it is considered that the proposed installation would not result in any material visual harm and would not have a detrimental impact on the character of the area.

In terms of impact on residential amenity, the nearest residential properties are located to the south, along Trallwn Road. Owing to the existing substantial tree screening adjacent to the proposed monopole, together with a distance of some 35 metres from the application site to the nearest residential property, it is not considered that the proposal would be intrusive or overbearing upon the occupiers of these dwellings. AREA 1 DEVELOPMENT CONTROL COMMITTEE – 27TH JANUARY 2009

ITEM 3 (CONT’D) APPLICATION NO. 2008/2410

The separation distance between the proposed installation and the bungalows on the opposite side of Trallwn Road is even greater, being 45m at its nearest, and similarly the proposal is not considered to have an unacceptable overbearing impact upon the occupiers of these dwellings.

In terms of the representation received, it is considered that the majority of concerns identified have been addressed above, particularly those in respect of health concerns and visual impact.

Nevertheless there is a perception of health risk amongst the local population and as expressed in the representation received. As a general principle however local objection in itself cannot justify refusal of an application. Moreover the Head of Environment, Management and Protection is satisfied that the information submitted accords with the precautionary approach adopted by this Council. On that basis therefore it is not considered that the perception of health risk is a sustainable reason for refusing the application.

In support of this current application the applicant has submitted a statement that the proposed equipment and installation is designed to be in full compliance with the requirements of the radio frequency (RF) public exposure guidelines of the ICNIRP/EU Council recommendation. As indicated above, the Pollution Control Division of the Environment Department has no objection to this application.

With regard to the other concerns raised, consultation on this application was undertaken in accordance with statutory requirements. The applicant has also undertaken independent pre-application consultation with the local community. Property value is not a material planning consideration, and cannot be taken into account in the determination of this application.

The Head of Transportation and Engineering has confirmed that there are no highway objections to the proposal.

In conclusion, it is not considered that the proposed installation would be an unduly prominent or obtrusive feature in the street scene and it would not cause significant harm to the character and appearance of the locality, and amenity would not be unduly impaired in this respect. As such the proposal would not conflict with the aims and objectives of Policies EV1, EV2 and R10 of the Swansea Unitary Development Plan. Approval is therefore recommended.

RECOMMENDATION

That the siting and appearance of the proposed streetworks monopole and associated equipment cabinet on land adjacent to Lidl store, Trallwn Road, Llansamlet, Swansea be APPROVED, subject to the following condition;

1 The finished colour of the telecommunications infrastructure shall be agreed with the Local Planning Authority prior to development taking place. Reason: In the interests of visual amenity, and to accord with Section 197 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990.

AREA 1 DEVELOPMENT CONTROL COMMITTEE – 27TH JANUARY 2009

ITEM 3 (CONT’D) APPLICATION NO. 2008/2410

INFORMATIVES

1 The development plan covering the City and County of Swansea is the City and County of Swansea Unitary Development Plan. The following policies were relevant to the consideration of the application: (Policies EV1, EV2 and R10 of the Unitary Development Plan 2008)

PLANS

Site location plan, proposed site plan, proposed east elevation, signage details received 22nd December 2008

AREA 1 DEVELOPMENT CONTROL COMMITTEE – 27TH JANUARY 2009

ITEM 4 APPLICATION NO. 2008/1065 WARD: Area 1 Landore

Location: Land adjacent to 6 Plough Road, Landore, Swansea, SA1 2QA Proposal: Construction of a two storey block of four self-contained flats & associated parking Applicant: Mr Andy Mildenhall

BACKGROUND INFORMATION

This application was DEFERRED at the Committee on 9th December 2009 at the request of Members to allow the applicant the opportunity to discuss the scheme with the neighbouring occupiers at No. 6 Plough Road.

The applicant’s agent was formally advised to forward any details of contact made. The agent has submitted the following statement: “Our client would like the application to be determined in its current form as it does comply with relevant policy and guidance.”

The occupier of no.6 Plough Road was consulted on the application in accordance with statutory requirements under planning legislation, and representations have subsequently been received. However, the lack of direct contact between the applicant and the occupier of this neighbouring property is not a material planning consideration, and is a matter covered under separate legislation (The Party Wall Act 1996). The recommendation remains for approval, subject to the conditions indicated, including a requirement to soundproof the party wall between the proposed development and no. 6 Plough Road. An appropriate informative also reminds the applicant that the provisions of the Party Wall Act are applicable. This Act provides the legislative framework ‘…for preventing and resolving disputes in relation to party walls, boundary walls and excavations near neighbouring buildings’.

The recommendation remains for approval. a) Relevant Planning Policies

City & County of Swansea Unitary Development Plan 2008

Policy HC2 Proposals for housing development within the urban area will be supported where the site has previously been developed or is not covered by conflicting plan policies or proposals and provided the proposed development does not result in any of the criteria set out in the policy.

Policy EV1 New development shall accord with the following objectives of good design (i) Be appropriate to is local context in terms of scale, height, massing, elevational treatment, materials and detailing, layout, form, mix and density. (ii) Integrate effectively with adjacent spaces and the public realm to create good quality townscape. AREA 1 DEVELOPMENT CONTROL COMMITTEE – 27TH JANUARY 2009

ITEM 4 (CONT’D) APPLICATION NO. 2008/1065

(iii) No result in a significant detrimental impact on local amenity in terms of visual impact, loss of light or privacy, disturbance and traffic movements, (iv) Incorporate a good standard of landscape design, (v) Sensitively relate to existing development patterns and seek to protect natural heritage and the historic and cultural environment, not only on-site, but in terms of potential impact on neighbouring areas of importance, and, where appropriate: (vi) Foster ‘inclusive design’ by ensuring the development allows access for the widest range of people possible, (vii) Support an integrated transport system, (viii) Contribute to the creation of new, and the improvement of existing, spaces and an enhancement of the general street scene, (ix) Promote resource efficient and adaptable buildings and layouts using sustainable design and construction techniques including the re-use and recycling of construction and demolition waste on site, and energy and water efficiency measures, (x) Provide a safe environment by addressing issues of security, crime prevention, and the fear of crime in the design of buildings and the space and routes around them, (xi) Have regard to the desirability of preserving the setting of any listed building. Design statements will be required in support of planning applications which have design implications including applications for new or extended buildings and infrastructure and changes to landscape appearance and/or those involving sensitive sites and locations. b. Relevant Site History

There is no planning history for this particular parcel of land, however, there is planning history for a neighbouring site (317/319 Llangyfelach Road):-

2003/0141 Change of use from retail (Class A1) with flat above to 4 self contained flats and addition of pitched roof to existing rear wings. Decision : Grant Permission conditional Date : 04 April 2003 c. Response to Consultations

The application was advertised on site and 5 neighbouring properties were directly notified. THREE LETTERS OF OBJECTION and a PETITION containing 44 signatures objecting to the application have been received. The objections raised are as follows :

• It would compromise the existing vehicle access at the rear of the shop. This access has been in use for over 40 years and is used by large lorries. Current parking is sparse and any further restrictions would be unacceptable • The building of 4 flats will not benefit the area one bit and will make it worse as traffic congestion will soar and pedestrian safety will be compromised. • As the flats have no gardens, rubbish bags would be left in the street. AREA 1 DEVELOPMENT CONTROL COMMITTEE – 27TH JANUARY 2009

ITEM 4 (CONT’D) APPLICATION NO. 2008/1065

• The road between my house and the flats is narrow and I would be directly overlooked • The development will extend 1m beyond our conservatory and this will obstruct light entering our property • Noise levels will increase due to the residents entrance and parking at the rear • The developer has stated on the plans that there will be no new access to a public road or any alterations to an existing access to a public road. But is in fact moving the access to a public road, approx 10m further up Mysydd Road. Plans show the creation of a new access road where a number of garages currently exist. Also according to the plans submitted the current access road is the position of the new flats. • The proposal will de-value our property which is an end of terrace but will become a mid terrace property. We have no intention of allowing the applicant to adjoin our flank wall which we have just renovated.

Amended plans were received showing small alterations to the layout. Further re- consultation took place and SIX further letters of objection were received from the same objectors which raise the same points as listed above.

Highway Observations

Original Plans The application is for the construction of four self contained flats with associated parking on land that is currently disused. The four car parking spaces for 4 flats accords with our adopted parking guidelines for one bedroom flats. The previous use of the site was garages and hence there has been traffic at the site historically. The access is existing and hence there fore no highway safety issues regarding the continued use of this. I recommend that no highway objections are raised to this proposal subject to the parking being retained for the sole use by residents and for no other use.

Amended Plans Plans have been submitted which show a new access being introduced to access the site and the demolition of a block of garages. The four car parking spaces for the 4 flats accords with our adopted parking guidelines for one bedroom flats.

The access is new and the existing access will need to be reinstated to Highway Authority Standards. I recommend no highway objections subject to;

a) The parking being retained for sole use by the residents and for no other use b) The construction of a new vehicular crossing to Highway authority standards and the reinstatement of the existing access to Highway authority standards.

APPRAISAL

The application is reported to committee for decision at the request of Councillor Viv Abbot.

Full planning permission is sought for the construction of 4 x one bed self contained flats on land adjacent to the junction of Plough Rd and Mysydd Terrace. AREA 1 DEVELOPMENT CONTROL COMMITTEE – 27TH JANUARY 2009

ITEM 4 (CONT’D) APPLICATION NO. 2008/1065

The site is presently grassed over and has frontages to both Plough Road and Mysydd Terrace. The site contains an access from Mysydd Terrace to an existing garage court and an also access to existing houses / flats and shops fronting on to Llangyfelach Rd and Plough Road. Adjacent to the site to the east is a 2 storey end of terraced house - 6 Plough Road. There are no other residential properties abutting the site. On the opposite side of Plough Rd is a terrace of 2 storey houses and on the opposite side of Mysydd Terraces is an access way and an end of terrace 2 storey house. Two of the existing garages are currently allocated to the occupiers of 317/319 Llangyfelach Road, as part of a condition 3 attached to planning permission 2003/0141. As all of the existing garages are proposed to be demolished, the applicant has added 1 additional parking space to the rear of No 317/319 and identified another car parking space within the site of the former garages for the use of those occupiers. This land is within the ownership of the applicant, who owns No. 317/319 as well as the application site.

The main issues for consideration in this instance relate to the suitability of the site for small scale residential development, its impact upon visual amenity, highway safety and residential amenity, having regard to Policies HC2 and EV1 of the Adopted Unitary Development Plan (UDP) 2008.

Policy HC2 of the UDP presume in favour of housing development on sites in the urban area providing the development does not give rise to an over-intensive form of development; and unacceptable loss of residential amenity or important green space, unacceptable impact upon the character and appearance of the residential neighbourhood and highway safety.

The proposal is for four, one bedroom flats with 2 units on the ground floor and 2 units on the first floor. The building has been designed with two frontages, one facing Plough Road and one facing Mysydd Terrace and would be attached to the existing house at 6 Plough Road. The elevations facing the street have been designed to reflect the local vernacular character by incorporating vertically emphasised fenestration patterns and matching the eaves with the existing terrace, and a communal front entrance door to the street. The land levels change slightly as the building turns the corner in to Mysydd Terrace which leads to a change in roof heights and adds articulation to the front elevation. The materials would be a mix of render and fair face blocks with re-constituted slate for the roof. In terms of the design, the proposal relates well to existing houses and would not appear at odds with the general streetscene and local character. In terms of the design, the application is considered to be acceptable.

There is a secondary entrance to the four flats from the rear of the building adjacent to the 4 car parking spaces provided. A small pathway of a width of 1.2m would be located between the 4 parking spaces and the side wall of No 6 Plough Road. Adjacent to the rear entrance door would be 4 cycle parking spaces and the bin / recycling storage area.

The application does not provide any outdoor amenity space or drying areas due to the restricted size of the site. Although this is not ideal, the applicant has commented that “there is not enough space within the site to provide any meaningful level of communal amenity space. No communal drying area will be provided. Individual condensing dryers will be provided to individual flats”. On balance, given the flats are 1 bedroom and are unlikely to be occupied by families, it is considered that the application is acceptable. Overall, the design and layout of the proposal is considered to be acceptable and complies with the provisions of Policies HC2 and EV1 of the UDP. AREA 1 DEVELOPMENT CONTROL COMMITTEE – 27TH JANUARY 2009

ITEM 4 (CONT’D) APPLICATION NO. 2008/1065

Turning to the impact of the development on existing residential amenity it is noted that the only adjacent property is No 6 Plough Road immediately adjacent to the site. The rear elevation of the proposed building would extend approx 1.5m beyond the rear elevation of No 6. On the upper floor of No 6 is a bedroom window and on the ground floor is a ‘lean- to’ style conservatory. It is considered that the side projecting wall of the new development at length of 1.5m would not cause an undue overbearing impact and would not reduce levels of daylight and sunlight. No windows are proposed within the new development that would overlook No 6 Plough Road.

An objection was received from the occupier on the opposite side of Mysydd Terrace relating to overlooking. The elevation facing Mysydd Terrace would not be located directly opposite existing houses and there is as a highway between the properties. As such it is considered that the proposed building would not cause harm to existing residential amenity, and the application is considered to be acceptable and complies with Policy BE2 of the SLP and HC2 of the UDP.

With regard to highways, the 4 car parking spaces and 4 cycle parking spaces are sufficient for the four flats proposed, and that the new access to the site is acceptable.

With regard to the objections received issues relating to access, parking, overlooking and light have been addressed above. With regard to rubbish bags, the proposal includes a secure and covered bin storage area which is accessible to all 4 flats at the rear. The concerns of the occupiers of No. 6 Plough Street relating to the adjoining of the development to their end of terrace property are not material planning considerations.

In conclusion therefore, having regard to all material considerations, including the Human Rights Act, it is considered that the site is a capable form of residential development that would not detract from the residential amenities of existing residential occupiers and would not harm the visual amenities of the locality and wider streetscene. The application therefore complies with Policies EV1 and HC2 of the Adopted Unitary Development Plan 2008.

RECOMMENDATION

APPROVE, subject to the following condition(s):

1 The development shall be commenced not later than the expiration of 5 years from the date of this planning permission and shall be completed in accordance with the said application plans and conditions prior to any part thereof being brought into beneficial use, unless otherwise agreed in writing by the Local Planning Authority. Reason: To comply with the provisions of Section 91 of the Town and Country Planning Act, 1990 and to ensure that the development is completed in accordance with the plans approved by the City and County of Swansea, and so avoid any detriment to amenity or public safety by works remaining uncompleted.

2 Before the development hereby approved is occupied the means of enclosing the boundaries of the site shall be completed in accordance with details to be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. Reason: In the interests of visual amenity and general amenity.

AREA 1 DEVELOPMENT CONTROL COMMITTEE – 27TH JANUARY 2009

ITEM 4 (CONT’D) APPLICATION NO. 2008/1065

3 Samples of all external finishes shall be submitted to and approved by the Local Planning Authority in writing before the development is commenced. The scheme shall be implemented in accordance with the approved details. Reason: In the interests of visual amenity.

4 The proposed building heights and surface level heights shall be built to the ground levels and heights as shown on the approved plans or lower; unless otherwise agreed in writing by the Local Planning Authority Reason: To define the terms of the permission granted and to safeguard the amenities of adjacent occupiers

5 No development shall take place unless and until a scheme to soundproof the party wall/floor between the dwelling units hereby approved and the party wall between the new building and No 6 Plough Road has been submitted to and approved by the Local Planning Authority and such works that form part of the approved scheme shall be completed before the premises are occupied. Reason: To ensure that each dwelling unit is adequately soundproofed in the interests of the amenity of the residents of the units, and of the neighbouring property.

6 No part of the development hereby approved shall be occupied until the access shown on the deposited plan has been constructed in accordance with Highway Authority Standards and Specifications and the existing access is removed and pavement reinstated in accordance with Highway Authority Standards and Specifications Reason: In the interests of highway safety.

7 The four car parking spaces to serve the proposed flats and the two alternative spaces to serve 317-319 Llangyfelach Road as shown on the approved site plan shall be set out on site prior to the occupation of the flats, and shall be retained for this purpose at all times. Reason: In the interests of highway safety and to define the terms under which permission is granted.

INFORMATIVES 1 The applicant is advised that the development must be carried out in accordance with the approved plans. If, prior to or during the implementation of this permission, any particulars are found to be inaccurate then the Local Planning Authority must be informed and works shall not commence or be continued until the matter has been resolved. Failure to do so could lead to the serving of an enforcement or stop notice.

2 The applicant's attention is drawn to the requirements of the Chronically Sick and Disabled Persons Act 1970, the Disability Discrimination Act, 1995 and to the provisions of Part M of the Building Regulations. The document "Designing an Accessible Environment" provides guidance for developers on designing an accessible environment for disabled persons and is available from the Building Control Section of the Environment and Health Department at the Guildhall, Swansea. AREA 1 DEVELOPMENT CONTROL COMMITTEE – 27TH JANUARY 2009

ITEM 4 (CONT’D) APPLICATION NO. 2008/1065

3 The development plan covering the City & County of Swansea is the Adopted Unitary Development Plan 2008. The following policies were relevant to the consideration of this application : Policies HC2 and EV1.

4 Any waste excavation material or building waste generated in the course of the development must be disposed of satisfactorily and in accordance with Section 34 of the Environmental Protection Act 1990. Carriers transporting waste must be licensed waste carriers.

5 The activity of importing waste into the site for use as, for example hardcore, must re-registered by the Environment Agency Wales as an exempt activity under the Management Licensing Regulations 1994.

6 The developer shall comply with the relevant requirements of the Fire Prevention Officer to Mid and West Wales Fire Brigade, (Sway Road, Morriston), and the Head of Environmental Health Services to the City and County of Swansea.

7 Please note that this consent is specific to the plans and particulars approved as part of the application. Any departure from the approved plans will constitute unauthorised development and may be liable to enforcement action. You (or any subsequent developer) should advise the Council of any actual or proposed variations from the approved plans immediately so that you can be advised how to best resolve the matter.

In addition, any conditions that the Council has imposed on this consent will be listed above and should be read carefully. It is your (or any subsequent developers) responsibility to ensure that the terms of all conditions are met in full at the appropriate time (as outlined in the specific condition).

The commencement of development without firstly meeting in full the terms of any conditions that require the submission of details prior to the commencement of development will constitute unauthorised development. This will necessitate the submission of a further application to retain the unauthorised development and may render you liable to formal enforcement action.

Failure on the part of the developer to observe the requirements of any other conditions could result in the Council pursuing formal enforcement action in the form of a Breach of Condition notice.

8 i. The applicant is requested to contact the Head of Environmental Health Services prior to the commencement of any works on site in order to identify any statutory controls which may be required in relation to the specific works being carried out and the hours of working on the site.

ii. The applicant's attention is drawn to the requirements of the Highways Act not to cause obstruction to the users of the public highway nor to allow soil, and or other materials to be deposited onto the street, and to obtain consent for the storage of building materials on the public highway. The applicant should contact the Director of Technical Services to advise on the requirements of the Act and the penalties for non-compliance.

AREA 1 DEVELOPMENT CONTROL COMMITTEE – 27TH JANUARY 2009

ITEM 4 (CONT’D) APPLICATION NO. 2008/1065

9 To protect the integrity of the Public Sewerage System, foul water and surface water discharges shall be drained separately from the site.

10 To prevent hydraulic overloading of the public sewerage system, to protect the health and safety of existing residents and ensure no detriment to the environment, no surface water shall be allowed to connect (either directly or indirectly) to the public sewerage system unless otherwise approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority.

11 To prevent hydraulic overload of the public sewerage system and pollution of the environment, land drainage run-off shall not be permitted to discharge, either directly or indirectly, into the public sewerage system.

12 The developer is advised to contact Dwr Cymru (Welsh Water) Telephone Swansea 772200 Ext. 2562 with regard to adequacy of water supply and position of water distribution mains in the area.

13 The applicant is advised that the Local Planning Authority has received an enquiry regarding a possible claim to the path adjacent to no. 6 Plough Road as a right of way. This route is not presently a right of way or adopted road. However, if sufficient evidence is forthcoming there is the possibility that it could be registered as right of way. It is council policy to remove obstructions on unregistered public footpaths if they become registered. The applicant is therefore reminded that this consent is issued without prejudice to any other consents or easements that subsequently may be required in connection with the proposed development

14 PARTY WALL ETC ACT 1996 The developer is advised that the provisions of the Party Wall etc. Act 1996 may be applicable to the proposal and is advised to seek appropriate advice prior to any work commencing on site.

PLANS

Site location plan received 19th May 2008. Amended plan BBA 389.P.01D - plans/elevations received 6th October 2008. Additional site layout plan received 5th November 2008.

AREA 1 DEVELOPMENT CONTROL COMMITTEE – 27TH JANUARY 2009

ITEM 5 APPLICATION NO. 2007/1261 WARD: Area 1 Landore

Location: Site of former 22 Trewyddfa Road, Plasmarl, Swansea Proposal: Three terraced houses with associated parking Applicant: cAnton Developments Ltd

BACKGROUND INFORMATION

The application was DEFERRED at the Committee on the 7th October 2008 to further investigate the lawful curtilage of the former bungalow on the site, as the rear portion of the application site extended into land designated as part of the urban greenspace system.

Following discussions with the agent, amended plans have been received showing the correct site boundary which no longer extends into the greenspace system, and reflects the original curtilage of the former bungalow accurately. It is considered that the reduced site remains capable of accommodating the proposal houses and approval is recommended. a. Relevant Planning Policies

City & County of Swansea Unitary Development Plan 2008.

Policy EV1 New development shall accord with a defined set of criteria of good design.

Policy EV2 The siting of new development shall give preference to the use of previously developed land and have regard to the physical character and topography of the site and its surroundings.

Policy HC2 Proposals for housing development within the urban area will be supported where the site has previously been developed or is not covered by conflicting plan policies or proposals and provided the proposed development does not result in any of the criteria set out in the policy. b. Relevant Planning History

There is no relevant planning history for this site c. Response to Consultations

Four neighbouring properties were consulted and the application was advertised on site. TWO OBJECTIONS have been received and the comments raised are:

• Access for maintenance – I need to maintain the side elevation of my house – what will be my rights of access • Drainage – the previous building was a small bungalow – will the existing drains be adequate for 3 houses AREA 1 DEVELOPMENT CONTROL COMMITTEE – 27TH JANUARY 2009

ITEM 5 (CONT’D) APPLICATION NO. 2007/1261

• Privacy – the three houses are pushed further into the site – the windows on the upper floors will overlook our garden invading our privacy • Parking – Trewyddfa Rd is very busy and the addition of more cars seeking access on the main road which is already congested • Rear Gardens - I believe the boundary of the land belonging to no. 22 is bounded by a plantation of trees planted by the local authority. The plans indicate the boundary of the application to encroach on this plantation. • At the side of my house I have a hard standing and land. The boundary was marked by a hedge that has existed since 1973/4. The applicant has demolished the hedge so the boundary line is now undefined. I am concerned that they are going to try and use some of my land for their development and I want my concerns to be conveyed to the developer prior to work starting.

Highways The proposal is for three terraces houses with associated parking. The proposed parking is satisfactory according to our adopted parking guidelines, and there are sufficient access points to each parking area. I recommend no highway objections subject to the construction of a vehicular crossing at each access point to Highway Authority Specifications.

Amended Plans – no additional comments to add.

APPRAISAL

This application is reported to Committee for decision at the request of Councillor Rob Speht.

The application is for the construction of 3 terraced houses on a plot of land which formerly contained a detached bungalow

The site has an area of 528sq.m and spans the site of the former 22 Trewyddfa Road, which was a detached bungalow and has now been demolished. The site is bounded to the north-east by a pair of semi-detached houses (nos 24 & 26) and to the south-west by a terrace of 2 storey houses (nos. 12-18). To the rear of the site is open / landscaped land which is part of the designated urban greenspace system.

The three houses proposed are modest two storey terraced houses with 3 bedrooms (including the loft space). Each house would have two parking spaces.

The main issues for consideration are the suitability of the site for residential development, the impact on visual amenity and the impact on residential amenity with regard to Policies EV1, EV2 and HC2 of the Unitary Development Plan. There are no overriding issues for consideration under the provision of the Human Rights Act.

In terms of the UDP policy HC2 relating to infill sites, the site is suitable for residential development, and the siting, number, design, parking and amenity issues are considered to be acceptable (as discussed below). AREA 1 DEVELOPMENT CONTROL COMMITTEE – 27TH JANUARY 2009

ITEM 5 (CONT’D) APPLICATION NO. 2007/1261

The three terraced houses are proposed to be 2 storey with a bedroom in the roof space. Each house would therefore have a roof light within the front roof slope. Initially, the design and position of the houses raised concerns, and following meetings with officers and the agent, amended plans have been received. It is considered that although the design is modern, elements from traditional terraces have been included, such as a first floor projecting window and a vertical emphasis to the fenestration.

Trewyddfa Road contains a mix of house styles and more modern houses have been allowed over time. To the south of the site are a terrace of traditional 3 two storey houses, whilst to the north are a pair of traditional semi-detached houses. These existing houses are located at the back of the pavement with no set back from the road.

Although concern was initially raised regarding the set back of the 3 houses in term of the impact on the street scene, it is noted however that the previous building on the site was a detached bungalow set well back from the road. The set back for the 3 new houses is necessary to incorporate front gardens and parking area. The provision of the front gardens will ensure a level of privacy for the ground floor front rooms, and as the small terrace is not to be attached to either neighbouring properties, the terrace will read as a development in its own right, set back from the road. The existing side elevation of No 18 is a blank elevation which extends a considerable distance rearward, presenting a blank elevation to the view from the street. The proposed 3 new houses will partially obscure this ‘hard’ elevation, and it is considered that given the quality of design, the 3 new houses will fit comfortably within the varied streetscene.

Following the revised site boundary, which now accurately reflects the boundary of the former bungalow, the rear gardens of the 3 houses has been reduced. However, the size of the proposed rear gardens are considered to be of a adequate size for each house, and measure 68sq.m for house one, 45sq.m for house two and 90sq.m for house three

It is therefore considered that the 3 terraced houses are acceptable in terms of their design and would not introduce a discordant feature within the street scene.

The neighbour at No 18 has no windows within the side elevation facing the application site. The rear elevation of the 3 new houses is at the same level as the rear elevation of the projection at the rear of No 18. As such, no loss of privacy, light or overbearing impacts would be caused to the occupier of No 18. In this regard the application is considered to be acceptable.

With regard to No 24, this house also has a main side elevation which has no windows. However, the rear 2 storey projection of no 24 does have habitable room window within its side elevation, which would be located at a distance of 10m from the side elevation of the proposed houses. As such 45 degree rule was applied and the proposed development does not breach this rule. As such it is considered that no loss of light would occur to No 24. In terms of an overbearing impact, the site of No 24 splays away from the application site and although the side elevation of the new houses will be visible, it is considered that no significant overbearing impact would be caused. This situation is also helped in that No 24 is at a slightly higher level than the application site due to the slope of the land. AREA 1 DEVELOPMENT CONTROL COMMITTEE – 27TH JANUARY 2009

ITEM 5 (CONT’D) APPLICATION NO. 2007/1261

There are two windows proposed in the side elevation of the end of terrace house adjacent to No 24. The ground floor window is a secondary window to the kitchen / dining room and it is considered that it would not cause any undue overlooking to No 24 as it would face the boundary fence between the two properties, and also is set at a slightly lower level than No 24. The first floor side window is to a bathroom which will incorporate obscure glazing. As such it is considered that the new houses would not cause any undue overlooking of No 24.

There are also the same window configuration facing No 18, however this is a blank elevation and therefore no overlooking would occur.

In terms of the amenity for the future occupiers of the houses, the layout of the rooms is considered to be acceptable and would allow for natural light and ventilation to all rooms. Each house would retain a rear garden are allowing sufficient amenity space.

Overall it is considered that the proposed houses are acceptable and would not cause harm to the residential amenity of the neighbouring houses. As such the application is considered to comply with Policies EV1, EV2 and HC2 of the UDP.

The highways officer has commented that the parking provision complies with the parking standards and that there are sufficient access points to each parking area. As such no highway objections are raised.

In response to the objections raised, issues regarding privacy / overlooking and parking have been addressed above. With regard to drainage, the standard Welsh Water informatives will be added. With regard to maintenance of the side wall, this situation remains unchanged, as there is sufficient distance between the new houses and the side wall of No 18 to allow for maintenance providing permission from the land owner is given. With regard to boundaries, this issue is a civil matter between the land owners.

In Conclusion, and having regard to all material planning considerations, including the provisions of the Human Rights Act, the application is considered to be acceptable in terms of its design and location and would not harmfully impact on residential amenity and is considered to comply with Policies EV1, EV2 and HC2 of the UDP 2008.

RECOMMENDATION

APPROVE, subject to the following conditions:

1 The development shall be commenced not later than the expiration of 5 years from the date of this planning permission and shall be completed in accordance with the said application plans and conditions prior to any part thereof being brought into beneficial use, unless otherwise agreed in writing by the Local Planning Authority. Reason: To comply with the provisions of Section 91 of the Town and Country Planning Act, 1990 and to ensure that the development is completed in accordance with the plans approved by the City and County of Swansea, and so avoid any detriment to amenity or public safety by works remaining uncompleted.

AREA 1 DEVELOPMENT CONTROL COMMITTEE – 27TH JANUARY 2009

ITEM 5 (CONT’D) APPLICATION NO. 2007/1261

2 Following the implementation of this permission, 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 buildings, extensions, windows, dormers or alterations permitted by Classes A, B, C, D, E & F of Part 1 of the Second Schedule of the 1995 Order shall be carried out without the prior written approval of the Local Planning Authority Reason: To safeguard the character and amenities of the premises and adjoining properties

3 Before the development hereby approved is occupied the means of enclosing the boundaries of the site and individual curtilages of all dwellings shall be completed in accordance with details to be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. Reason: In the interests of visual amenity and general amenity.

4 Samples of all external finishes shall be submitted to and approved by the Local Planning Authority in writing before the development is commenced. The scheme shall be implemented in accordance with the approved details. Reason: In the interests of visual amenity.

5 The first floor windows in the side elevation facing No 24 Trewyddfa Rd, shall be obscure glazed, and unopenable except for a fan light and shall be retained as such unless otherwise agreed in writing with the Local Planning Authority. Reason: To safeguard the privacy of the occupiers of neighbouring residential properties.

6 No part of the development hereby approved shall be occupied until the access shown on the deposited plan has been constructed in accordance with details to be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. Reason: In the interests of highway safety.

INFORMATIVES 1 The applicant is advised that the development must be carried out in accordance with the approved plans. If, prior to or during the implementation of this permission, any particulars are found to be inaccurate then the Local Planning Authority must be informed and works shall not commence or be continued until the matter has been resolved. Failure to do so could lead to the serving of an enforcement or stop notice.

2 It is an offence under the Wildlife & Countryside Act 1981 (as amended) to intentionally (intentionally or recklessly for Schedule 1 birds) to: - Kill, injure or take any wild bird - Take, damage or destroy the nest of any wild bird while that nest in use or being built - Take or destroy an egg of any wild bird You are advised that any clearance of trees, shrubs, scrub (including gorse and bramble) or empty buildings should not be undertaken during the bird nesting season, 1st March - 31st August and that such action may result in an offence being committed. AREA 1 DEVELOPMENT CONTROL COMMITTEE – 27TH JANUARY 2009

ITEM 5 (CONT’D) APPLICATION NO. 2007/1261

3 This consent is issued without prejudice to any other consents or easements that may be required in connection with the proposed development.

4 The development plan covering the City & County of Swansea is the West Glamorgan Structure Plan (Review No. 2), the Swansea Local Plan (Review No.1) and the emerging Unitary Development Plan 2008. The following policies were relevant to the consideration of this application : Policies NE2, H2, BE1 and BE2 (SLP) and Policies HC2 and EV24 (UDP)

5 Site operators should ensure that there is no possibility of contaminated water entering and polluting surface or underground waters.

6 Any waste excavation material or building waste generated in the course of the development must be disposed of satisfactorily and in accordance with Section 34 of the Environmental Protection Act 1990. Carriers transporting waste must be licensed waste carriers.

7 The activity of importing waste into the site for use as, for example hardcore, must re-registered by the Environment Agency Wales as an exempt activity under the Management Licensing Regulations 1994.

8 The developer shall comply with the relevant requirements of the Fire Prevention Officer to Mid and West Wales Fire Brigade, (Sway Road, Morriston), and the Head of Environmental Health Services to the City and County of Swansea.

9 Underground mining operations have been carried out beneath this site and the developer is advised to seek appropriate technical advice in order to decide what precautions if any, need to be taken to reduce the risk of damage from subsidence. If as a consequence of this technical advice, the developer wishes to carry out exploratory works to coal seams or to old coal workings upon this site, then his proposals should be forwarded to the Coal Authority for its written approval, prior to their execution. It is suggested that the developers discuss the proposals with the Authority's Building Control Officers prior to submitting an application under the Building Regulations.

10 Please note that this consent is specific to the plans and particulars approved as part of the application. Any departure from the approved plans will constitute unauthorised development and may be liable to enforcement action. You (or any subsequent developer) should advise the Council of any actual or proposed variations from the approved plans immediately so that you can be advised how to best resolve the matter. In addition, any conditions that the Council has imposed on this consent will be listed above and should be read carefully. It is your (or any subsequent developers) responsibility to ensure that the terms of all conditions are met in full at the appropriate time (as outlined in the specific condition). The commencement of development without firstly meeting in full the terms of any conditions that require the submission of details prior to the commencement of development will constitute unauthorised development. This will necessitate the submission of a further application to retain the unauthorised development and may render you liable to formal enforcement action.

AREA 1 DEVELOPMENT CONTROL COMMITTEE – 27TH JANUARY 2009

ITEM 5 (CONT’D) APPLICATION NO. 2007/1261

Failure on the part of the developer to observe the requirements of any other conditions could result in the Council pursuing formal enforcement action in the form of a Breach of Condition notice.

11 i. The applicant is requested to contact the Head of Environmental Health Services prior to the commencement of any works on site in order to identify any statutory controls which may be required in relation to the specific works being carried out and the hours of working on the site.

ii. The applicant's attention is drawn to the requirements of the Highways Act not to cause obstruction to the users of the public highway nor to allow soil, and or other materials to be deposited onto the street, and to obtain consent for the storage of building materials on the public highway. The applicant should contact the Director of Technical Services to advise on the requirements of the Act and the penalties for non-compliance.

12 The developer is advised to contact Dwr Cymru (Welsh Water) Telephone Swansea 772200 Ext. 2562 with regard to adequacy of water supply and position of water distribution mains in the area.

13 To protect the integrity of the Public Sewerage System, foul water and surface water discharges shall be drained separately from the site.

14 To prevent hydraulic overloading of the public sewerage system, to protect the health and safety of existing residents and ensure no detriment to the environment, no surface water shall be allowed to connect (either directly or indirectly) to the public sewerage system unless otherwise approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority.

15 To prevent hydraulic overload of the public sewerage system and pollution of the environment, land drainage run-off shall not be permitted to discharge, either directly or indirectly, into the public sewerage system.

PLANS

Amended plans 0727-04A, 0727-05A received 9th May 2008. Amended plans 0727-01/A, 0727-02/A, 0727-03B, 0727-06A received 13th November, 2008

AREA 1 DEVELOPMENT CONTROL COMMITTEE – 27TH JANUARY 2009

ITEM 6 APPLICATION NO. 2007/2735 WARD: Area 1 Pontarddulais

Location: Land at rear of 40 Alltiago Road, Pontarddulais, Swansea Proposal: Retention of detached dwelling and new access way serving 40 Alltiago Road Applicant: Mr N Madden

BACKGROUND INFORMATION

POLICIES

Policy Policy Description Policy EV1 New development shall accord with a defined set of criteria of good design. (City & County of Swansea Unitary Development Plan (2008)).

Policy EV2 The siting of new development shall give preference to the use of previously developed land and have regard to the physical character and topography of the site and its surroundings. (City & County of Swansea Unitary Development Plan (2008)).

Policy HC2 Housing development within the urban area will be supported where the site has been previously developed, its development does not conflict with other policies, does not result in ribbon development, and the coalescence of settlements, overintensive development, loss of residential amenity, adverse effect on the character and appearance of the area, loss of urban green space, harm to highway safety, adverse effects to landscape, natural heritage, security and personal safety, infrastructure capacity, and the overloading of community facilities and services. (City & County of Swansea Unitary Development Plan 2008)

SITE HISTORY

App No. Proposal 97/1546 ERECTION OF A DETACHED DWELLING (OUTLINE) Decision: *HGPC - GRANT PERMISSION CONDITIONAL Decision Date: 16/02/1998

A00/1809 Erection of a detached dwelling house (Outline) Decision: Grant Permission Conditional Decision Date: 07/02/2002

2003/1356 Construction of one detached dwelling (outline) Decision: Withdrawn Decision Date: 03/02/2004

AREA 1 DEVELOPMENT CONTROL COMMITTEE – 27TH JANUARY 2009

ITEM 6 (CONT’D) APPLICATION NO. 2007/2735

2003/2456 Construction of one detached dormer bungalow with attached garage Decision: Grant Permission Conditional Decision Date: 28/01/2004

RESPONSE TO CONSULTATIONS

ORIGINAL PROPOSAL

The application was advertised on site and three properties were individually consulted. TWO LETTERS OF OBJECTION were received which can be summarised as follows:

• The building is large and imposing and has destroyed the privacy and enjoyment of the neighbouring outdoor amenity space at No. 38 Alltiago Road. • The owner has damaged the public footpath and created a driveway to No. 40 Alltiago Road. • Why weren’t neighbours written to in relation to the planning application?

One letter of comment was also received stating that the site notice had been removed.

AMENDED PLANS

The application was advertised on site and four properties were individually consulted. TWO LETTERS OF OBJECTION were received including one from Pontarddulais Town Council. The objections can be summarised as follows:

• The applicant has made no provision for the parking of two commercial vehicles which are parked on the pavement outside neighbouring properties which can force pedestrians onto the street and obstructs the Council’s street cleaning vehicles. • The developer has a number of vehicles and the development will not be able to accommodate further vehicles. • The applicant has to reverse onto the footpath leading from Twyniago to Alltiago Road which is used my families and children. • The ditch carrying surface water from Twyniago has been blocked by the applicant.

A PETITION OF SUPPORT has also been submitted by the applicant containing 71 signatures of people who support the application and consider the dwelling to be well built and a credit to builder and the locality.

Highway Observations

The site has previously had consent for a bungalow with associated parking but the dwelling has not been built in accordance with the approved plans thus this application is required.

The application is for a detached dwelling and new access way. The access way serves the parking area of the house to the rear of the proposed house (belonging to number 40 Alltiago Road).

Access to the proposed house is directly off Twyniago Road and provides 2 formal parking spaces and adequate turning to enable access/egress in a forward gear. There is also room within the plot to achieve additional parking provision. AREA 1 DEVELOPMENT CONTROL COMMITTEE – 27TH JANUARY 2009

ITEM 6 (CONT’D) APPLICATION NO. 2007/2735

The amended plans detail a 4m wide access and 1.8m footway which is adequate to serve a single dwelling. The footway has been provided in negotiation with Highways as the access route runs along a public right of way which is used by children to get to school.

I recommend that no highway objections are raised to the proposal subject to:

1. The footway being provided at the applicant’s expense to Highway Authority Standards and Specification. 2. The parking area being laid out in accordance with the approved plans prior to beneficial occupation.

APPRAISAL

The application is reported to Committee for decision at the request of Councillor John Miles.

The application seeks planning permission for the retention of a detached dwelling on land to the rear of 40 Alltiago Road and new access way serving 40 Alltiago Road. The application was submitted following a site visit from the planning enforcement team who were alerted to the site following a complaint that the dwelling was not being built in accordance with the approved plans. The applicant was advised that any further works would be unlawful and undertaken at his own risk. The dwelling is now substantially completed.

The application site is a broadly rectangular parcel of land that is accessed off Twyniago, the site measures 17 metres in width and 25 metres in depth. The site is defined to the north by a footpath (which is included within the application site) leading from Twyniago down to Alltiago Road. The site is bordered to the north by an area of open land that is currently the subject of a planning application for 3 bungalows (2007/0988). To the east of the site is a single storey garage at the head of Twyniago. To the south of the site is the side boundary of No. 38 Alltiago Road and to the west of the site is the rear boundary of No. 40 Alltiago Road which is located at a lower land level.

The principle of this rear garden land being suitable for residential development has been established under previous outline application approved in 1998 (97/1546). More recently full planning permission was granted in 2004 for the ‘Construction of one detached dormer bungalow with attached garage’ (2003/2456).

The 1998 outline permission contained a condition to restrict the dwelling to single storey only. The siting, scale and design of the dormer bungalow scheme approved under the 2004 permission was the subject of pre-application meetings with the Department’s planning officers and urban designer. The officer’s report for this application noted that the design would complement the character and form of development along Twyniago and would enhance the street scene by providing an attractive focal building at the end of the cul-de-sac. The report further noted that that the dwelling was sensitively designed to ensure no detrimental harm to the amenities of neighbouring dwellings to the rear along Alltiago Road and existing and proposed dwellings along Twyniago. AREA 1 DEVELOPMENT CONTROL COMMITTEE – 27TH JANUARY 2009

ITEM 6 (CONT’D) APPLICATION NO. 2007/2735

The dwelling that has been built on the plot has been completely re-designed from that previously approved, furthermore the applicant (who lives at No. 40 Alltiago Road) is now utilising the existing footpath to the north of the plot as a vehicular access point leading to the rear of the dwelling, as such this application is for the retention of the dwelling and the use of the access way to No. 40. It should be noted that the applicant has served the relevant notice on the owner of the access way.

The main considerations with regards to this application are the acceptability of the submitted details having regard to Policies EV1, EV2 and HC2 of the emerging Unitary Development Plan (Post Inquiry Modifications).

Policy EV1 (Design) states that new development shall accord with good design objectives and EV2 (Siting) states that preference should be given to the use of previously developed land over green field sites. Furthermore HC2 (Urban Infill Housing) supports housing development within urban areas provided the development does not result in: over intensive development, significant loss of residential amenity, a significant adverse impact affect on the character and appearance of the area, the loss of important greenspace and significant harm to highway safety. Furthermore developments should not have significant adverse affects in relation to: Landscape, natural heritage, security and personal safety, infrastructure capacity and overloading of available community facilities and services.

Visual Amenity The surrounding area is characterised by a range of types of dwellings, with bungalows on the north side of the road and two storey detached and terraced properties on the south side of the road. The dwelling occupies a prominent location at the head of Twyniago, and is therefore a focal building when heading west along the road. The application site is also prominently sited within the surrounding area and is located at the top of a steeply sloping bank that is visible from the surrounding streets below.

The dwelling is essentially a two storey structure to the front and rear with expanses of low sloping roof to the side elevations. The north side elevation includes a low glazed first floor gable serving a siting room, whereas the south side elevation includes a dormer window that serves a hall way. The front elevation faces down Twyniago and comprises of a recessed front entrance with a projecting hipped roof element. The rear elevation is similar in design terms with a recessed façade. Two parking spaces are indicated to the front of the dwelling.

The dwelling has a stone finish with cream heads, cills and quoins. The roof is natural slate and the windows and doors are woodgrain upvc.

In terms of the footprint of the dwelling, this is not significantly different to that approved under the 2004 permission, however the upstairs living accommodation has significantly increased. The previous permission included two bedrooms at ground floor level and a further two bedrooms and bathroom in the upper floor, which had a floor area of approximately 44 sqm. The submitted dwelling includes four upstairs bedrooms (two served with en suites) together with a sizable sitting room. The total upstairs floor area matches that of the ground floor (approximately 133 sqm) therefore the first floor accommodation has significantly increased over and above the previous approval. AREA 1 DEVELOPMENT CONTROL COMMITTEE – 27TH JANUARY 2009

ITEM 6 (CONT’D) APPLICATION NO. 2007/2735

The increase in the upstairs living space has resulted in a significant increase in the bulk and mass of the dwelling, for example the ridge height has increased from 6.1 metres for the approved dwelling to 8 metres for the submitted dwelling. To the front of the dwelling facing onto Twyniago this is not considered to have a significant adverse impact on the street scene given the mix of bungalows and two storey dwellings in the immediate vicinity. However, the increase in the height and size of the dwelling together with its highly prominent and elevated location has resulted in a built form that dominates the skyline when looking south towards the application site, the proposal therefore fails to effectively integrate with the surrounding landscape. Whilst the approved dwelling would also have been visible from lower ground to the north, its low ridge line would have reduced its prominence from surrounding views and would therefore have integrated successfully with it surroundings.

Turning to the land adjoining the application site, this area, which slopes steeply down to Alltiago Road has previously benefited from full planning permission for 11 dwellings including 3 bungalows directly opposite the application site served off a shared drive (98/1036 refers). This application has now expired however, there is currently an application (2007/0988 refers) on the upper part of the site for 3 detached bungalows which include bedroom accommodation in the roof space and an application for 5 detached dwellings on the lower part of the site (2008/1969 refers) which is a renewal of a previous permission (2003/1784 refers). If approved the application at the top of the site for 3 bungalows would reduce the prominence of the application dwelling when viewed from lower ground to the north, however given the skyline location and excessive height of the dwelling compared to the modest bungalow previously approved, it is not considered that the proposal is appropriate to its local context and it does not effectively integrate with the landscape. The proposal therefore has a detrimental impact on the visual amenities of the surrounding area contrary to Policies EV1, EV2 and HC2 of the City and County of Swansea Unitary Development Plan.

Residential Amenity The proposed dwelling is sited on a broadly similar footprint to the approved dwelling, which was designed to ensure a satisfactory separation distance of over 11 metres from the first floor bedroom window to the rear boundary of No. 40 Alltiago Road.

In contrast the design of the dwelling to be retained has resulted in a two storey rear elevation which has two bedroom windows that would overlook the rear garden of No. 40 at a distance of less that 10 metres. At its closest the window of bedroom 2 would be some 8 metres from the rear boundary of No. 40, the window of bedroom 1 would be some 9 metres from this rear boundary. Furthermore an insufficient distance of approximately 10 metres is maintained from the application dwelling to the windowed rear wing of No. 40 resulting in unacceptable overlooking between windowed elevations. This close relationship is further compounded by the application site being at a higher level than No. 40 as such the perception of being overlooked is increased. It is noted that the occupier of No. 40 are using the area closest to the boundary with the application site as a parking area, notwithstanding this it is considered that the close proximity of the rear elevation windows would result in a significant adverse overlooking impact upon this dwelling to the detriment of the residential amenities of the occupiers. Given the height and proximity of the dwelling in relation to No. 40, it is not considered that boundary screening would satisfactorily address the above concerns. AREA 1 DEVELOPMENT CONTROL COMMITTEE – 27TH JANUARY 2009

ITEM 6 (CONT’D) APPLICATION NO. 2007/2735

Turning to the impact on No. 38, the approved dwelling was located some 3 metres from the side boundary of this dwelling, this distance has now decreased to 2.5 metres for the dwelling to be retained. The boundary with this dwelling is defined by a hedge which is over 2.5 metres in height.

The design to the south facing side elevation has also significantly altered from the previous approval. The eaves height has increased by 1 metre and the maximum ridge height has increased by 2 metres. Furthermore the mass of the proposal closest to the dwelling at No 38 has increased from single storey to two storey in height. Under the approved scheme the ridge of the roof would have been no higher than the roof of the dormer that has been added on the south facing elevation, furthermore the roof line of the approved scheme sloped away from the rear elevation of No. 38. As such the mass of the building near to the boundary with No. 38 was significantly less under the approved scheme.

By using the height of the dormer roof as a means of comparing the roof heights between the approved scheme and the dwelling to be retained it is evident that the increased height and massing of the dwelling in close proximity to the boundary with No. 38 has a significant adverse overbearing impact when viewed from the rear garden of this dwelling which results in an increased sense of enclosure. In their letter of objection the occupiers of this dwelling refer to the imposing size of the building and it is notable that a wooden outbuilding has recently been erected on the hardstanding of this garden which faces away from the application site which would suggest that the occupiers of No. 38 no longer feel comfortable using this portion of the garden as an open amenity area. In light of the above it is considered that the dwelling by virtue of its height and proximity to the boundary with No. 38 would have a detrimental overbearing impact that would significantly limit the enjoyment of the garden by the occupiers of this dwelling.

With regards to the overlooking impacts the dormer window serving a stairwell directly overlooks the garden of No. 38. As the window does not serve a habitable room this could be fixed with obscure glazing, however this would not address the perception of overlooking that would result from a glazed opening of this size and height in such close proximity to the garden. Added to this is the proximity of the bedroom window in the rear elevation that would have a field of view towards the front of the rear garden of No. 38. Cumulatively it is considered that the dormer window and the proximity of the bedroom window would significantly reduce the privacy enjoyed by the occupiers of No 38 when in the garden and would be significantly harmful to their living conditions.

The front elevation of the dwelling faces east as such there would be no significant overshadowing impacts upon neighbouring dwellings.

In summary it is considered that the proposal has a significant adverse overlooking impact upon No. 40 Alltiago Road and a significant adverse overlooking and overbearing impact upon No. 38 Alltiago Road to the detriment of the residential amenities of the occupiers of these dwellings contrary to polices EV1 and HC2 of the City and County of Swansea Unitary Development Plan. AREA 1 DEVELOPMENT CONTROL COMMITTEE – 27TH JANUARY 2009

ITEM 6 (CONT’D) APPLICATION NO. 2007/2735

Access and Highways With regards to highways concerns, letters of objection have been received relating to the provision of the vehicular access leading from Twyniago to No. 40 Alltiago Road, which may compromise pedestrian safety. The applicant has served notice on the owner of this land and has indicated the provision of a 1.8 metre footpath adjoining the vehicular access that would join the adopted footway on Twyniago.

Concerns have also been raised relating generally to the number of vehicles owned by the applicant and where they are parked, which causes obstruction and inconvenience to the surrounding properties. The number of vehicles owned by the applicant and where he chooses to park them is not a material planning consideration that would affect the determination of this application. It should be noted that two formal parking spaces would be provided within the development and there is also room within the plot for additional parking provision. As such there is satisfactory parking within the plot.

In light of the above and subject to conditions relating to the footpath and the formation of the parking area, the proposal is considered to be acceptable in terms of access and highways.

Other matters Concerns have been raised that the applicant has blocked a ditch that drains surface water from Twyniago. This is not a material planning consideration that would affect the determination of this application.

Conclusion In conclusion and having regard to all material planning considerations including the provisions of the Human Rights Act it is considered that the proposal would result in significant harm to the visual amenities of the area and would have a significant adverse impact on the living conditions of the occupiers of neighbouring dwellings. The proposal is therefore contrary to policies EV1, EV2 and HC2 of the City and County of Swansea Unitary Development Plan. The application is therefore recommended for refusal.

RECOMMENDATION:

REFUSE, for the following reasons:

1 The application dwelling, by virtue of its size, design and siting in close proximity to neighbouring dwellings has a significant adverse overlooking impact upon No. 40 Alltiago Road and a significant adverse overbearing and overlooking impact upon No. 38 Alltiago Road to the detriment of the living conditions of the occupiers of these dwellings contrary to Policies EV1 and HC2 of the City and County of Swansea Unitary Development Plan 2008.

2 The proposal, by virtue of its excessive size together with its siting in a prominent and elevated location results in an incongruous development that fails to assimilate with the landscape and dominates the skyline to the detriment of the visual amenities of the locality, contrary to policies EV1, EV2 and HC2 of the City and County of Swansea Unitary Development Plan.

AREA 1 DEVELOPMENT CONTROL COMMITTEE – 27TH JANUARY 2009

ITEM 6 (CONT’D) APPLICATION NO. 2007/2735

INFORMATIVES

1 The development plan covering the City and County of Swansea is the City and County of Swansea Unitary Development Plan. The following policies were relevant to the consideration of the application: HC2, EV1 and EV2.

PLANS

Site location plan received 13th December 2007. Amended proposed elevations and floor plans received 29th May 2008 and amended block plan received 7th August 2008

AREA 1 DEVELOPMENT CONTROL COMMITTEE – 27TH JANUARY 2009

ITEM 7 APPLICATION NO. 2007/2882 WARD: Area 1 Castle

Location: Swansea Marriot Hotel - Maritime Quarter Swansea SA1 3SS Proposal: Retention of two storage containers for a temporary period of two years Applicant: Marriott Hotel

BACKGROUND INFORMATION

POLICIES

Policy Policy Description Policy EV1 New development shall accord with a defined set of criteria of good design. (City & County of Swansea Unitary Development Plan (2008)).

SITE HISTORY

App No. Proposal 2005/0803 Retention of two portacabins and two storage containers for a temporary period of two years (part renewal of temporary planning permission 2003/0499 granted on 24th April 2003) Decision: Grant Temporary Permission Decision Date: 31/08/2005

A00/0903 SINGLE STOREY EXTENSION TO SOUTH EAST ELEVATION TO PROVIDE ADDITIONAL KITCHEN, RESTAURANT AND NEW GYMNASIUM Decision: *HGPC - GRANT PERMISSION CONDITIONAL Decision Date: 08/08/2000

2003/0499 Replacement portacabin and two storage containers for a temporary period of two years Decision: Grant Temporary Permission Decision Date: 24/04/2003

83/0878/03 CONSTUCTION OF A LUXURY HOTEL INCLUDING BARS DINING FACILITIES ETC + A 1000 SEAT CONFERENCE/EXHIBITION HALL HOTEL TO HAVE 150 B/ROOMS Decision: *HGPC - GRANT PERMISSION CONDITIONAL Decision Date: 28/07/1983

2003/1584 Erection of pump house and water tank south of existing car park Decision: Grant Permission Conditional Decision Date: 12/09/2003

AREA 1 DEVELOPMENT CONTROL COMMITTEE – 27TH JANUARY 2009

ITEM 7 (CONT’D) APPLICATION NO. 2007/2882

87/0733/03 CONSTRUCTION OF A NEW HOTEL Decision: Withdraw Decision Date: 02/08/2001 14:31:49

86/0670/03 NEW HOTEL. Decision: *HGPC - GRANT PERMISSION CONDITIONAL Decision Date: 28/08/1986

91/0311 SINGLE STOREY EXTENSION Decision: *HGPC - GRANT PERMISSION CONDITIONAL Decision Date: 30/04/1991

2007/1609 Smoking shelter Decision: Grant Permission Conditional Decision Date: 15/01/2008

95/0491 SINGLE STOREY FRONT EXTENSION AND ALTERATIONS TO EXISTING ENTRANCE Decision: *HGPC - GRANT PERMISSION CONDITIONAL Decision Date: 14/06/1995

93/0324 OUTLINE APPLICATION FOR A MIXED USE DEVELOPMENT IN ACCORDANCE WITH CLASS C1 (HOTELS/HOSTELS) AND CLASS C3 (DWELLING HOUSES) (COUNCIL DEVELOPMENT REGULATION 4) Decision: *HGPC - GRANT PERMISSION CONDITIONAL Decision Date: 14/07/1993

98/0606 SINGLE STOREY REAR EXTENSION INCORPORATING STAFF CANTEEN AND STORAGE/OFFICE ACCOMMODATION Decision: *HGPC - GRANT PERMISSION CONDITIONAL Decision Date: 21/07/1998

2008/2026 Smoking shelter Decision: Grant Permission Conditional Decision Date: 19/12/2008

RESPONSE TO CONSULTATIONS

The proposal was advertised on site – No response.

APPRAISAL

This application was called to committee for decision at the request of Councillor David Phillips. AREA 1 DEVELOPMENT CONTROL COMMITTEE – 27TH JANUARY 2009

ITEM 7 (CONT’D) APPLICATION NO. 2007/2882

Temporary planning permission is sought for the retention of two storage containers on land within the curtilage of the Marriott Hotel, maritime Quarter, Swansea. Each storage container is constructed out of steel and is fitted with a flat roof, with double doors to one side. One of the containers measures approx. 3.6m in length by 3m in width and rise to a height of approx 2.4m. The second storage container measures approx. 2.7m in width by 4m in length and extends to a height of 2.4m

A previous application (ref: 2005/0803) sought temporary consent for two portacabins and two storage containers which was subsequently approved. The temporary consent has now expired. The portacabins have been removed, however the storage containers remain in situ and now require a further temporary consent.

The main issues for consideration with regard to this application are associated with the need for such temporary structures and the impact upon visual amenity.

Policy EV1 of the Unitary Development Plan requires that new development displays a standard of design and layout sympathetic to the character and amenity of the site, its immediate surroundings and the broader area, and which have proper regard to the amenities of the surrounding areas in particular in terms of visual impact, loss of light or privacy, shared activity, traffic and parking implications.

In relation to the impact upon visual amenity, the storage containers are located within the service yard, and as such are shielded from view by the existing hotel, the means of enclosure around the service yard and a landscaping belt which separates the service yard from the foreshore. The structures are not therefore visually prominent and do not have a significant adverse impact upon the character and appearance of the surrounding area.

With regard to residential amenity, no issues were raised when the previous application was assessed. However, several large residential tower blocks have been constructed on land adjacent to the application site since the last consent. However, the storage containers would be largely screened from view and it is not therefore considered they would have a significant adverse impact on future occupiers of these units.

In terms of highway safety, there are no highway safety implications as a result of this application.

In conclusion therefore and in view of the above, it is considered that the retention of the two storage containers for a temporary period of two years would not unacceptably conflict with the requirements of Policy EV1 of the City and County of Swansea Unitary Development Plan and accordingly approval is recommended.

RECOMMENDATION APPROVE, subject to the following condition: 1 Notwithstanding the provisions of Section 91 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 and the Town and Country Planning (General Permitted Development) Order 1995, this permission is for a limited period of 24 months only, expiring on 27th January 2011 when the use shall cease and any works carried out under this permission shall be removed and the land reinstated in accordance with a scheme to be agreed in writing with the Local Planning Authority. Reason: To permit reconsideration in the light of circumstances then prevailing. AREA 1 DEVELOPMENT CONTROL COMMITTEE – 27TH JANUARY 2009

ITEM 7 (CONT’D) APPLICATION NO. 2007/2882

INFORMATIVES

1 This consent is issued without prejudice to any other consents or easements that may be required in connection with the proposed development.

2 The development plan covering the City and County of Swansea is the City and County of Swansea Unitary Development Plan. The following policies were relevant to the consideration of the application: Policy EV1 of the Unitary Development Plan, 2008.

PLANS

2013_101 site location plan, 2007/_100 site plan received 24th December 2007

AREA 1 DEVELOPMENT CONTROL COMMITTEE – 27TH JANUARY 2009

ITEM 8 APPLICATION NO. 2008/1601 WARD: Area 1 Castle

Location: Quadrant Gate, Nelson Street, Swansea, SA1 3QE Proposal: Replacement single storey side extension, fenestration alterations and external seating area Applicant: Paragon Properties (Wales) Ltd

BACKGROUND INFORMATION

POLICIES

Policy Policy Description Policy EV1 New development shall accord with a defined set of criteria of good design. (City & County of Swansea Unitary Development Plan (2008)).

Policy EV9 Development within or adjacent to a Conservation Area will only be permitted if it would preserve or enhance the character and appearance of the Conservation Area or its setting. (City & County of Swansea Unitary Development Plan 2008)

Policy EV13 Proposals for new or renovated shopfronts, including security grilles, should be sympathetic to the character of the building, adjacent properties and the surrounding area. (City & County of Swansea Unitary Development Plan 2008)

SITE HISTORY

App No. Proposal 2008/0950 Change of use from a public house (Class A3) to retail (Class A1) (application for a Certificate of Proposed Lawful Development) Decision: Is Lawful Decision Date: 17/06/2008

2007/0780 New render and fenestration on front and side elevations, erection of three large umbrellas, and external alterations including fire escape Decision: Grant Permission Conditional Decision Date: 21/04/2008

99/0054 ALTERATIONS TO EXTERNAL FACADE Decision: *HGPC - GRANT PERMISSION CONDITIONAL Decision Date: 05/03/1999

84/1624/03 BAR EXTENSION, NEW GENTLEMEN'S TOILET + AN INCREASED DINING AREA. Decision: *HGPCU - GRANT PERMISSION UNCONDITIONAL Decision Date: 31/01/1985

AREA 1 DEVELOPMENT CONTROL COMMITTEE – 27TH JANUARY 2009

ITEM 8 (CONT’D) APPLICATION NO. 2008/1601

96/0228 SINGE STOREY REAR EXTENSION Decision: *HGPC - GRANT PERMISSION CONDITIONAL Decision Date: 09/07/1996

RESPONSE TO CONSULTATIONS

The application was advertised by way of a site notice and a press notice. No representations have been received.

APPRAISAL

The application is reported to Committee for decision at the request of Councillor Alan Lloyd.

The application is for the replacement of a single storey side extension, changes to the external fenestration, and the creation of an outdoor seating area in association with a new café.

The application site is a part 2, part 3 storey red brick building which was formerly known as the Quadrant Gate Public House. The site is located within and adjacent to the southern boundary of the Oxford Street / Union Street / Nelson Street Conservation Area.

The Quadrant Gate was originally designed as a public house. The outside consists of dark red brickwork throughout, with decorative panels in a herringbone pattern and matching brickwork plinth to the base. The roof consists of rosemary tiles with hipped gables and tall elegant decorative chimneys in matching brickwork with stone detailing.

The general look of the building is typical 1930’s and it has a generally pleasing quality but it needs to be enhanced. The windows are steel with a vertical emphasis but split horizontally into smaller panes on the upper floors, but with a more horizontal emphasis on the ground floor.

The building is visually split, the western end being three storeys and the eastern end two storeys. The ground floor displays various alterations which have been carried out over the years, especially around the entrance doors, with its window heights generally kept above the existing plinth level (approximately 1m high) and visually matching the windows of the upper floors.

The western end (three storey) has on the ground floor a curved window running round between the north and west elevations with a flat roof over, and the first and second floors directly above being a flattened concave curved façade set back off the roof.

Overall the building is one of good quality but with an air of neglect – the brickwork although dark red in colour has a rusticated face and this appears to have helped collect a layer of grime on its surface which may, with cleaning, lighten in appearance and bring the whole façade back to its original colour. AREA 1 DEVELOPMENT CONTROL COMMITTEE – 27TH JANUARY 2009

ITEM 8 (CONT’D) APPLICATION NO. 2008/1601

The public house has been vacant for approx 1 year, and it is proposed to use the building as two A1 shops and an A3 Café. The internal sub-division of the pub into 3 separate units for a mix of A1 and A3 does not require planning permission, and a Certificate of Proposed Lawful Development for an A1 shop use was considered to be Lawful and was issued on 17 June 2008.

The main issues for consideration are the impact of the external fenestration alterations, replacement side extension and outdoor seating area upon the visual appearance of the building, upon the wider streetscene and upon the character and appearance of the Conservation Area with regard to Policies EV1, EV9 and EV13 of the Unitary Development Plans. There are no overriding issues with regard to the Human Rights Act.

The proposed replacement single storey side extension would replace an existing small hipped roof and flat roof extension, which has fallen into a state of disrepair and detracts from the appearance of the building and the conservation area. The proposed extension has a complementary pitched roof to match the existing and this coupled with the matching doors screens give a much improved elevation, and the double door and window sections complement the overall with a much improved proportion and window/door split. As such, it is considered that the replacement extension is considered to be acceptable and will serve to enhance the character and appearance of the building and the conservation area.

The elevational fenestration alterations facing Nelson street involve the removal of 2 windows and an entrance door with 2 new windows and 2 new sets of double doors to access the newly formed retail units. The original elevation showed the curved window coming around from the west elevation to a single, plain entrance door to the café, this has now been changed and the entrance door to the café has been incorporated into a larger windows/screen with double doors. This now matches the other windows proposed along this elevation and provides a rhythm to this ground floor elevation which is more complementary to the building whilst at the same time providing maximum light to the much larger retail areas behind.

The proposed elevation facing the delivery yard of the Quadrant Shopping centre proposes to retain the curved window immediately above the raised plinth but introduces three further windows along this elevation into the café area with one of these window units having a set of double doors which acts as the link between the outside seating area and the internal café area. The adjustments to the side elevation of the two windows nearest the curved window show that they are not now to be taken down to ground level but finish above the plinth level. The larger window including the double entrance doors has to be taken down to ground level, and unfortunately the central position for the double doors cannot be accommodated because of the position of the internal staircase. It is considered that the new window, design and the adjustments made to raise them to plinth level, is more complementary to the building.

Adjacent to this side elevation is a small paved area which was formerly used as a beer garden for the pub. This area is now to be used as an outdoor seating area for the café, and it proposed to erect a simple galvanised steel ‘pergola’ structure with opaque glazed panels over the seating area. It is considered that the new pergola will add interest to this area, and will also screen the delivery yard from customers using the outdoor seating area, and will improve the visual appearance of the building, the streetscene and the conservation area. AREA 1 DEVELOPMENT CONTROL COMMITTEE – 27TH JANUARY 2009

ITEM 8 (CONT’D) APPLICATION NO. 2008/1601

Highways Officers have not raised any objections as the proposed alterations would not affect highway users.

In conclusion, the proposed alterations to the former public house are considered to be acceptable, and will enhance the visual appearance of the building, the wider streetscene and the character and appearance of the Conservation Area. As such, the application is considered to comply with Policies EV1, EV9 and EV13 of the Unitary Development Plan

RECOMMENDATION

APPROVE, subject to the following condition(s):

1 The development shall be commenced not later than the expiration of 5 years from the date of this planning permission and shall be completed in accordance with the said application plans and conditions prior to any part thereof being brought into beneficial use, unless otherwise agreed in writing by the Local Planning Authority. Reason: To comply with the provisions of Section 91 of the Town and Country Planning Act, 1990 and to ensure that the development is completed in accordance with the plans approved by the City and County of Swansea, and so avoid any detriment to amenity or public safety by works remaining uncompleted.

2 Full details of a) the window / door frames, heads, jams, cills reveals, method of opening and glazing configuration (including 1:5 section of the glazing bar & reveal profiles); b) the brickwork / stall risers in relation to the new openings and c) the new galvanised steel pergola and glazed panels shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority, prior to the works commencing on site. The development shall then be carried out in accordance with the details thereby approved Reason: In the interests of visual amenity and to safeguard the character and appearance of the conservation area..

3 Notwithstanding the details shown on the approved elevational plan, this permission specifically excludes all reference to signage panels and any other signage. Full advertisement consent will be required for any advertisements attached to the building. Reason: To define the terms under which planning permission is granted.

INFORMATIVES

1 The applicant is advised that the development must be carried out in accordance with the approved plans. If, prior to or during the implementation of this permission, any particulars are found to be inaccurate then the Local Planning Authority must be informed and works shall not commence or be continued until the matter has been resolved. Failure to do so could lead to the serving of an enforcement or stop notice.

2 The applicant is advised of the need to obtain separate consent under the Town and Country Planning (Control of Advertisements) Regulations 1992 for any advertisements requiring express consent which it is intended to display on the premises. AREA 1 DEVELOPMENT CONTROL COMMITTEE – 27TH JANUARY 2009

ITEM 8 (CONT’D) APPLICATION NO. 2008/1601

3 Bats may be present. All British bat species are protected under Schedule 5 of the Wildlife & Countryside Act 1981 (as amended) and are listed in Schedule 2 of the Conservation (Natural Habitats & c.) Regulations 1994. This legislation implements the EC Habitats & Species Directive in the UK making it an offence to capture, kill or disturb a European Protected Species or to damage or destroy the breeding site or resting place of such an animal. It is also an offence to recklessly / intentionally to disturb such an animal. If evidence of bats is encountered during site clearance, work should cease immediately and the advice of the Countryside Council for Wales sought before continuing with any work (01792 634960).

4 Birds may be present in the roof of this building please note it is an offence under the Wildlife & Countryside Act 1981 (as amended) to intentionally (intentionally or recklessly for Schedule 1 birds) to: - Kill, injure or take any wild bird - Take, damage or destroy the nest of any wild bird while that nest in use or being built - Take or destroy an egg of any wild bird Care should be taken when working on buildings particularly during the bird nesting season March-August.

5 This consent is issued without prejudice to any other consents or easements that may be required in connection with the proposed development.

6 The development plan covering the City and County of Swansea is the City and County of Swansea Unitary Development Plan. The following policies were relevant to the consideration of the application: EV1, EV9 and EV13

7 Conservation Area Consent is not required for the demolition of the small single storey side extension under the provision of the Town and Country (Listed Buildings and Buildings in Conservation Areas) Regulations 1987.

PLANS

Site location plan, BBA393.P.01 existing survey, BBA393.P.02 existing floor plans and elevations, received 31st July 2008. Amended plans BBA393.P.03A proposed ground floor plan, 393.P.04B proposed elevations received 11th November 2008

AREA 1 DEVELOPMENT CONTROL COMMITTEE – 27TH JANUARY 2009

ITEM 10 APPLICATION NO. 2008/1604 WARD: Area 1 Castle

Location: 76 Symmons Street, Swansea, SA1 6FT Proposal: First floor rear extension Applicant: Mrs Jessica Holohan

BACKGROUND INFORMATION

POLICIES

Policy Policy Description Policy EV1 General requirements to ensure new development displays a standard of design and layout sympathetic to the character and amenity of the site, its immediate surroundings and the broader area, and which have proper regard the amenities of the surrounding areas in particular in terms of visual impact, loss of light or privacy, shared activity, traffic and parking implications (City & County of Swansea Unitary Development Plan (April 2008))

Policy HC7 Criteria for proposals to alter and extend existing residential dwellings (City & County of Swansea Unitary Development Plan (April 2008)).

SUPPLEMENTARY PLANNING GUIDANCE

Householder Development Design Guide – June 2008

SITE HISTORY

None

RESPONSES TO CONSULTATIONS

The application was advertised via direct neighbour consultation. No response.

Highways

The application is for a first floor rear extension. There is no parking loss to consider with this application. I recommend no highway objections be raised.

APPRAISAL

The application is reported to Committee for decision at the request of Councillor Alan Lloyd.

Planning permission is sought for the construction of a first floor rear extension at 76 Symmons Street, Winch Wen. The property is a mid terraced dwelling located within an established residential area. The proposal measures 3.9m in width, 4m in depth, 7.5m in height to the apex and lowering to 6m at its eaves. The proposed extension would form a first floor rear bedroom. AREA 1 DEVELOPMENT CONTROL COMMITTEE – 27TH JANUARY 2009

ITEM 10 (CONT’D) APPLICATION NO. 2008/1604

The original proposal has been amended to comply with the requirements of the Design Guide for Householder Development which state that extensions to terraced properties should be a maximum of 4m at first floor level and should benefit from a pitched roof.

In terms of visual amenity the proposal includes the use of a matching slate roof, rendered blockwork and uPVC external windows, fascias and rainwater goods to match the original dwelling. The proposal is considered to relate well to the host building and the character and appearance of the area. The use of a pitched roof is considered to be visually appropriate and conforms to the adopted Household Design Guide. The proposal is considered to conform to Policies EV1 and HC7 of the emerging Unitary Development Plan.

Turning to residential amenity, the use of a pitched roof and a maximum rearward projection of 4m ensure that the proposal would not have an unacceptable overbearing or overshadowing impact on the adjacent property. The absence of any side windows ensures that there is no loss of privacy issue. The proposal therefore conforms to the requirements of Policies EV1 and HC7 of the Unitary Development Plan.

Having regard to all material planning considerations including the Human Rights Act, the proposal is considered to be an acceptable form of development that accords with Policies EV1 and HC7 of the Unitary Development Plan. The application is therefore recommended for approval.

RECOMMENDATION

APPROVE, subject to the following conditions;

1 The development shall be commenced not later than the expiration of 5 years from the date of this planning permission and shall be completed in accordance with the said application plans and conditions prior to any part thereof being brought into beneficial use, unless otherwise agreed in writing by the Local Planning Authority. Reason: To comply with the provisions of Section 91 of the Town and Country Planning Act, 1990 and to ensure that the development is completed in accordance with the plans approved by the City and County of Swansea, and so avoid any detriment to amenity or public safety by works remaining uncompleted.

2 The materials used in the development hereby approved shall match those of the existing building. Reason: In the interests of visual amenity.

INFORMATIVES

1 The development plan covering the City and County of Swansea is the City and County of Swansea Unitary Development Plan. The following policies were relevant to the consideration of the application: Policies EV1 and HC7.

2 PARTY WALL ETC ACT 1996 The developer is advised that the provisions of the Party Wall etc. Act 1996 may be applicable to the proposal and is advised to seek appropriate advice prior to any work commencing on site. AREA 1 DEVELOPMENT CONTROL COMMITTEE – 27TH JANUARY 2009

ITEM 10 (CONT’D) APPLICATION NO. 2008/1604

3 INFORMATIVE NOTE: This decision relates to planning control only. The Department would advise that if the proposed works require Building Regulations approval this should be obtained from the relevant District Council before the works commence. The Department would also advise that this planning decision does not cover any other approval which may be necessary under other legislation.

PLANS

Amended plan RH/01A all plans received 13th October 2008

AREA 1 DEVELOPMENT CONTROL COMMITTEE – 27TH JANUARY 2009

ITEM 10 APPLICATION NO. 2008/2337 WARD: Area 1 Castle

Location: 73 - 74 Mansel Street, Swansea, SA1 5TR Proposal: Conversion of premises from a private members club to counselling services and offices (Class D1) second floor rear extension, with fenestration and external alterations including front canopy (amendment to planning permission 2007/2412 granted on 17th December 2007) Applicant: Swansea Drugs Project

BACKGROUND INFORMATION

POLICIES

Policy Policy Description Policy EV1 New development shall accord with a defined set of criteria of good design. (City & County of Swansea Unitary Development Plan (2008)).

Policy CC1 Within the City Centre, development of the following uses will be supported:- (i) Retailing and associated uses (Classes A1, A2, A3), (ii) Offices (B1), (iii) Hotels, residential institutions and housing (C1, C2, C3), (iv) Community and appropriate leisure uses (D1, D2, A3) (v) Marine related industry (B1, B2). Subject to compliance with specified criteria. (City & County of Swansea Unitary Development Plan 2008)

SITE HISTORY

App No. Proposal 2007/2412 Conversion of premises from a private members club to counselling services and offices (Class D1) second floor rear extension, with fenestration and external alterations including front canopy Decision: Grant Permission Conditional Decision Date: 17/12/2007

RESPONSE TO CONSULTATIONS

One neighbouring property was individually consulted and those who submitted representations on the previous application (all representations were supporting letter/petitions). No response has been received.

Highway Observations: The application is a resubmission of a previously consented scheme. This current application differs in the fenestration and roofing details, hence there are no highway safety implications with the application. AREA 1 DEVELOPMENT CONTROL COMMITTEE – 27TH JANUARY 2009

ITEM 10 (CONT’D) APPLICATION NO. 2008/2337

APPRAISAL

This application is reported to Committee for decision at the request of Councillor Alan Lloyd.

The application site is the former British Legion Club at 73-74 Mansel Street.

Full planning permission is sought for amendments to Planning Permission Ref: 2007/2412 granted on the 17th December 2007 for the change of use of the building to counselling services and offices with an associated second floor extension and other external alterations.

The amendments relate to the roof of the existing building and the rear extension. The two changes proposed to the roof structure are the addition of a glazed section on the roof of the original rear extension, and the replacement of three small pitched roofs on the previously approved rear extension with one larger pitched roof.

With regard to visual amenity, it is considered that these amendments relate well to the overall appearance and character of the host property and will not have a detrimental impact upon the street scene or the character of the surrounding area.

Turning to residential amenity, the proposed amendments to the previous approval are not considered to have a detrimental impact upon the amenities of occupiers from neighbouring properties.

In conclusion, having regard for all material considerations including the Human Rights Act, this proposal represents an acceptable form of development, which conforms with Policy EV1 of the City and County of Swansea’s Unitary Development Plan and approval is therefore recommended.

RECOMMENDATION

APPROVE, subject to the following conditions:

1 The development shall be commenced not later than the expiration of 5 years from the date of this planning permission and shall be completed in accordance with the said application plans and conditions prior to any part thereof being brought into beneficial use, unless otherwise agreed in writing by the Local Planning Authority. Reason: To comply with the provisions of Section 91 of the Town and Country Planning Act, 1990 and to ensure that the development is completed in accordance with the plans approved by the City and County of Swansea, and so avoid any detriment to amenity or public safety by works remaining uncompleted.

INFORMATIVES

1 The development plan covering the City and County of Swansea is the City and County of Swansea Unitary Development Plan. The following policies were relevant to the consideration of the application: Policies EV1 of the City and County of Swansea is the City and County of Swansea Unitary Development Plan.

AREA 1 DEVELOPMENT CONTROL COMMITTEE – 27TH JANUARY 2009

ITEM 10 (CONT’D) APPLICATION NO. 2008/2337

PLANS

Site location plan, roof plan, proposed front & rear elevation, proposed side elevation received 4th December 2008

AREA 1 DEVELOPMENT CONTROL COMMITTEE – 27TH JANUARY 2009

ITEM 11 APPLICATION NO. 2008/2232 WARD: Area 1 St Thomas

Location: Site A14A Swansea SA1 Proposal: Construction of 6 storey mixed use development comprising of 1 no. ground floor retail unit (Class A1) and 1 no. ground floor food and drink unit (Class A3) and 132 no. bedroom hotel (Class C1) with 10 no. car parking spaces and delivery/service yard (application for reserved matters approval pursuant to outline planning permission 2002/1000 granted on the 19th August 2003) Applicant: Waterstone Estates (Swansea) Ltd

BACKGROUND INFORMATION a. Relevant Planning Policies

Swansea Local Plan Review No. 1:

Policy EV1 New development shall accord with a defined set of criteria of good design.

Policy EV2 The siting of new development shall give preference to the use of previously developed land and have regard to the physical character and topography of the site and its surroundings.

Policy EV3 Accessibility criteria for new development.

Policy EC1 Employment land is allocated in SA1 to meet the growth needs of the local economy

Policy EC2 A major redevelopment area is identified at SA1 Swansea Waterfront for mixed employment and residential development together with supporting leisure, tourism, community uses and ancillary services.

Policy EC6 The provision of appropriate small-scale local shopping and neighbourhood facilities will be encouraged within local shopping centres and in areas of acknowledged deficiency in order to meet local need.

Policy EC15 Proposals that consolidate the urban tourism resource, by improving the quality and range of attractions, destinations, accommodation and services will be supported at the Maritime Quarter and Tawe Riverside Basin

Policy EC 18 Development that improves the range and quality of serviced tourist accommodation will be supported AREA 1 DEVELOPMENT CONTROL COMMITTEE – 27TH JANUARY 2009

ITEM 11 (CONT’D) APPLICATION NO. 2008/2232

Policy AS1 New development associated with housing, employment, shopping, leisure and service provision should be located in areas that are currently highly accessible by a range of transport modes, in particular public transport, walking and cycling, or in areas where a good level of such provision can realistically be achieved.

Supplementary Planning Guidance:

Port Tawe and Swansea Docks – Supplementary Planning Guidance (12th September 2002). b. Relevant Planning History

2002/1000 Mixed use development comprising employment (Use Class B1, B2) residential (C3), retail (A1), commercial leisure (D2), food and drink (A3), hotel (C1), and educational (D1/C3) uses, car parking, associated infrastructure (including new highway access and pedestrian overbridge), hard and soft landscaping. Approved August 2003. c. Response to Consultations

The application was advertised on site and in the local press. No response received.

Glamorgan Gwent Archaeological Trust – the development of the infrastructure surrounding the docks makes it unlikely that significant remains of any archaeological features remain, but there remains a possibility that some evidence could be revealed during construction work.

Welsh Water – No problems are envisaged with the Waste Water Treatment Works for the treatment of domestic discharges from this site.

Environment Agency – No objection subject to adherence to conditions under the Outline Consent in respect of contamination, floor levels, surface water and waste management and recycling.

Head of Environment, Management and Protection – No objections subject to the imposition of conditions in respect of land contamination, air quality management, dust, construction noise and smoke nuisance control.

Highway Observations – The proposed development provides a nominal on-site car parking provision of 10 spaces and concern has been raised as to how the demand for car parking generated by the development can be accommodated.

The application site is part of a temporary surface car park facility, however, within the SA1 Masterplan is identified as a development area. Two travel plans (2003 & 2006) have been provided for the masterplan to ensure a rational consistent and ongoing approach is adopted to sites in terms of accessibility and parking, and it is indicated that the form of this development reflects the findings of both these plans. AREA 1 DEVELOPMENT CONTROL COMMITTEE – 27TH JANUARY 2009

ITEM 11 (CONT’D) APPLICATION NO. 2008/2232

Supporting information has been provided to clarify parking availability at the site and also outline the long term parking aspirations for SA1 as a whole.

Existing surface car parking facilities are provided on plots A1, A9, A11, A14A and B13. Overall they currently provide the 400 spaces that WAG are obligated to provide. Feedback from the car park operators indicates that current usage is for approx. 300 spaces.

This particular application site will result in a loss of parking of 80 spaces. The site currently operates as a permit car park and is under used (approx 20 users). It is proposed to open up Plot A13 as a short term measure to compensate for the loss of parking and maintain the current levels of parking provision. The nature of the proposed use, namely hotel, small retail store and restaurant is such that short term indiscriminate parking is not likely to occur. The restaurant use in intended to be ancillary to the hotel use, and thus is unlikely to attract much vehicular traffic. The shop use again is intended to serve local needs only and it is expected that most of the customers will be on foot. The hotel users will likely to be mainly car-borne but again there is ample surface car parking provision short term to cater for their needs, in fact there is an pay and display car park adjacent to the site on plot A11. Longer term there is a Multi Storey Car park identified for SA1 which will be located on Plot A9.

Whilst the dedicated on site parking facilities are low the users of the Development will have adequate parking facilities conveniently located elsewhere within SA1 (as has been described above).

On balance the nature of the proposal and the parking provision to hand means that the car parking demands should be accommodated without the need for any overspill parking, or indiscriminate parking which would have an impact of the Highway Network by way of causing an obstruction.

I recommend that no highway objections are raised to the proposal subject to:

1. The provision of a minimum 400 car parking spaces being available for general purpose use. 2. The provision of cycle and motor cycle parking in accordance with details to be submitted for approval to the Highway Authority. 3. The disabled car parking space to be laid out in accordance with the current British Standard. 4. The parking area to be laid out in accordance with the approved plans prior to beneficial occupation of the retail unit. 5. A travel plan be prepared to tie in to the overall Travel Plan for SA1.

APPRAISAL

The application is reported to Committee at the request of Councillor Alan Robinson.

The application seeks reserved matters approval for the construction of a 6 storey mixed used development comprising of a ground floor retail unit (Class A1), ground floor restaurant (Class A3) and a 132 No. bedroom hotel on the upper floors at Plot A14A, SA1 Swansea Waterfront. AREA 1 DEVELOPMENT CONTROL COMMITTEE – 27TH JANUARY 2009

ITEM 11 (CONT’D) APPLICATION NO. 2008/2232

The development also comprises 10 surface car parking spaces and a services access road off Langdon Road. The 418 sq. m (4,500 sq.ft.) retail convenience store will face onto Langdon Road, whilst the restaurant will face out onto the dock edge of the Prince of Wales Docks. The hotel will be accessed from the ‘Market Square’ public area. The site is part of a larger development platform located on the southern side of Langdon Road and which overlooks the Prince of Wales Docks but is currently part of a temporary surface car park. The site itself slopes gently down to the dockside from Langdon Road with levels at the road at 8.8m AOD sloping down to 6.9m AOD at the dock edge.

The application is accompanied by a Design Statement (DS). The DS indicates that the site is flanked by plots A11B and A11C, and that site A11B is proposed for office use whilst A11C is proposed for a four storey residential use, however, applications for planning permission in respect of these sites have yet to be submitted. To the east, the site fronts onto the proposed ‘Market Square’ public space which is indicated to be 16 metres wide but which is not part of this current development proposal. Beyond the ‘Market Square’ area is Site A14 B / A17 ‘Harbour Square’ for which planning permission was granted in Sept. 2007 for a predominantly residential development of 425 units rising from 5 storeys to 10 storeys with ground floor commercial units (Ref:2007/0810). This approved development is yet to commence on site but is of importance in assessing the design issues in relation to the scale, massing and the architectural design of the development.

Principal of Land Uses and Development Plan Policies

Outline planning permission was granted in August 2003 under reference 2002/1000 for a mixed use development of SA1 Swansea Waterfront comprising employment (Use Classes B1, B2) residential (C3), retail (A1), commercial leisure (D2), food and drink (A3), hotel (C1), and educational (D1/C3) uses, car parking, associated infrastructure, hard and soft landscaping, subject to conditions and a Section 106 Planning Obligation. The general land use principles within SA1 have therefore been established and in particular to the current proposal, the general principle of the small scale local needs food and general convenience retail use (Class A1), food and drink – restaurant (Class A3) and hotel use (Class C1) have already been established within the SA1 development and would accord with Policy EC2 of the UDP.

Condition 6 of the outline planning permission indicates that any Class A1 retail development should be restricted to small scale local needs food and general convenience goods shopping, maritime relates sales and small scale speciality retailing servicing local tourism and recreation activity. Additionally, the condition requires the design of the retail development to be consistent with the design guidance to be approved pursuant to Conditions 3 and 4 of the outline permission. Freestanding retail units are specifically excluded from this permission. UDP Policy EC6 indicates that the provision of appropriate small-scale local shopping and neighbourhood facilities will be encouraged within local shopping centres and in areas of acknowledged deficiency in order to meet local need. The amplification to Policy EC6 indicates for the purposes of this policy, small- scale embraces individual retail developments are defined as retail units with up to a maximum of 1000 sq.m. gross floorspace. The 418 sq. m (4,500 sq.ft.) retail convenience store will provide 418 sq.m (4,500 sq.ft.) of floorspace and would therefore conform to the policy. The amplification further indicates that in areas of deficiency, and where no local shopping provision currently exists, new facilities should be located centrally to the areas they are intended to serve and easily accessible by foot, bicycle and public transport.

AREA 1 DEVELOPMENT CONTROL COMMITTEE – 27TH JANUARY 2009

ITEM 11 (CONT’D) APPLICATION NO. 2008/2232

Condition 3 of the outline planning permission required an Urban Design Framework to be submitted to and approved by the Local Planning Authority within 6 months of the date of the permission to illustrate how the urban design objectives of the Port Tawe SPG and the illustrative Development Framework submitted could be achieved. The Design and Development Framework Version 5 (August 2004) was subsequelty approved in accordance with the condition (as varied). The Landuse Masterplan contained within this document allocates the application site for a café/restaurant/service retail uses. The proposal therefore departs from this allocation in land use terms in respect of the hotel use, however, the masterplan illustrates an indicative arrangement of principal uses within the study area. It is not intended as a prescriptive designation of uses but rather an indication of the preferred mix within the area. The overriding intention is to ensure the correct distribution and balance of uses throughout the development and not stifle creative proposals which enhance the principles of the masterplan. The proposed land use is therefore considered acceptable when assessed against the site specific designations established by the outline planning permission.

This position has however evolved as Conition 4 of the outline planning permission requires detailed urban design guidance to be approved for each of the masterplan zones indicated in the indicative Development Framework and for this guidance to be consistent with the Urban Design Framework to be approved pursuant to condition 03. In accordance with this condition a draft Detailed Urban Design Guidance document (Part One, Version 2, June 2005) for the Western Gateway, Primary Gateway Area and part of the Institutional Quarter to the east has been prepared. As development of SA1 has matured, the vision for Plot A11 has evolved. Originally, Plot A11 was master planned to be a large scale residential development site, however, in order to bring a greater diversity to the urban grain, the plot has been split into the three sub-plots. Plot A14A has been planned to be a convenience retail / marketplace area, facing onto the dock edge at ground floor level, however the ‘Market Square’ has now been enlarged to provide a more definitive area of public open space and would also provide a continuous viewpoint onto the waterside of the Prince of Wales Docks from Langdon Road.

Design and Visual Impact

In assessing the visual impact of the proposal, regard must be had in the first instance to Policies EV1 and EV2 of the UDP which states that new development shall accord with a defined set of criteria of good design. The Detailed Urban Design Guidance provides an indicative number of storeys within individual plots in order to achieve the scale and massing of buildings required to meet the urban design objectives of the Development Framework. Whilst development proposals will normally be expected to comply with the number of storeys specified, it is recognised that there is potential for change. Departures from the indicated numbers of storeys may be acceptable but will need to be justified in terms of market demand, relationship to the overall objectives and guidelines of the Development Framework, and relationships to adjoining plots and relationships to the surrounding area. The Detailed Urban Design Guidance indicates that Plot A14A would be 3 stories, whereas the adjoining Plots A11B is 5 stories. However, the proposed convenience retail / marketplace area has now been integrated into the larger development plot and in this respect the scale and massing provides a better relationship to the streetscape. The Design Statement indicates how the 6 storey height of the development is deemed appropriate as it would form a ‘step’ between a potential 4 storey development on Plot A11C and the 5 storey (rising to 10 stories) on the proposed development opposite on Plot A11B. AREA 1 DEVELOPMENT CONTROL COMMITTEE – 27TH JANUARY 2009

ITEM 11 (CONT’D) APPLICATION NO. 2008/2232

The Design Statement indicates that the architectural style of the building has been broken down into a series of elements each with a distinct material treatment. It is further indicated that the choice of materials are influenced by the recently completed buildings in SA1 namely: natural stone, coloured render, timber boarding and glass. In particular, the proposed palette of cladding materials applied to the individual elements of the building, would consist of through colours renders, grey colour coated aluminium cladding, rough coursed pennant stone, stained timber boards, aluminium colour coated clear glass curtain walling and glass balustrades. This would suggest the use of high quality, well articulated facades, although it is recommended that the final detail be controlled by way of condition. It is considered therefore that the building would achieve the high standards of architectural design required at this location. As such it is considered that the proposal would comply with the requirements of Policies EV1 and EV2.

Active facades face on Langdon Road, the Market Square and onto dockside to promote interest and provide a strong contemporary character and identity. Whilst the proposal has been designed to be accessible in accordance with the requirements of Policy EV3.

Transportation and Parking Issues

The proposed development provides a nominal on–site car parking provision of 10 spaces and the issue of how demand for car parking generated by the development will be accommodated needs to be addressed. The application site is part of a temporary surface car park facility, however, within the SA1 Masterplan represents a development area. Two travel plans (2003 & 2006) have been provided for the masterplan to ensure a rational consistent and ongoing approach is adopted to sites in terms of accessibility and parking, and it is indicated that the form of this development reflects the findings of both these plans. The applicants also point to the Council’s Local Transport Plan which observes the same key objectives in so far as it advocates a modal shift away from car use and improvement of local non car user link, such as Bus, park & ride, cycle and pedestrian methods. (In accordance with TAN 18). In this respect the designs put forward embrace this approval in so far as they adopt minimal on site car parking. This is consistent with modern urban developments.

However, it is acknowledged that the actual users of the hotel will in part be car borne and the demand for car parking generated by the development needs to be considered in the overall context for the SA1 project as whole. For example, with regard to the tenants / operators within the ‘J Shed’ building, WAG have legally undertaken with the developer to “ensure that at all times not less than 150 car parking spaces are available to all users of SA1” and currently in relation to the J Shed these have been delivered albeit on a temporary basis on the vacant development sites and have been positioned in areas close to the development and will be amended to suit the ongoing rolling programme of development envisaged for the whole of SA1.

The long term objective of WAG is to provide a multi-storey car park (mscp) at Plot A9 adjacent to Fabian Way for 400 to 600 spaces for public use. This project has currently been offered to developers and as of time of writing good expressions of interest have been received by WAG and are being evaluated. This car park will in the long run, soak up the parking demand for the Hotel which in the short term will be satisfied by WAG’s commitment to provide reasonably adjacent parking on a flexible basis. The viability of this MSCP is increased directly by the commitment of the Planning Authority to allow designs such as the Hotel to proceed with minimal parking. AREA 1 DEVELOPMENT CONTROL COMMITTEE – 27TH JANUARY 2009

ITEM 11 (CONT’D) APPLICATION NO. 2008/2232

This would be consistent with the recommendations of the 2006 Travel Plan which advocates for “parking need to be limited and controlled for a travel plan to have effect”. To complement the excellent public transport links which have been established, and which are outlined in the travel plan along with foot borne and cycle borne routes to and from the surrounding area, it is considered that with the appropriate short stay for shoppers parking on site and delivery arrangements designed in, the project reflects the SA1 design and development philosophy and is consistent with the travel plan for SA1. It is further indicated that the developer will undertake to buy into the SA1 ‘Travel Plan Forum’ which promotes sustainable travel modes and will also undertake to develop a bespoke Travel Plan for the site to reflect these needs.

Whilst the development of Plot A14A would result in the loss of part of an existing surface car park, this provision will be replaced elsewhere within the SA1 site. Until the multi- storey car park is in place, WAG are committed to providing 400 surface car parking spaces at SA1, subject to relevant user charges. However, it is indicated that currently there is a provision in excess of 600 spaces and that these are not even operating at half capacity. The car park currently occupying A14a accommodates 80 of those spaces. It is a permit car park for users who pay for a fixed period in advance and operates at approximately 25% capacity. Therefore, even with the loss of this car park, there would still be 520 space remaining, 120 more than WAG are obliged to provide, and 200 more than current demand. This level of provision is considered to be sufficient to meet the demand from existing and committed developments, including the development of Plot A14A. Indeed it is indicated that the existing car parks are not operating at capacity levels.

Any car parking requirements borne out of this proposal will therefore be met within the SA1 site, both in the short and long term and there would be no need therefore to search for car parking spaces off site. Notwithstanding this, users of the hotel will by their very nature be coming from outside the area and as such are very unlikely to try and find car parking in any location other than the closest available to the site, even if the motivation is to avoid car parking charges. Indeed it is common practice that hotel guests pay car parking charges in addition to the room rate.

It is further indicated by the proposed hotel operators that over 50% of hotel users arrive after 6pm and leave before 08.30am, so their demand for car parking spaces falls outside the peak times, when in fat car parking is free and therefore no need to go off site to avoid charges, should the hotel guest be inclined to do so. The restaurant, to a large extent, is ancillary to the use of the hotel, and again will not coincide with the main parking demand at SA1. In summary, the peak use time will occur when car parking in SA1 is free. Furthermore, the Class A1 retail unit is only intended to serve local needs. Users therefore will most likely walk to the facility or park as close to the unit as possible.

The Head of Transportation has recommended no highway objection to the proposal subject to the imposition of conditions in respect of the provision of the car parking facilities, cycle and motorcycle parking provision, the provision of on-site parking for the retail unit (disabled parking bay) and the preparation and implementation of a travel plan.

It is acknowledged that there have been concerns expressed by residents of St Thomas about the parking of vehicles, particularly by office workers in SA1, in the nearby residential streets where capacity is limited. The position is being monitored and if necessary resident’s only parking restrictions could be considered if warranted. AREA 1 DEVELOPMENT CONTROL COMMITTEE – 27TH JANUARY 2009

ITEM 11 (CONT’D) APPLICATION NO. 2008/2232

It is not however considered that this development in itself will have a significant impact on indiscriminate parking in St Thomas for the reasons set out above and it is not considered that this would be a sustainable reason to refuse the application. Of particular significance in this respect is the need to consider this application within the context of the outline permission for SA1 as a whole and the opportunity that allows to consider car parking and transportation matters strategically as well as on a site by site basis.

In conclusion it is considered that the proposal as submitted is acceptable when assessed against the provisions of development plan policy, adopted Supplementary Planning Guidance, and the approved Urban Design Framework and Detailed Urban Design Guidance for SA1. There are considered to be no additional issues arising from the provisions of the Human Rights Act and conditional approval is therefore recommended.

RECOMMENDATION: APPROVE, subject to the following conditions:

1 Notwithstanding the details and disposition of the external finishes indicated in the application and unless otherwise agreed by the Local Planning Authority, no supestructure works shall be undertaken without the prior approval of the Local Planning Authority of samples of all external finishes. The pattern of application of the external finishes shall be in accordance with the approved scheme. Reason: In the interests of visual amenity.

2 Notwithstanding the provisions of Class A3 of the schedule to the Town and Country Planning (Use Classes) Order 1987, or any Order revoking, amending or re-enacting that Order with or without modification, the Class A3 within the development shall be restricted to a restaurant or cafe use (i.e. principally for the sale and consumption of food and accompanying beverages, consumed at seated tables) only unless otherwise agreed in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The use of the premises as a hot-food takeaway is expressly precluded from the development. Reason: The Local Planning Authority wish to promote an appropriate mix of compatible uses within the SA1 Swansea Waterfront development and in order to protect the residential amenities of the area.

3 The use of any part of the development operating within a Class A3 restaurant or cafe shall only open to customers between 08.00 and 23.30 hours with last customers entering the building no later than 22.30 hours unless otherwise agreed in writing with the Local Planning Authority. Customers shall vacate the A3 premises outside these approved hours. Reason: To safeguard the amenities of existing and future occupiers of neighbouring properties.

4 Prior to the area within the application site being fitted out for the purposes of an A3 use, a detailed scheme ventilation filtration and fume extraction shall be implemented in accordance with a scheme to be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. Reason: To comply with the requirements of the Town and Country Planning (Control of Advertisement) Regulations, 1992. AREA 1 DEVELOPMENT CONTROL COMMITTEE – 27TH JANUARY 2009

ITEM 11 (CONT’D) APPLICATION NO. 2008/2232

5 Prior to the commencement of super structure works, details at an appropriate scale (unless otherwise agreed by the Local Planning Authority) of the following shall be submitted to and agreed in writing by the Local Planning Authority: - Typical window unit within its opening; - Typical external door within its opening; - Typical glazed screen / shop front; The development shall be carried out in accordance with the agreed details. Reason: In the interests of visual amenity.

6 The development shall not be brought into beneficial use until the remote car parking facilities have been provided in accordance with the details submitted to the Local Planning Authority. The car parking facilities shall remain in place unless otherwise agreed by the Local Planning Authority. Reason: In the interests of highway safety.

7 The proposed on-site car parking provision (including the disabled car parking bay) shall be laid out in accordance with the approved plans prior to beneficial use of the Class A1 retail unit. Reason: In the interests of highway safety.

8 Cycle and motor cycle parking shall be provided in accordance with a detailed scheme to be submitted to and approved by the Local Planning Authority, and shall be provided within the site prior to the beneficial use of the development unless otherwise agreed with the Local Planning Authority. Reason: In order to encourage bicycle / motorcycle use.

9 The development shall be carried out in accordance with a travel plan to be submitted to and agreed in writing by the Local Planning Authority prior to the beneficial use commencing. The Travel Plan shall include details of car reduction initiatives and methods of monitoring, review and adjustment where necessary Reason: In the interests of sustainability and to prevent unacceptable highway congestion.

INFORMATIVES

1 The development plan covering the City and County of Swansea is the City and County of Swansea Unitary Development Plan. The following policies were relevant to the consideration of the application: (Policies EV1, EV2, EV3, EC1, EC2, EC6, EC15, EC18 and AS1)

2 The applicant is advised to comply with the conditions of the outline planning permission Ref:2002/1000 in respect of the proposed development.

AREA 1 DEVELOPMENT CONTROL COMMITTEE – 27TH JANUARY 2009

ITEM 11 (CONT’D) APPLICATION NO. 2008/2232

PLANS

SP136-P003 site location plan, SP136-P002 block plan, SP136-P10 elevation to plaza, SP136-P11 elevation to Langdon Road, SP136-P12 elevation to Dockside, SP136-P13 elevation to Plot A11C, SP136-P01 proposed ground floor plan, SP136-P02 first floor plan, SP136-P03 second floor plan, SP136-P04 third floor plan, SP136-P05 fourth floor plan, SP136-P06 fifth floor plan, SP136-P07 roof plan received 13th November 2008

Item No. 5

Report of the Head of Legal and Democratic Services

Area 1 Development Control Committee

27th January 2009

ALLEGED PUBLIC FOOTPATH FROM PARK ROAD TO THE A4067 ALONGSIDE THE RIVER TAWE

COMMUNITY OF MORRISTON

Summary

Purpose: To consider the evidence and whether to recognise the path as a public right of way.

Policy Framework: Countryside Access Policy No 4

Reason for Decision: That the evidence shows the path has been obstructed throughout most of the period of use and therefore the use enjoyed has not been as of right.

Consultations: All the usual organisations have been consulted including all the owners and occupiers of the land, the Byways and Bridleways Trust, The Ramblers Association, the British Horse Society, the Commons Open Spaces and Footpath Preservation Society; The Countryside Council for Wales; G Bligh (equestrian riders interests); L. Locke (local representative of the Ramblers Association and Gower Society), Councillors R.F. Davies, J. Davies, M. Hedges, R. Lloyd and R. Stewart.

Recommendation(s): It is recommended that:

(i) That this Committee recommend to Cabinet that no Modification Order be made.

1. Background

1.1 This report concerns an application made under the provisions of Schedule 14 of the Wildlife and Countryside Act 1981. It has been made to this Council to recognise and consequently register the path as a public footpath via the route shown on the attached plan from points A-F.

1.2 Mr Morgan submitted the claim on the 14th June, 2005 supported by eighteen information sheets. An additional person came forward to support the claim. A total of nineteen people are therefore in support, their average length of use being 18 years with seven people who had each used the path in excess of twenty years. Nine people were interviewed.

1.3 The claim is based on the premise that because they have been able to enjoy a minimum period of twenty years uninterrupted use, it is sufficient to raise the presumption the path has been dedicated as a public footpath. (Explained more fully under “Legal Principles”).

1.4 The path commences at its northern end on Park Road at point A1 and follows the course of the River Tawe on its west bank, passing alongside some open fields as a field path. Once the path passes under the M4 and railway bridge at point D it is several metres wide comprising stone and dust. It passes alongside Riverside Caravan Park between points D and E , before joining the footway of the A4067 at point F. Between points A and B on the attached plan there are two routes one of which is positioned closer to the edge of the river.

2. Legal Principles

2.1 Under the provisions of the Wildlife and Countryside Act 1981 Section 53(2), this Council is obliged to keep the Council’s record of public rights of way, known as the Definitive Map and Statement under continuous review. Claims for additions to the Map and Statement are called “Schedule 14 applications” as they are made under this provision to the 1981 Act. They often are based on the public being able to demonstrate their long-term use of a path whether by showing:

(a) the minimum period of twenty years, as is required by Section 31 of the Highways Act;

(b) a greater or lesser period than twenty years but under common law;

The Council is obliged to make amendments to the Map and Statement where it discovers other evidence that shows a public path exists.

2.2 The manner by which the Definitive Map and Statement can be changed is by making a Modification Order, which modifies that Map and Statement. Once made, an Order will be subject to objections and representations but can only be confirmed by this Council if it is unopposed. If it is opposed the Order has to be referred to the National Assembly for Wales for determination.

2.3 Under the provisions of Section 31 to the Highways Act 1980 (Appendix I) a public right of way will be deemed to have been dedicated to the public if a minimum period of twenty years uninterrupted use can be shown to have been enjoyed by the public. In such cases the provisions of Section 53(b) to the Wildlife and Countryside Act 1981 will then apply (Appendix II).

2.4 This twenty year period is calculated by counting retrospectively from the first occasion the publics alleged right to use the way was brought into question. This usually happens when the path is blocked by something like a locked gate or fence. When the twenty year period has been identified it is usually termed the “relevant period”. If there is no physical barring of the way then the relevant period is counted retrospectively from the date a Schedule 14 application is made.

2.5 Another means by which a path may be presumed to have been dedicated is under common law (Appendix III). In these circumstances the landowner would have to show that he or she had not just acquiesced to public use but in some way facilitated or encouraged that use. The owner of all the land containing the claimed public path would therefore have to be identified but the period of use need not necessarily be twenty years and could be for a lesser period.

2.6 In addition, the Council may discover other evidence which suggests a public path exists. Under the provision in Section 53(3)(c)(i) to the Wildlife and Countryside Act 1981, a Council is obliged to make a Modification even if it is only reasonable to allege such a way exists (Appendix II). Such evidence could include user evidence and/or documentary evidence.

3. Consultations

3.1 All the usual consultations have been undertaken and the three known landowners have been consulted. These persons include the Riverside Caravan Park owned by Mr and Mrs Parker who own the majority of the path between points C and F; the William Martin Estate who own a section between B and C, A1 and A; the Environment Agency who own land between A and B. Mr and Mrs Parker and the William Martin Estate have both objected to this application.

3.2 The application has been made on the basis the path has been subject to a presumed dedication under Section 31 of the Highways Act 1980 that the public have enjoyed a minimum period of twenty years uninterrupted use

4. Calling into Question

In order to establish whether a minimum period of twenty years has been established, it is necessary to determine when the public’s use of the way was first challenged. In this case it appears that it was in the Summer of 2005 when Mr and Mrs Parker erected a wooden barrier across the path at point C which resulted in the application being made. However there is also evidence which shows the public’s alleged right to use this way was challenged at a much earlier date. Nonetheless one possible twenty year period may be 1985 - 2005 and this is the primary period which has been assessed in relation to this claim.

5. Issues

There are several issues to consider:

(a) one includes an additional wooden fence and locked gate alongside Park Road at point A1;

(b) the barrier at point C;

(c) verbal challenges to certain members of the public by the landowner Mr Parker;

(d) notices at points X;

(e) whether there is a sufficient minimum period of twenty year’s use.

(a) Barrier at Point A1

5.1 The entrance to the path is currently accessible via a gap in the wooden fence, and there is also a metal field gate in the fence currently padlocked.

5.2 Six people who were interviewed in 2006 who said they believed the gap had been in existence for about two years. One of the interviewed lives virtually opposite the entrance and rents some of the fields from the William Martin Estate. Another person interviewed stated the gap had been in place for a few years; five said a strand or strands of wire had been placed across the gap previously, and five said they have always needed to climb over the wooden fence because the gate was locked or usually locked. Only one person said there was a stile in the fence.

5.3 The William Martin Estate own this first field adjacent to Park Road and their agents said they do not consider a public path exists, but note some people have been using it by forced entry via the boundary fence. They stated the gate is kept padlocked to prevent unauthorised access.

5.4 In 1995 the Environment Agency purchased and raised a narrow area of land aligned parallel to the river in order to prevent flooding and also removed the weir. It is their view there has been a fence at Park Road at point A1 since the Tawe Swansea Valley Scheme came into being in 1970. Secondly, that the gate would also probably have been there since that time.

5.5 The agents acting for the William Martin Estate stated the Environment Agency would themselves have kept the gate padlocked to prevent access to both the Agency and their clients land. However, the Environment Agency were unable to confirm this point.

5.6 The agents for the William Martin Estate also indicated that this land is licensed to the Swansea and Abertawe Angling Society who have been granted conditional access for this purpose on payment of a fee. Therefore, it would not be appropriate for the general public to enjoy the benefit of access. None of the claimants have said they are members of this of this club and so any access they have enjoyed was not permissive. In addition private and public means of access can co-exist and should the route be registered as a public right of way, it would only enable the public the right to pass and re- pass. They would not be entitled to fish alongside the path.

5.7 The same agents have also stated that in addition to the field gate having been kept padlocked, there is substantial fencing along the boundary with Park Road and that there has never been a stile located anywhere to facilitate access.

5.8 The solicitors who act for Mr. and Mrs. Parker have submitted a letter by Mr. Williams the occupier of Ynystanglws Farm which is located on the eastern side of the River Tawe. Mr. Williams stated he has been living and working on this farm since 1933 and until 1988 he rented the first field crossed by the claimed public path between points A1 and C. He said there was no public right of way across the field, that it had always been enclosed with a fence including a fence at point C which formed the boundary between the William Martin Estate and Ynysforgan Farm, which now comprises the Riverside Caravan Park.

5.9 Consequently this would indicate that during the first three years of the possible relevant period of 1985-2005 the land was enclosed and therefore access could not have been uninterrupted for the minimum period of twenty years. Mr. Williams also said the fence remained in place after he stopped renting this field although did not specify for how long.

In addition, it appears that the field containing this first section of the claimed public path has been enclosed since 1933, which was the date from when the present occupier of Ynystanglas Farm has been working and living on that farm. If this is the case then the route as claimed could only have been accessed by climbing over the two fences at points A1 and C. No uninterrupted access could be made out for a minimum period of twenty years as the earliest evidence of use commenced in 1969.

5.10 Other reasons for the objection from the William Martin Estate, include concerns over the potential danger to the public from the river during periods of heavy rainfall, and the location of a deep pond in proximity to this path. In addition as there is another path following the eastern side of the river bank, they would say there is no need for an additional path across their client’s land. The issue to be resolved, however, is whether the public have the right to use the route and therefore issues such as convenience, liability or whether a suitable alternative exists in close proximity are not issues that can be considered in determining this claim.

5.11 They state that their clients have spent a substantial sum of money repairing the fence adjacent to Park Road which they assume was damaged through forced but unauthorised access. In addition, the padlock was also removed recently but not under their client’s authority.

(b) Barrier at Point C

5.12 Mr. Parker stated he has owned land south of point C since 1977 and his mother and grandfather owned it before him. Therefore he has been familiar with the land since he was a young boy. Until 1986 the land was used to graze livestock and therefore they had to keep this field stockproof by keeping a fence across the route of the claimed path at point C. He stated he had to replace the wooden fence with a metal one as the public kept vandalising it. He said he would not be able to repair the damaged sections immediately but would attend to it every few weeks. However he said that some people would walk around the fence.

5.13 According to the claimants this wooden fence disappeared in late 2005 and a gap remained until a metal barrier replaced the fence in the summer of 2006. This therefore suggests this is one of the reasons the claimants interpreted this to be a challenge to their use even though they had to climb over the wooden fence at point A1 previously.

(c) Verbal Challenges by the Landowner to Users

5.14 Two people said they have never been challenged during their period of use from 1969 - 2006. However one said he was challenged at the time the wooden barrier was erected in 2005 by the owner of the caravan site and another person said he was challenged in 1996 at the time mobile caravans appeared on the site.

5.15 By the admission of these two claimants and on the evidence offered by Mr. Parker, one can conclude there were at least some instances when Mr Parker made it clear to some members of the public that he did not consider they had any right of access across his land. 1996 interrupts the possible twenty year period from 1985 - 2005 if this were considered to have been a calling into question.

5.16 Two people said they were challenged when they walked their dog through the caravan park. This may be less significant as those concerned were not on the path being claimed as a public one and it may be the owner challenged them at that time because they were with their dogs.

(d) Notices at Point X

5.17 There are two sets of notices each positioned at points D and E which read: “Strictly Private, No unauthorised persons allowed beyond this point” and “All dogs to be kept on lead at all times”. Therefore, whilst the landowner acknowledged that people walk the path he objected to them claiming it as a public right of way.

5.18 Two claimants said the notices are facing people who enter the caravan park and so assume they are intended for anyone who is considering walking through that area, rather than along the claimed public footpath.

Two claimants said the notices first appeared in the mid 1990’s and another that the private notices appeared first.

5.19 It is arguable the notices are directed at those wishing to enter the caravan park and the notice stating that dogs are to be kept on leads is an acknowledgement people are walking along the path and entering the caravan park. However given the landowners reputation for having told some people to leave and his efforts to maintain a barrier on the perimeter of his land, then they could also be interpreted as a notice to anyone wandering on the path or the caravan park.

5.20 The landowner said he believes another reason the claim was made in 2005 was because at that time some locals were objecting to his application to have more caravans on the site. He then started approaching people particularly when he found walkers allowing their dogs to defecate on his land.

(e) User Evidence

5.21 Whilst there are a total of eighteen people in support of this claim there are seven who can show personal use in excess of twenty years, four of whom have been interviewed.

6. Conclusion

6.1 Access to the path is obtained via a gap in the wooden fence at point A1 and across land owned by the William Martin Estate. However the evidence suggests the gap has only been open since 2004 and prior to that time a strand or strands of wire had been placed across the gap which resulted in the claimants having to climb over the fence or step through the wire. The evidence from the claimants is that since they started walking the path a barrier has existed at Point A1. Only one person says there was a stile at this point. However the tenant of the fields owned by the William Martin Estate has lived opposite this land since 1990 and also holds the key for the Environment Agency who need to obtain access. He made no mention of such a stile. The agents for that Estate also state that no stile has even existed.

6.2 The significance of this barrier is that the public can not claim uninterrupted use of the way as of right when it is evident the landowner and their tenant had not made any provision for public access and therefore can not be said to have acquiesced to that use.

6.3 According to the claimants they considered their alleged right to use the way was challenged by Mr and Mrs Parker when they closed access to their land in 2005. Nonetheless there is also evidence that the landowner had challenged the public before this time, although it is not clear whether these approaches were concerned with the public walking through the caravan park. Equally it is not clear whether the notices are directed at those walking through the caravan park or the path.

6.4 The application was made in 2005. If the alleged public footpath was called into question at that time, the relevant twenty year period should be calculated retrospectively from that date. If this is correct no uninterrupted period of twenty years can be found from 1985-2005 because the path was obstructed at point A1 throughout the entire period. In addition there is evidence Mr. Parker challenged public use in 1996 and that the first field was enclosed until at least 1988.

6.5 It is possible that the path was first called into question not long after 1969 when in or around 1970 the Tawe River Valley Scheme came into existence. According to Mr. Williams of Ynystanglws Farm, the field has been enclosed from at least that time.

Whichever date of calling into question is considered no single twenty year period of uninterrupted use can be found and therefore it is recommended that the application should fail.

Financial Implications - None.

Recommended – this Committee recommend to Cabinet that no Modification Order be made.

Background papers - Document File ROW 71

Contact Officer: M J Workman 01792 686008

Ref. MJW/ROW-71

(GDL) APPENDIX I

HIGHWAYS ACT 1980

Section 31. Dedication of way as a highway presumed after public use for 20 years.

Where a public way over land, other than a way of such a character that use of it by the public could not give rise at common law to any presumption of dedication, has actually been enjoyed by the public as of right and without interruption of a full period of 20 years, the way is deemed to have been dedicated as a highway unless there is sufficient that there was no intention during this period to dedicate it.

For Section 31(1) Highways Act, 1981 to operate and give rise to a presumption of dedication the following criteria must be satisfied:

- the physical nature of the path must be such as is capable of being a public right of way - the use must be ‘bought into question’, i.e. challenged or disputed in some way - use must have taken place without interruption over the period of twenty years before the date on which the right is brought into question - use must be as of right i.e. without force, without stealth or without permission and in the belief that the route was public - there must be insufficient evidence that the landowner did not intend to dedicate a right of type being claimed - use must be by the public at large

APPENDIX II

WILDLIFE AND COUNTRYSIDE ACT, 1981

Section 53 Duty to keep the Definitive Map and Statement under continuous review.

(2) As regards every definitive map and statement, the surveying authority shall keep the map and statement under continuous review and as soon as possible after the occurrence of any of [events specified in sub section (3)] by order make such modifications to the map and statement as appear to them to be requisite in consequence of the occurrence of that event.

(3) The events referred to in sub section (2) are as follows:-

(b) the expiration, in relation to anyway in the area to which the map relates of any period such that the enjoyment by the public

(c) the discovery by the Authority of evidence which (when considered with all other relevant evidence available to them) shows:

(i) that a right of way which is not shown on the map and statement subsists or is reasonably alleged to submit over land in the area to which the map relates, being a right of way to which the part applies.

APPENDIX III

DEDICATION UNDER COMMON LAW

No minimum period of use is required, but the claimants must show that if can be inferred by the landowners conduct, that he or she had actually dedicated the route. User of right, is not of itself necessarily sufficient. Under statute, twenty years, if proved to have been uninterrupted will be sufficient to show presumed dedication.

Under common law it is still possible that use was due to the landowners tolerance rather than because that landowner had intended to dedicate. Consequently there needs to be evidence that the landowner (or owners) for whatever period is being considered, acquiesced to that use and took measures to facilitate public use.

Obviously this means the landowners have to be identified and there has to be evidence that they wished to have the route dedicated to the public.

2680 15.016070

1 4 3 O M  A1

A

B StILES 64.465762 64.465762

1995 C 1995

MO 349

D

E F

Reproduced from the Alleged Public Path Ordnance Survey Map with the permission of the

64.465762 A F controller of HMSO 64.465762 Crown Copyright

1985 City and County of 1985 Community of Morriston Swansea licence no. 100023509

268015.016070 ITEM NO: __6_____

For Information

Report of the Head of Planning Services

To The Area 1 - Development Control Committee on

27th January 2009

Electoral Division: MYNYDDBACH

APPEAL DECISION

1. 281 Clasemont Road Morriston, Swansea Office recommendation - Planning application No. : 2007/1637 ALLOWED section 78 appeal Members decision – Against the decision of the City and County of REFUSED Swansea Council to refuse planning permission for the rear double extension extra living ALLOWED accommodation and a garage and hobbies area. With conditions.

COMMENTS

The main issue of this appeal was the affect of the proposal on the living conditions of neighbours by reason of noise and disturbance, and the effect on the character and the appearance of the area.

It is proposed to replace the existing garages with a larger building consisting of a garage workshop and hobbies area. The proposed two storey extension will provide extra living accommodation and will include a conservatory to the rear.

The inspector contended that the proposed garage workshop and hobbies would not necessarily increase the level of the appellant’s hobby activities or the amount of noise and disturbance they would generate. A larger more solid building would more likely better contain noise levels than the existing dilapidated garage. He concluded therefore that it was unlikely that the proposed development would have an adverse affect on the amount of noise and disturbance experienced by neighbours. Moreover the extensions would not be overbearing or have an unacceptable effect on natural light and privacy.

Page 1

Electoral Division: MORRISTON

APPEAL DECISION

2. 85 Woodfield Street Morriston, Swansea. Planning application No. : 2008/0407 Section 78 appeal

Against the decision of City & County of Swansea Council to refuse planning permission for change of use from shop to café from A1 to A3 license. DISMISSED

COMMENTS

The principal concern was whether reasonable measures have been undertaken to market the premises as a retail use to justify the proposal, having regards to planning policies. The Inspector acknowledged that the shop unit has been vacant since 2006 and the premises have not been marketed in relation to the requirements of Local Plan Policy S3 which indicates that the market should be tested for a period of at least 12 months to establish interest in a retail use.

Accordingly the Inspector concluded that reasonable measures to market the premises have not been undertaken that would justify the proposal having regard to Policy S3 and from the Council’s evidence the shopping use survey does not indicate a significant proportion of vacant premises in the primary shopping area.

Page 2

Electoral Division: CLYDACH

APPEAL DECISION

3. 31 High Street, Clydach, Swansea. Planning application No. : 2008/0583 Advertisement appeal.

Against the decision of the City & County of Swansea Council to refuse to grant express consent to display one internally illuminated, double sided, free standing display unit. DISMISSED

COMMENTS

The main concern of the Inspector was the effect of the proposed display unit on the visual amenity of the area. The appeal site is located in the forecourt area of 31 High Street on an open area with no boundary walls or fences. He contended that when viewed from the southwest the sign would be seen with an entirely commercial view beyond. However set at the eastern end of the frontage he found it would in some views be seen with the Auto – Smart sign just above and this would lead to some visual cluttering. He also found that when viewed from the residential properties to the northwest, the unit would be clearly visible.

The Inspector concluded that the unit would be a large dominating and imposing feature for people using the residential doorway adjacent to the site.

In terms of illumination, the proposed unit would be more conspicuous in the scene if illuminated during hours of darkness and overall, he found the introduction of the proposed unit would be a detrimental intrusion and unacceptable in terms of visual amenity.

Page 3

Electoral Division: CLYDACH

APPEAL DECISION

4. 39 High Street, Clydach, Swansea. Planning application No. 2008/0105 Section 78 appeal

Against the decision of the City & County of Swansea Council to refuse to grant planning permission under section 73 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 for the development of land without complying with conditions subject to which a previous planning permission was granted. The application sought planning permission to open a café (Class A3 use) to change from a butchers shop (Class A1 use) without complying with a condition attached to planning permission reference A00/0843 dated August 2000. The condition in dispute is No. 2 which states that ‘ the premises shall be used for a café for the sale of food or drink for consumption on the premises and for no other purpose (including any other purpose in Class A3 of the Schedule to the Town or Country Planning (use classes) Order 1987, or in any provision equivalent to that Class in any statutory instrument revoking and re – enacting that Order with or DISMISSED without modification)’

COMMENTS

Planning permission was granted for a café in 2000 subject to the above condition but the Inspector was concerned as to whether the condition was necessary having regard to highway safety and the free flow of traffic and the provision of on – street parking in the area.

The Inspector was not convinced by the appellant’s argument that any increase in traffic associated with the proposal using the single width lane to the side of the appeal property would be safe. The Inspector stated that due to its width and restricted visibility on a junction with High Street it would prejudice highway safety.

There is no space for two vehicles to pass one another and would lead to reversing manoeuvres which could endanger pedestrians on a footway and drivers of oncoming cars on the High Street. Accordingly he found that this proposal to use the land at the rear of the café for car parking was not a practical proposition. It was more likely that customers would park on the High Street where parking is restricted by yellow lines due to the proximity of a bus stop.

Page 4

He concluded that the development would run contrary to Policy T2 of the Northern Lliw Valley Local Plan and that condition No. 2 continued to be necessary having regard to highway safety.

Page 5

Electoral Division: UPLANDS

APPEAL DECISION

5. 14 Bernard Street, Uplands, Swansea. ALLOWED / DISMISSED Planning application No. : 2007/2622 Section 78 appeal Demolition of rear porch and construction of new shower Against the decision of City & County of Swansea room Council to refuse planning permission for a single ALLOWED storey rear bedroom extension and demolition of rear porch and construction of new shower room Single storey rear bedroom in same location. extension DISMISSED

COMMENTS

The Inspector acknowledged that the Council raised no objection to the shower room extension and he considered that as the two parts of the proposal were both physically and functionally independent, then he determined that the shower room extension, which has already been erected, should be allowed.

With regard to the rear bedroom extension however, the Inspector was concerned as to its effect on the character and appearance of the terrace and its effect on the living conditions of the occupier of No 12 Bernard Street.

He referred to the Council’s Household Extension Design Guide which supplements Policy H11 of the Swansea Local Plan Review No.1. He acknowledged that this extension would increase the footprint of the dwelling in excess of the allowable extent and would erode the rhythm and uniformity of the terrace. Moreover it would unbalance the composition of the street and conflict with the adopted Design Guide to the detriment of the character and appearance of the terrace and its spaces.

He also contended that due to the height and proximity of the extensions to the side kitchen window of No.12, it would overshadow and significantly reduce the level of light entering the neighbouring property. This would unacceptably harm the living conditions of No.12 contrary to Local Plan Policies H11 and BE12.

Page 6

Electoral Division: LLANSAMLET

APPEAL DECISION

6. 15 Heol Gwanwyn, Llansamlet, Swansea. Planning application No. :2007/2753 Section 78 appeal

Against the decision of the City and County of Swansea Council to refuse planning permission for a two storey side extension. DISMISSED

COMMENTS

The principal concern was the effect of the proposed development on neighbours’ living conditions with particular regard to whether it would be overbearing.

The proposed extension would be 3m wide and substantially elevated above the level of a living room and patio area at the rear of No.5 Eileen Road. The Inspector agreed that the proposed two storey extension would appear unpleasantly overbearing when seen from the living area at the rear of No.5 Eileen Road. It would also be significantly harmful to the living conditions of the occupants of that property contrary to Local Plan Policies H11 and BE2.

Page 7

Electoral Division: MORRISTON

APPEAL DECISION

7. 7-8 Woodfield Street, Morriston, Swansea Officer recommendation Planning application No. 2007/2457 - APPROVAL Section 78 Appeal Members decision Against the decision of the City & County of - REFUSAL Swansea Council to refuse planning permission for the conversion to an A2 use for a licensed ALLOWED bookmakers. With Conditions

COMMENTS

The main issue considered by the Inspector was the effect of the proposal on the vitality and viability of Morriston District Centre.

The site is located in an area where there is a policy presumption against the introduction of non –retail uses at ground floor level unless it can be demonstrated that the premises has remained vacant for a length of time despite being actively marketed for retail use. In this case the premises have been marketed for around five years without securing any long term interest.

The Inspector was of the view that there was little prospect of the site being let for a retail use in the foreseeable future. Also if the appeal was allowed it would not create an unacceptable predominance of non-retail uses along this part of Woodfield Street. An active frontage could be retained by condition to offer interest to passing shoppers that would contribute more to the District Centre than a vacant building. Furthermore a £200,000 investment would transform the run-down appearance of the building.

The Inspector agreed with the Council that there is a lack of quality and insufficient diversity in the current retail offer of the District Centre. However, in the absence of any likely future retail investment, he concluded there is little point keeping a unit that has been vacant for a considerable period.

Page 8

Electoral Division: MORRISTON

APPEAL DECISION

8. 126 Woodfield Street, Morriston, Swansea Officer recommendation Planning application No. 2007/0087 - REFUSAL Section 78 Appeal Members decision Against the decision of the City & County of - REFUSAL Swansea Council to refuse planning permission for change of use to amusement arcade (ground floor only) – sui generis. DISMISSED

COMMENTS

The Inspector considered the main issue in this case to be the effect of the proposal on the vitality and viability of Morriston District Centre.

The proposal would lead to an overall dilution of retail uses and undermine the range of retail opportunities in the Centre. It would also interrupt the continuity of shopping uses along this part of the street and isolate smaller shops from the principal shops.

This would consequently discourage shoppers from visiting the other parts of the district centre.

There was no evidence that the premises had been vacant for a significant amount of time or actively marketed for retail use. The Inspector concluded that the proposal would have a harmful effect on the vitality and viability of the district shopping centre.

Page 9

Electoral Division: UPLANDS

APPEAL DECISION

9. 66 Eaton Crescent, Uplands, Swansea Officer recommendation Planning application No. 2008/0070 - REFUSAL Section 78 Appeal Members decision Against the decision of the City & County of - REFUSAL Swansea Council to refuse planning permission for a rear balcony. DISMISSED

COMMENTS

The main issues in this case were considered to be the effect of the proposal on the character and appearance of the existing dwelling and surrounding residential area and also the impact on the living conditions of adjoining occupiers.

There are no other balconies in the immediate vicinity. The Inspector considered that the balcony has a contrived and incongruous appearance and occupies a prominent location. As a consequence it would be harmful to the character and appearance of the existing dwelling and surrounding area. The balcony also overlooks adjoining rear gardens resulting in a significant reduction in privacy which is harmful to the living conditions of the occupiers.

The removal of the balcony is currently being negotiated by the Enforcement Team.

Page 10

Electoral Division: PONTARDDULAIS

APPEAL DECISION

10. 7 Oakfield Street, Pontarddulais, Swansea Officer recommendation Planning application No. 2008/0729 - REFUSAL Section 78 Appeal Members decision Against the decision of the City & County of - REFUSAL Swansea Council to refuse planning permission for a new dwelling with on site parking for two ALLOWED cars. With Conditions

COMMENTS

The Inspector considered the main issue to be the effect of any on-street parking resulting from the implementation of the proposal on highway safety.

The proposed dwelling within the side garden would result in the loss of off-street parking for the occupiers of the existing dwelling. However, the adjoining roads are wide enough to allow on-street parking and there are no restrictions. The Inspector concluded that the limited on-street parking that could result would not harm highway safety. Furthermore the separation distances from adjoining dwellings are sufficient to ensure that there would be no overlooking that would be harmful to living conditions of neighbouring occupiers.

Page 11

Electoral Division: UPLANDS

APPEAL DECISION

11. 3 Rosehill, Mount Pleasant, Swansea Officer recommendation Planning application No. 2007/2801 - REFUSAL Section 78 Appeal Members decision Against the decision of the City & County of - REFUSAL Swansea Council to refuse planning permission for roof dormer and conversion, including change ALLOWED of use from house to house in multiple occupation With Conditions (for 5 students)

COMMENTS

This appeal was determined on the basis that the use of the accommodation for 5 students did not represent a material change of use from a single dwelling. The main issue therefore considered by the Inspector was the effect of the front and rear dormers on the appearance of the street scene.

The property is at the end of a terrace that includes a property already having similar dormers at the other end. In this context the Inspector concluded that the proposal would not appear out of place or visually intrusive and over dominant. It would add balance to the terrace and there would be no loss of amenity to neighbouring residents.

Page 12

Electoral Division: LLANSAMLET

APPEAL DECISION

12. Ynys Allan Farm, Ynys Allan Road, Birchgrove, Officer recommendation Swansea - REFUSAL Planning application No. 2007/2505 Section 78 Appeal Members decision - REFUSAL Against the decision of the City & County of Swansea Council to refuse planning permission for conversion of existing barns to two dwellings. DISMISSED

COMMENTS

The main issues considered by the Inspector were whether the proposal constitutes inappropriate development in the green wedge; the risk to residents from exposure to landfill gas and flooding; and whether satisfactory provision has been made for foul drainage.

He found that the development does not fall within any of the permissible forms of appropriate development within Green Wedges. It also lies within close proximity to a former landfill site and a cautionary approach is required in the absence of any evidence to demonstrate that the risks to future occupiers from landfill gas can be addressed. No flood consequences assessment was submitted in support of the application which is sited within a category C1 Flood Risk Zone. Neither was an assessment submitted demonstrating that septic tank drainage could be justified.

Other considerations such as the removal of the use of the site as commercial vehicle operating centre, visual improvements to the building and the personal circumstances of the applicant do not justify the increased amount of built development proposed.

Page 13

Electoral Division: MYNYDDBACH

APPEAL DECISION

13. 861, 863, 865 Llangyfelach Road, Treboeth, Officer recommendation Swansea - APPROVAL Planning application No. 2008/0073 Section 78 Appeal Members decision - REFUSAL Against the decision of the City & County of Swansea Council to refuse planning permission for proposed refurbishment of existing dental surgery, extension and refurbishment of first floor ALLOWED and loft living accommodation and addition of With Conditions delivery space to Spar Shop.

COMMENTS

The Inspector considered the main issues to be the effect of the proposals upon the living conditions of neighbouring residents and upon highway safety.

In the Inspector’s view the principal sources of potential harm to neighbouring residents relate to the proposed rear windows and the use of the rear service yard and car park. Given the existing use the premises the additional trade and extension of space/refurbishment were not considered to materially alter the effect on the character of the area.

The proposal would not significantly increase noise and disturbance arising from the existing rear service yard and access. It would also potentially improve the quality of the rear space subject to appropriate landscaping - a scheme for which must be submitted. Only one of the proposed windows would serve a habitable room and this would be well beyond the normal 21 metre separation distance expected in developments. Other windows would be obscure glazed (controlled by condition). The Inspector therefore concluded that neighbouring residents living conditions would not be materially harmed.

In terms of highway safety a visibility danger was identified. However, a Traffic Regulation Order would overcome the identified problem which together with restrictions on the use of the car park and creation of a turning area would outweigh the potential harm to highway safety.

Page 14

Electoral Division: MAWR

APPEAL DECISION

14. Ty Uchaf, Pontarddulais Road, Garnswllt, Officer recommendation Swansea - Certificate is not Planning application No. 2006/2340 lawful Section 195 Appeal Members decision Against the decision of the City & County of - Certificate is not Swansea Council to refuse to grant a Certificate of lawful Lawful Use or Development (LDC) for ‘use of land as residential chalet (dwelling) with store room, Certificate of Lawful use or auxiliary store, greenhouse and washroom’. development is not granted

COMMENTS

The Inspector considered the following issues:

(i) Whether or not the chalet is a caravan or a building.

The Inspector was satisfied that the erection of the chalet was a building operation, it has the appearance of a building and does not fulfil the statutory definition of a caravan. Consequently it does not contravene the 1995 enforcement notice issued by the Council to remove a caravan from the site which was previously complied with.

(ii) Whether or not the chalet has been used as a dwellinghouse.

Case law has established that only a building can be used as a dwellinghouse. The inspector accepted that the chalet had been used for residential purposes and, given the facilities that were on site, is to be considered as being a dwellinghouse.

(iii) Whether used as a dwellinghouse for 4 years.

Statements submitted in support of the application suggest a continuous period of occupation from 1995 until November 2005 since when the site has been unoccupied. However, there is tangible evidence, including documented records which suggest that the last occupier may have lived elsewhere until 2002. On the balance of probability therefore there is insufficient evidence to establish permanent occupancy for a continuous 4 year period before November 2005.

Consequently the Inspector concluded the Council’s decision to refuse the Certificate of Lawful Use or Development was well founded.

Page 15

AREA 1 DEVELOPMENT CONTROL COMMITTEE

Councillors:

V N Abbott (Vice-Chairman) A Lloyd P M Black (Non-Voting) R J Lloyd (Non-Voting) N S Bradley P Matthews (Non-Voting) J E Burtonshaw (Non-Voting) P N May A R A Clement (Chairman) J T Miles W J F Davies J Newbury C R Doyle H M Morris J Evans B G Owen R Francis-Davies (Non-Voting) D Phillips M E Gibbs S J Rice J B Hague I M Richard C A Holley D A Robinson G Phillips D T Howells R Speht M J Hedges P B Smith (Non-Voting) D H Hopkins R L Smith B J Hynes J Stanton D H James R C Stewart (Non-Voting) W E A Jones (Non-Voting) D G Sullivan Mervyn R Jones C Thomas Mary H Jones J M Thomas R H Kinzett L G Thomas E T Kirchner (Non-Voting) S M Waller Thomas R D Lewis J Woodman(Non-Voting)