Agenda Document for Planning Committee, 07/03/2016 16:00

Agenda Item 4

REPORT TO: Planning Committee

REPORT NO. HCWD/06/16

DATE: 7 March 2016

REPORTING OFFICER: Head of Community Wellbeing & Development

CONTACT OFFICER: David Williams (Ext 8775)

SUBJECT: Development Control Applications

WARD: N/A

PURPOSE OF THE REPORT

To determine the listed planning applications.

INFORMATION

Detailed reports on each application together with the recommendations are attached.

RECOMMENDATION

See attached reports.

BACKGROUND PAPERS

None.

Page 13 REPORT OF THE HEAD OF COMMUNITY WELLBEING AND DEVELOPMENT – Date 7th March 2016

Community Code No Applicant Recommendation Pages MAE P/2014 /0903 MR WAYNE WILLIAMS GRANT 15 - 20

GWE P/2015 /0270 THE CHURCH IN GRANT 21 - 31 WALES MIN P/2015 /0644 NEW RIVER RETAIL GRANT 32 – 48 PROPERTY UNIT TRUST, NO. 4 CEF P/2015 /0697 MR BRIAN DAVIES GRANT 49 – 52

LLR P/2015 /0809 MRS ANNE ROBERTS GRANT 53 – 61

GLY P/2015 /0810 E & J MORRIS REFUSE 62 – 85

WRR P/2015 /0812 GOWER HOMES GRANT 86 – 100 MR M FORGRAVE WRR P/2015 /0899 MONTPELIER ESTATES GRANT 101 – 103 LTD WRR P/2015 /0900 MONTPELIER ESTATES GRANT 104 – 116 LTD ROS P/2015 /0928 MR LEE MYTTON GRANT 117 – 119

BRN P/2015 /0962 FARM ADVENTURE GRANT 120 – 135 MR & MRS MIDDLETON WRR P/2016 /0011 MR ANDREW ROBERTS GRANT 136 – 140

LGC P/2016 /0021 MRS S WHITE GRANT 141 – 145

BRY P/2016 /0040 MS A WILLIAMS GRANT 146 – 152

Total Number of Applications Included in Report: 14

All plans included in this report are re-produced from Ordnance Survey Mapping with the permission of the Controller of Her Majesty’s Stationery Office.  Crown Copyright. Unauthorised reproduction infringes Crown Copyright and may lead to prosecution or civil proceedings. WCBC Licence No. LA0902IL

All plans are intended to be illustrative only and should be used only to identify the location of the proposal and the surrounding features. The scale of the plans will vary. Full details may be viewed on the case files.

Page 14 REPORT OF THE HEAD OF COMMUNITY WELLBEING AND DEVELOPMENT – Date 7th March 2016

APPLICATION NO: LOCATION: DATE RECEIVED: P/2014 /0903 LAND SOUTH OF GRANGE ROAD 03/12/2014 PENLEY WREXHAM LL13 0LS COMMUNITY: CASE OFFICER: Maelor South DESCRIPTION: PF ERECTION OF AGRICULTURAL BUILDINGS (PARTLY IN WARD: RETROSPECT) INCLUDING AGENT NAME: Overton GENERAL PURPOSE BUILDING, MR WAYNE WILLIAMS POULTRY SHEDS, BOAR & WEANER PENS, STRAW / FEED STORE AND CATTLE & SHEEP HANDLING FACILITY

APPLICANT(S) NAME: MR WAYNE WILLIAMS ______

THE SITE

Location of proposed structures

PROPOSAL

Planning permission is sought for the erection of agricultural buildings, more specifically the following: - a livestock handling and feed store (7m by 16m at a max height of 3.5m), - a poultry house (measuring 4.9m by 2.5m at a max height of 2.8m),

Page 15 REPORT OF THE HEAD OF COMMUNITY WELLBEING AND DEVELOPMENT – Date 7th March 2016

- a poultry house (measuring 2.3m by 3.7m at a max height of 2.5m), - a boar pen (measuring 5.6m by 6.1m at a max height of 2.5m) and - a weaner pen and attached general purpose store (5.7m by 6.5m at a max height of 3.1m).

The applicant has confirmed that the extent of his agricultural holding is 16.65 acres (6.738 hectares ) and that the application site is his only parcel of land at present.

The application is made partially in retrospect.

HISTORY

None.

DEVELOPMENT PLAN

The site is located outside any defined settlement and within a Special Landscape Area. Policies PS2, GDP1, EC3, EC4, EC6 and T8 are relevant.

CONSULTATIONS

Community Council: Object for the following reasons. - The land in question is a special landscape area. The members are concerned that the erection of the proposed buildings will be an eye-sore on a landscape of natural beauty. - The members feel that the plans equate to overdevelopment of the piece of land. - The members have concerns that this overdevelopment of buildings will lead to intensification of animal keeping and use of the land. - The land in question is home to many forms of wildlife. Indeed there is a pond, which may be home to great-crested newts as they have been found on nearby land in similar habitats. - It has been brought to the attention of the members that the planning application notice for this particular case was taken down within a couple of hours of it being displayed. This causes great concern as correct protocol was not followed. Local Member(s): Notified 11.12.2014 Site notice: Expired 12.01.2015 Highways: Recommends that the access at the site is improved to include improved visibility splays given the intensification of the use of the site. Parks and Rights of Way: Consulted 10.12.2014 Public Protection: Advice note in relation to construction activity. NRW: Liaise with Authority ecologist.

Page 16 REPORT OF THE HEAD OF COMMUNITY WELLBEING AND DEVELOPMENT – Date 7th March 2016

Welsh Water: Consulted 10.12.2014 Ramblers Association: Consulted 10.12.2014 Shropshire County Council:Consulted 10.12.2014 Neighbouring occupiers: One neighbouring occupier notified. One representation received raising the following points: - The gate posts and field is becoming unsightly spoiling the landscape for those walking past; - The buildings are out of character scattered across the site; - If approved there should be better screening of the buildings from the lane. The site notice was immediately removed.

SPECIAL CONSIDERATIONS:

Background: The proposed development is partly in retrospect and consists of the erection of various agricultural buildings and structures associated with the applicant’s small holding on the site. The buildings are not associated with an existing farm complex. The land is effectively visited on a daily basis by the applicant.

Policy EC3 usually requires new farm buildings to be erected where it can be demonstrated that there is minimal impact upon the environment or the surrounding landscape. Isolated buildings will only be permitted where there is an essential agricultural need and there is no reasonable alternative location for the development. In this instance the above does not apply as there is no existing farm complex. However, having considered the records available to me, there is evidence of agricultural buildings scattered on the site in 2009, along with the provision of a trackway through the site to the area where the proposed buildings are located. I am satisfied that the buildings are relatively minor in their scale, consisting of an implement and machinery shed, small poultry houses, pig sty and the largest building being a cattle handling shed with feed/hay store. I consider the principle of the buildings can be accepted given the potential benefits in regularising the existing ad hoc agricultural nature of the entire site. Detailed material considerations are discussed below.

Ecology: The site is located on the edge of a county wildlife site. Policy EC6 presumes against development within such sites unless there is an overwhelming need demonstrated. The development has already occurred in this instance and there have been significant alterations to the boundary treatments of the site, most notably the removal of a length of hedgerow along the northern boundary adjacent to the proposed buildings. The removal of this hedgerow would normally have required consent under The Hedgerow Regulations 1997.

In terms of the quality of the county wildlife site it is noted by officers that the quality of the site has severely degraded over time, to the point where its biodiversity value is now considered questionable. For this reason, I do not

Page 17 REPORT OF THE HEAD OF COMMUNITY WELLBEING AND DEVELOPMENT – Date 7th March 2016 consider that there is sufficient justification to recommend that this planning application be refused on the grounds of the impact upon the integrity of this wildlife site.

However, given the removal of the features of habitat and landscape value as mentioned above, the applicant has provided an ecological report including a method statement and mitigation measures. This report includes of the provision of mitigation measures such as pond management and planting to boost great crested newt habitat, grassland management as well as the creation of hedgerows to replace those which were significantly removed prior to the submission of this application. I consider that these measures will significantly increase the biodiversity value of the site, which was significantly degraded prior to the submission of this application and likely prior to the carrying out of any building works on site.

Visual Impact: The site is located within a Special Landscape Area. Policy EC5 requires developments to conserve or enhance the existing landscape. I am satisfied that the proposed buildings are small ancillary agricultural structures. The largest is a low level, partially open fronted cattle pen and fodder store consisting of steel cladding and concrete block work. Whilst the site is within a special landscape area, I consider these grouped buildings will have minimal landscape impact. The site is located some 150 metres from Grange Road and whilst a public right of way passes the location of the buildings, subject to the recreation of the hedgerow as indicated by the submitted ecological report, visual impact from this viewpoint will be minimised.

Highways: The buildings are accessed by an existing trackway running north east to south west across the site. This track terminates at an access onto Grange Road and has been established since at least 2009. Highways consider that the proposed development will result in a material increase in traffic from the site and have recommended improvements to the access consisting of hedgerow removal and access widening. Whilst the visibility from the site access is poor, I do not consider that the level of traffic generated from the site will materially increase to a level that would warrant the significant hedgerow removal at the existing access to provide a widened access or visibility splays which would ultimately result in visual detriment to the locality. The applicant has also indicated that the position of the gates have been altered closer to the metalled part of the carriageway on the advice of the police following a series of thefts. This is to discourage the parking of thieves’ vehicles in this gateway. In light of my comments above about the low level potential traffic movements, I sympathise with the applicant’s justification on this matter and therefore do not consider amendments are necessary.

CONCLUSION

I am satisfied that the impacts of the proposed development can be considered acceptable with mitigation measures, predominantly the

Page 18 REPORT OF THE HEAD OF COMMUNITY WELLBEING AND DEVELOPMENT – Date 7th March 2016 replacement of existing hedgerows. I therefore recommend that planning permission be granted subject to the following conditions.

RECOMMENDATION: That permission be GRANTED

CONDITION(S)

1. The development shall only be carried out in strict accordance with the details shown on the approved drawing(s) dated 3 December 2014 and as contained within the application documentation. 2. The mitigation measures as identified in section 5 and 6 of the approved Great Crested Newt report and Method Statement & Mitigation Measures written by Emma Hankinson of Wildbanks Conservation dated 21 August 2015 shall be implemented in accordance with a timescale which has been submitted to and agreed in writing by the local planning authority within 3 months of the date of this permission. 3. Notwithstanding the requirements of condition no. 2, within 2 months of the date of this permission a full scheme and specification of replacement native hedgerow planting (to broadly accord with the specification as stated in section 6.6 of the approved Great Crested Newt report and Method Statement & Mitigation Measures written by Emma Hankinson of Wildbanks Conservation dated 21 August 2015), to include a timescale for its implementation shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the local planning authority. The planting scheme shall be fully implemented in accordance with the approved timescale and shall be permanently retained for the lifetime of the development.

REASON(S)

1. To ensure a satisfactory standard of appearance of the development in the interests of the visual amenities of the area. 2. In order that the development does not harm features of habitat value. 3. In the interests of the visual amenity of the area and to increase the habitat value of the locality.

NOTE(S) TO APPLICANT

The applicant is advised that any further development of the site for permanent structures is likely to require a formal application for planning permission. You are advised to contact the local planning authority for further advice on this matter.

Burning of waste generated from construction activities is not considered to be an appropriate method of disposal and action may be taken as follows: - Under the Environmental Protection Act 1990 anyone found disposing of construction site waste by burning is likely to be in breach of their duty of care with regard to waste disposal; - Under the same Act an abatement notice may be served where smoke is judged to be causing a nuisance to neighbouring properties. Failure to comply with the requirements of the notice can result in prosecution;

Page 19 REPORT OF THE HEAD OF COMMUNITY WELLBEING AND DEVELOPMENT – Date 7th March 2016

- Under the Clean Air Act 1993 it is an offence for a commercial activity to burn anything that gives rise to dark smoke.

To prevent offences under the above named Acts there should be no bonfires on the site, to include the prohibition of the burning of cleared vegetation. The applicant should contact the Council's Housing and Public Protection Department on 01978 315300 for further advice and information.

Public Footpath No 1 - Penley, passes through the development site and should not be interfered with. I would strongly recommend that the applicant liaise with our Public Rights of Way Section to discuss the proposed development. Please contact Mr Sean Hanratty on Tel: 01978 729761. ______

Page 20 REPORT OF THE HEAD OF COMMUNITY WELLBEING AND DEVELOPMENT – Date 7th March 2016

APPLICATION NO: LOCATION: DATE RECEIVED: P/2015 /0270 LAND ADJACENT TO AND EAST OF 07/04/2015 HOLY TRINITY CHURCH CHURCH STREET GWERSYLLT WREXHAM COMMUNITY: LL11 4HD CASE OFFICER: Gwersyllt KH DESCRIPTION: ERECTION OF 4 DWELLINGS AND WARD: NEW VEHICULAR AND PEDESTRIAN AGENT NAME: Gwersyllt North ACCESS FROM CHURCH STREET MR JOHN WILLIAMS AFALLON APPLICANT(S) NAME: THE CHURCH IN WALES ______P/2015/0270 THE SITE

Proposed layout

The site is located off the western side of Mold Road and to the east of Holy Trinity Church and directly in front of the churchyard which surrounds the church to the east and south. The site is bounded by residential development to the south, Ysgol Bryn Alyn and Ysgol y Drindod to the west and Church Street to the north.

Page 21 REPORT OF THE HEAD OF COMMUNITY WELLBEING AND DEVELOPMENT – Date 7th March 2016

PROPOSAL

Erection of four dwellings, one of which will be used as a vicarage. Access to the site will be off Church Street to the north. Mold Road bounds the site to the east.

HISTORY

None.

DEVELOPMENT PLAN

The site lies within the settlement of Gwersyllt. Policies PS1, PS2, GDP1 and EC9 refer.

CONSULTATIONS

Community Council: Consulted 14.04.15 Local Member: Notified 14.04.15 Highways: No objections subject to conditions including visibility splays. Public Protection: Conditions required including construction noise and contamination conditions. Natural Resources Wales: No objections. Ecological report submitted has been undertaken to an acceptable standard and risks to statutory protected species is negligible. Method Statement with regards to how Japanese Knotweed will be removed from the site and managed long-term. Welsh Water: Conditions required. Other Representations: 2 objections on grounds: - Mold Road is extremely busy and already difficult to gain access onto Mold Road from Church Street. - A main route for children going back and to from Bryn Alyn School with buses accessing Church Street with the proposal adding congestion and increased danger. - Buildings will restrict views from a neighbouring property. - A nearby property would have made an ideal vicarage and applicants should have contacted owners who would have been willing to sell. - Setting of church. May be unmarked graves on the site. Site Notice: Expired 19.04.15

Page 22 REPORT OF THE HEAD OF COMMUNITY WELLBEING AND DEVELOPMENT – Date 7th March 2016

SPECIAL CONSIDERATIONS

Proposal: The scheme initially proposed six dwellings, one of which would be used as a vicarage. Due to concerns regarding the impact on the setting of Holy Trinity Church, a Listed Building, the scheme was subsequently amended to provide four properties, one to be used as a vicarage.

Built Conservation/Design: The application site is located to the east of Holy Trinity Church and directly in front of the churchyard that surrounds the church to the east and south.

Holy Trinity is a Grade II Listed Building and forms a prominent landmark within the settlement occupying an elevated position above Mold Road. The church is recognised as being a well-designed example of a High Victorian Church building. The prominent position and striking architectural appearance are deliberate in drawing attention to the church and provide evidence of the communal value such buildings had within the community.

In considering the impact of the development upon the setting of the church it is important to understand the contribution of the setting to the overall significance of the church. The setting of a Listed Building in part stems from the way the Listed Building is experienced. The church is experienced as a prominent building within the area, through its architecture which clearly defines the religious function of the building, from its elevated position which makes the church prominent within views and from its current openness with the churchyard and cemetery enclosing the building to the east and south. The churchyard slopes away from the church to the east which further opens up views towards the church. The current setting contributes to the evidential, aesthetic and communal values of the church and allows the church to be appreciated as the prominent building within the site and the wider area. Also the openness of the churchyard at present provides an important sense of tranquillity and peace for those visiting and using the area and appropriate for the function of the Listed Building.

The initial scheme provided six properties, with two of the properties and an associated garage in perhaps the most sensitive location being directly in front of the listed church and prominently sited at the corner junction of Church Street/Mold Road. Subsequent amended plans have deleted the properties in front of the listed church. The remaining four dwellings are sited in the southern corner of the site where the land slopes away more significantly from the cemetery and the design has used the topography to help set the dwellings down into this part of the site. The impact upon the setting of the church and cemetery can be mitigated to some extent by landscaping and treatment of the rear boundaries of the proposed new dwellings. Landscaping to the front of the site and a cluster of proposed new trees on land adjacent to Mold Road to the northern part of the site will help mitigate the impact.

Page 23 REPORT OF THE HEAD OF COMMUNITY WELLBEING AND DEVELOPMENT – Date 7th March 2016

I am satisfied that with high quality materials and appropriate landscaping the site can contribute positively to the streetscene and the setting of the Listed Building.

Highways: The development site is located on an unclassified highway subject to both a 20 and 30 mph speed limit. Vehicles entering Church Street from the Mold Road junction are likely to be travelling no more than 25mph. The 20mph is imposed some 10m to the east of the proposed access. Visibility splays measuring 2.4 x 33m should be provided to the south east and 2.4 x 25m to the west, both of which appear achievable.

Whilst the road is a cul de sac, it gives vehicular and pedestrian access to Bryn Alyn School and is consequently very busy at school peak hours. It is therefore important that any access provides adequate visibility for and of pedestrians. A condition will be required for pedestrian visibility. Whist it is acknowledged that the road is busy at peak hours the traffic generation from a development of this size will be negligible and is unlikely to detrimentally impact on the highway.

I am satisfied that the proposed is acceptable from a highway perspective.

Ecology: Natural Resources Wales are satisfied that the ecological report undertaken for the development (Clwydian Ecology 30.03.2015) has been undertaken to an acceptable standard. A condition requiring the submission of an invasive species method statement is required as there is Japanese Knotweed on the site.

The site is within 50m of a known great crested newt site and whilst the application site is relatively isolated from this population a Reasonable Avoidance Measures Scheme will be required and the appointment of an Ecological Clerk of Works will be required.

Amenity: Distance to existing dwellings, orientation of the dwellings and windows and differences in levels will ensure no loss of privacy or light.

CONCLUSION

The reduced number of properties has addressed the concerns regarding the setting of the Listed Building and landscaping and high quality materials will ensure the development is successfully integrated within the streetscene. Highways have raised no objections subject to appropriate conditions and the proposal will not adversely impact on nearby amenities or ecological interests.

My recommendation is however in three parts to reflect the need for educational payments.

Page 24 REPORT OF THE HEAD OF COMMUNITY WELLBEING AND DEVELOPMENT – Date 7th March 2016

RECOMMENDATION A

That the Council enters into an Obligation under Section 106 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 to secure a financial contribution towards local schools.

That the Head of Community Wellbeing and Development be given delegated authority to approve the final form and content of the obligation.

RECOMMENDATION B

Upon completion of the Planning obligation that permission be GRANTED subject to the following conditions:-

CONDITION(S)

1. The development hereby permitted shall be commenced before the expiry of five years from the date of this permission. 2. No part of the development shall commence until samples of all external facing and roofing materials have been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The development shall only be carried out in strict accordance with such details as are approved. 3. Prior to first use of the development hereby approved the vehicular access shall provide visibility splays of 2.4 metres x 25 metres to the west and 2.4 metres x 33 metres to the south east measured to the nearside edge of the adjoining highway. Within these splays there shall be no obstruction in excess of 1 metre in height above the level of the adjoining highway. The splays shall thereafter be permanently retained clear of any such obstruction to visibility. 4. Prior to first use of the development hereby approved a pedestrian visibility splay shall be established measured from the centreline of the vehicular access 2.4 metres back from the edge of the footway to points 3.3 metres either side measured along the nearside edge of the carriageway. Within these splays there shall be no obstruction in excess of 0.6 metres in height above the level of the adjoining highway. The splays shall thereafter be permanently retained clear of any such obstruction to visibility. 5. Prior to first use of the development a suitable turning head shall be constructed to adoptable standards details of which shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The facilities as approved shall thereafter be permanently retained and kept free of any obstruction, and made available solely for these purposes only. 6. No part of the development shall commence until a scheme detailing the construction of the following has been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority: 1) Detailed layout, design, drainage and construction of the proposed new footway / carriageway. The scheme as is approved shall be fully implemented prior to first use of the development.

Page 25 REPORT OF THE HEAD OF COMMUNITY WELLBEING AND DEVELOPMENT – Date 7th March 2016

7. There shall be no gates or other means of enclosure across the vehicular access point within 5 metres of the highway boundary. 8. No private surface water run off shall be permitted to flow from the development site onto the adjoining highway. An Aco drain or similar shall be provided across the approved access to intercept any such run off prior to first use of the development. 9. The vehicular parking and turning areas as shown on approved drawing(s) No(s). 14.5498/1 Rev A shall be fully laid out, surfaced and drained prior to first use of the development. These areas shall thereafter be permanently retained and kept free of any obstruction, and made available solely for the parking and turning of motor vehicles at all times. 10. No part of the development shall commence until a Construction Traffic Management Plan including provisions for contractor parking has been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority and the Plan as is approved has been fully implemented. 11. All works in relation to the implementation of this permission, including deliveries to and / or leaving the site, shall be undertaken only between the hours of 7.30 and 18.00 Monday to Friday, and 08.00 to 14.00 on a Saturday, and at no time on a Sunday or a Bank Holiday. 12. No part of the development shall commence until a noise survey in order to determine noise levels for both day and night has been carried out, and a detailed report of the survey findings together with a detailed scheme of noise attenuation and/or noise insulation measures has been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The measures as are approved shall be fully implemented prior to the first occupation / use of the development. 13. No part of the development shall commence until a scheme to deal with potential contamination at the site has been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. This scheme shall include a phased investigation approach to identify the extent of contamination and any measures required to remediate the site, including post-development monitoring. 14. No part of the development shall be occupied until a Verification Report which demonstrates that the remedial works approved as part of condition no. 13 above have been satisfactorily carried out, has been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. 15. No land drainage run-off or surface water shall be permitted to discharge or connect to the public sewerage system, either directly or indirectly, and foul and surface water shall be drained separately from the site. 16. Prior to the commencement of works on site an invasive species method statement for Japanese Knotweed shall be submitted to and approved, in writing, by the Local Planning Authority. The method statement as approved shall be fully implemented in accordance with the timescales, removal and long-term management. 17. Within three months of commencement of development, full details of a hard and soft landscaping scheme together with a timescale for implementation of works shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. 18. The landscaping scheme approved as part of this application shall be fully implemented in strict accordance with approved drawing no. 17 within

Page 26 REPORT OF THE HEAD OF COMMUNITY WELLBEING AND DEVELOPMENT – Date 7th March 2016 three months of the first use of the development with the exception of soft landscaping which shall be carried out in the first planting season (November to March) or seeding season (April to September) following the first use. 19. The landscaping scheme as carried out in connection with condition nos. 17 and 18 shall be permanently retained. Any planting becoming severely damaged or seriously diseased, or is in poor physiological condition and/or are removed without the written permission of the Local Planning Authority shall be replaced with trees or shrubs and within a timescale all to be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. 20. No part of the development shall commence until details of the proposed Reasonable Avoidance Measures (RAMS) have been submitted to and approved, in writing, by the Local Planning Authority. The details shall include the details of the appointment of an Ecological Clerk of Works. The development shall be carried out in strict accordance with the RAMS as are approved. 21. All boundary means of enclosure (including internal sub-division) shall be submitted to and approved, in writing, by the Local Planning Authority. No boundary means of enclosure shall be undertaken except in strict accordance with the details as are approved and to a timescale to be agreed as part of the submitted details and retained thereafter unless otherwise agreed, in writing, with the Local Planning Authority. 22. Prior to commencement of works on site a scheme of proposed engineering/excavation works on site shall be submitted to and approved, in writing, by the Local Planning Authority. Works shall be carried out strictly in accordance with the details as are approved, unless otherwise agreed, in writing, with the Local Planning Authority. 23. Notwithstanding the provisions of the Town and Country Planning (General Permitted Development) Order 1995 (or any order revoking, re- enacting that Order with or without modification), no further development shall take place under Classes A, B, C and E of Schedule 2 Part(s) I, other than the development hereby granted permission.

REASON(S)

1. To comply with Section 91(3) of the Town and Country Planning Act, 1990. 2. To ensure a satisfactory standard of appearance of the development in the interests of the visual amenities of the area. 3. To ensure that adequate visibility is provided at the proposed point of access to the highway. 4. To ensure that adequate visibility is provided at the proposed point of access to the highway. 5. In the interest of safety and the free flow of traffic on the adjoining highway. 6. In the interests of highway safety. 7. In the interest of the free and safe movement of traffic on the adjacent highway and to ensure the formation of a safe and satisfactory access. 8. In the interests of highway safety.

Page 27 REPORT OF THE HEAD OF COMMUNITY WELLBEING AND DEVELOPMENT – Date 7th March 2016

9. To provide for the parking and turning of vehicles clear of the highway and to ensure that reversing by vehicles into or from the highway is rendered unnecessary in the interest of traffic safety. 10. In the interests of highway safety. 11. To protect the amenities of the occupiers of nearby properties. 12. To protect the amenities of the occupiers of nearby properties. 13. In the interests of the amenities of the future occupants of the buildings 14. In the interests of the amenities of the future occupants of the buildings 15. To protect the integrity of the public sewerage system and prevent hydraulic overloading of the public sewerage system. To protect the health and safety of existing residents and to ensure no detriment to the environment. 16. In the interest of human health and ecological interests. 17. To ensure a satisfactory standard of appearance of the development in the interests of the visual amenities of the area. 18. To ensure a satisfactory standard of appearance of the development in the interests of the visual amenities of the area. 19. To ensure a satisfactory standard of appearance of the development in the interests of the visual amenities of the area. 20. To protect the great crested newt in the interests of the conservation of wildlife. 21. In the interests of the general visual amenities of the area and to respect the setting of the Listed Building. 22. In the interests of land stability and the general visual amenities of the area. 23. In the interests of the general visual amenities of the area and to respect the setting of the Listed Building.

NOTE(S) TO APPLICANT

Your attention is drawn to the advisory notes from Welsh Water and attached to this decision.

The separate written consent of the Local Highway Authority must be obtained before any work is carried out within the confines of the highway.

A licence should be obtained (as required by section 184 of the Highways Act 1980) from the Highway Authority in order to lower the kerbline and cross the footpath at the new access position. Further guidance can be obtained from the Highways Department of Wrexham County Borough Council on telephone 01978 729690.

Your attention is drawn to the Standard Advice - Guidance Note for Developers.

The applicant is advised that compliance with condition no. 11 does not provide an exemption from the statutory noise nuisance provisions of the Environmental Protection Act 1990. Any complaints received relating to noise from the development during the permitted hours may still be investigated using the Council's Standardised Procedure for Dealing with Noise Nuisance

Page 28 REPORT OF THE HEAD OF COMMUNITY WELLBEING AND DEVELOPMENT – Date 7th March 2016

Complaints and legal action may be taken where appropriate.

The applicant is advised that the Council has the option to control construction noise by serving a Control of Pollution Act 1974, Section 60, Notice where deemed necessary, and failure to comply with such a Notice can result in prosecution. For further information and advice regarding construction noise please contact the Council's Housing and Public Protection Department on 01978 315300.

The Applicant is advised that under the Environmental Protection Act 1990, dust from construction and/or demolition activities can be judged to be causing a statutory nuisance to neighbouring properties. A legal notice can be served requiring that any dust nuisance is abated and failure to comply with the requirements of the notice can result in prosecution. The applicant should contact the Council's Housing and Public Protection Department on 01978 315300 for further advice and information.

The development site is in close proximity to Mold Road and the developer is therefore required to carry out a noise survey in connection with condition no. 12 in order to determine noise levels for both day (0700 - 2300 hours) and night (2300 - 0700 hours) having regard to Planning Guidance (Wales), Technical Advice Note (TAN) 11 - Noise. The report of the noise survey findings shall include: a) Noise levels arising from day/night time activities in the vicinity of the proposed development site and the impact upon the proposed accommodation, and b) A detailed scheme of noise insulation and / or attenuation measures so designed to safeguard the amenity of the future occupants of the proposed accommodation hereby approved.

Further advice on compliance with condition no. 13 may be obtained by contacting the Council's Environmental Protection Team on 01978 315733. Should the investigation identify contamination issues that may affect receptors other than the site users e.g. groundwater, then it is recommended

Page 29 REPORT OF THE HEAD OF COMMUNITY WELLBEING AND DEVELOPMENT – Date 7th March 2016 that these works are also addressed in consultation with the Housing and Public Protection Department prior to commencement of works on site.

It is the applicant's responsibility to take legal advice in relation to the Disused Burial Grounds Act. ______

Page 30 REPORT OF THE HEAD OF COMMUNITY WELLBEING AND DEVELOPMENT – Date 7th March 2016

RECOMMENDATION C

That if the obligation pursuant to Section 106 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 is not completed within 6 months of the date of the Committee Resolution the Head of Community Wellbeing and Development is given delegated authority to refuse the application for the following reason:-

No contribution has been made towards the provision of additional school capacity and without the additional provision, there would be insufficient capacity to cater for the development. As such the development does not accord with policy GDP2 of the development.

______

Page 31 REPORT OF THE HEAD OF COMMUNITY WELLBEING AND DEVELOPMENT – Date 7th March 2016

APPLICATION NO: LOCATION: DATE RECEIVED: P/2015 /0644 FIVE CROSSES INN RUTHIN ROAD 25/08/2015 BWLCHGWYN WREXHAM LL11 3UT COMMUNITY: CASE OFFICER: Minera DESCRIPTION: JS ERECTION OF CLASS A1 (RETAIL) CONVENIENCE STORE WITH WARD: ASSOCIATED CAR PARKING, AGENT NAME: Minera ACCESS ARRANGEMENTS, PETER BRETT LANDSCAPING AND ATM MACHINE ASSOCIATES

APPLICANT(S) NAME: NEW RIVER RETAIL PROPERTY UNIT TRUST, NO. 4 ______P/2015/0644 THE SITE

The site is located on the north east side of Ruthin Road (A525). It is located on the fringe of the main residential area of Coedpoeth, and the flats of Aldergrove Place are located adjacent to the north east boundary. The Five Crosses Industrial Estate is adjacent to the north west boundary of the site.

Aldergrove Place Five Crosses Industrial Estate

Application Site

Page 32 REPORT OF THE HEAD OF COMMUNITY WELLBEING AND DEVELOPMENT – Date 7th March 2016

PROPOSAL

As above. The submitted application has been amended a couple of times, and the latest plans indicate the following:

Erection of new single storey Class A1: shop premises with ATM on outside wall, with a gross floorspace of 232m2, with a shared car parking area (to be used by the new retail store and the adjacent public house) of 23 spaces. There is also separate room for off street parking for the owner / operator of the public house off Gwernygaseg Road.

The finished floor level of the store will be 2m above the level of the nearest residential properties.

The application has been submitted with transport statement and other supporting documents, including swept path analyses for on-site and off-site vehicle movements for HGVs. Additionally various off-site pedestrian facilities have been indicated, and a draft Delivery Management Plan.

An existing recycling facility within the car park area would need to be relocated to a new site, because there is no room available if the retail store is located on the site.

The retail store as originally submitted with this application indicated a gross floor space of 325m2, with a shared parking area of 18 spaces. The current amended submission has reduced the gross size of retail store by 93m2, and the car park has been increased by 5 spaces. The position of the new store has been moved further away from the public house.

Also when compared with the first planning application (e.g. P/2015/0011) the gross floor area of the store is now 140m2 (or third of original size) smaller, and the shared on-site parking area has been increased by 8 spaces. It also includes dedicated parking provision for the disabled spaces near to entrance area, a parent with child facility, and cycle stands.

Page 33 REPORT OF THE HEAD OF COMMUNITY WELLBEING AND DEVELOPMENT – Date 7th March 2016

HISTORY

P/2015/0011 Erection of retail store with ATM together with associated works. Withdrawn 6.3.15. [The retail floor area was indicated to be 372m2, with 15 spaces – to be shared between the adjacent Five Crosses pub house and the new store]

DEVELOPMENT PLAN

Within settlement limits. Policies PS1, PS2, GDP1, S6, and T8 are relevant.

CONSULTATIONS

Community Council: Objects. - Although the application contains more parking than the original application of P/2015/0011 it was felt that the scheme contains or provides the following: - Insufficient parking spaces. - There will be manoeuvring difficulties for delivery vehicles to and from A525. - There is traffic congestion impacting on the area at a fraught junction area. -The position of the shop will reduce visibility for traffic exiting Minera Industrial Estate. - The 2.7m sound proof barrier will remove natural light to ground floor flat.

Page 34 REPORT OF THE HEAD OF COMMUNITY WELLBEING AND DEVELOPMENT – Date 7th March 2016

- The upper floor flats will have increased noise pollution. - Highway improvements are required. - Re-consulted 15.1.16 Local Member(s): Notified 28.8.15 and re-consulted 15.1.16 Public Protection: No objections subject to controls by planning conditions – including a restriction on permissible hours of deliveries to the store. The site is within an area of historical lead mining, and potential contamination must be addressed. Natural Resources Wales: No objection. Welsh Water: No objections but conditions are required to ensure that no surface water or land drainage is allowed to connect directly or indirectly to the public sewerage system. Land drainage scheme for the site should be submitted for approval. The site is crossed by a 150mm public sewer and the building should not be within 3m of the centre line of the sewer. Highways: Based upon the latest amended plans, the new retail unit would require a maximum of 16 spaces. The public house would need a maximum of 20 parking spaces – to give a maximum requirement of 36 spaces. The scheme provides 23 spaces, which is 33% below maximum standards. The current site for the pub use has 34 spaces.

The delivery vehicle will impeded 9 spaces for between 30 – 40 minutes, and potentially 1 – 2 deliveries per day. This would leave 15 spaces if one delivery lorry, and only 6 spaces if two at same time. A service and delivery plan is required, and this should consider the operational hours of the public house use.

It is noted that the site is poorly served by footways and crossing points. The developer needs to carry out a number of improvements to improve pedestrian access to and from the site. [These items are included in the main body of the report as part of the highway safety and accessibility heading].

It is also recommended that swept paths of vehicles (16m long HGVs) negotiating the Minera Hall Road / Ruthin Rod and Gwernygaseg Road / Ruthin Road junctions are provided to ensure that the pedestrian safety improvements do not impede vehicle movements at these locations.

Page 35 REPORT OF THE HEAD OF COMMUNITY WELLBEING AND DEVELOPMENT – Date 7th March 2016

A traffic regulation order is required to ensure that no indiscriminate on-street parking occurs along this section of Ruthin Road and nearby junctions, and the TRO will need to be funded by the applicant. Double yellow lines to include no waiting / no loading, and it will need to cover both sides of Ruthin Road, Gwernygaseg Road / Ruthin Road junction and Minera Hall Road / Ruthin Road junction. Site Notice: Expired 30.9.15 Other Representations: 16 neighbours notified, and three letters received raising the following: - The Five Crosses junction is regularly crossed by children, and on dark evenings. Visibility at the junction is made worse at time by inclement weather. The store will increase pedestrians young and old at the busiest times, and therefore pedestrian safety is important. Traffic lights are required. The junction is horrendous. - Own ground floor kitchen and bedroom windows (No. 17 Aldergrove Place) are near to the boundary, and boundary treatments will cause light to be blocked. - The hours of use will be about 6.00am to 10.00pm and there will be more traffic going onto the site at these times, and it will be noisy early morning and late at night. - Privacy will be affected

A petition of 4 signatures from some of the 12 flats in Aldergrove Place has been received, and concern has been raised that the proposed development will affect their current amenities.

Neighbours re-notified on 15.1.16, and one letter received raising the following: - Concerned that it will become more difficult to maintain the sloping ground between the car park and the properties in Aldergrove Place and requests that this area is slabbed to reduce maintenance.

SPECIAL CONSIDERATIONS

Background: This application follows an earlier planning application which was withdrawn. That previous scheme involved a much larger building, and incorporated less room for on-site parking, and it did not specify pedestrian safety features for adjacent roads or at local junction areas. The application was generally lacking information, and this latest amended application seeks to address the shortcomings of the original scheme.

Page 36 REPORT OF THE HEAD OF COMMUNITY WELLBEING AND DEVELOPMENT – Date 7th March 2016

Policy: Small scale shopping development at this location is acceptable in principle under the terms of UDP Policies PS1 and S6, providing the development is safely accessible for customers on foot; does not impact upon residential amenity, or give rise to traffic problems. Also the sales area should not exceed 300m2.

Issues of accessibility and traffic, will be examined as separate items in my report below. Likewise residential amenity will also be considered separately below.

In terms of scale gross floorspace of the store will be 232m2, and due to the tightness of the site there is limited scope to extend this sales area without compromising the parking layout, and the size of the store is below the 300m2 threshold for a local need shopping facility.

It is considered that the scale of use will not impact upon the vitality and viability of the nearby district shopping centre of Coedpoeth. That centre is 800m away, and although located along the same stretch of Ruthin Road, this proposed store is more likely to serve customers at the northern end of the Coedpoeth settlement area; although there is potential that the store may also prove useful for residents living further afield, within the nearby settlement areas, e.g. Minera, Bwlchgwyn and Gwynfryn which are lacking shopping facilities. Minera at its nearest point is 440m away down Minera Hall Lane.

Following negotiations with the applicant, the scale of the store has been reduced by a third since the first submission, and this will help maintain its local shopping purpose; and every effort has been made as part of the amended application to ensure that pedestrian links to adjacent residential areas is improved to help its accessibility. Usefully the site is immediately adjacent to Five Crosses Industrial Estate and therefore it could help provide an ancillary function for employees working on that estate. Neighbours have been re-advised regarding the latest plans and any further comments will be reported in the addendum.

Highway / pedestrian safety, and accessibility: The site is located on the busy A-classified Ruthin Road, and given this location it would not be suitable to allow a use which generated any possibilities for on-street parking which could cause interference to the free flow of through traffic in close proximity to nearby traffic junctions, and the industrial estate access.

As a result, the current submission has been subject to much discussion regarding potential highway impacts, and the latest amended plans now overcome those initial concerns. The reduced the scale of the retail use is now at a level that is now deemed acceptable for the ratio of on-site parking for the resulting shared use. If the pub was not open at the same time as the store, the parking provision exceeds maximum provision by 7 spaces, and therefore the convenience store would have the benefit of more spaces to use at certain times of the day. Also from a pedestrian safety viewpoint, the store will be better connected to adjacent residential areas, to allow local residents

Page 37 REPORT OF THE HEAD OF COMMUNITY WELLBEING AND DEVELOPMENT – Date 7th March 2016 or public transport users improved pedestrian facilities within the area, and crossing facilities will be improved in close proximity to the site.

The latest amended scheme includes the following highway matters:

Widening / improvements to existing footways on the corner of B5426 Minera Hall Road , including extension to footway along western side of Ruthin Road to a new 1.4m splitter (refuge) island – to allow a safer crossing point to the store. The running lines e.g. carriageway width on each side of the splitter island will be 2.9m min wide. The provision of 1.4m wide splitter (refuge) island across Minera Hall Road junction with Ruthin Road, including associated dropped kerbs. Improvements to the kerb radius / footway at south east corner of Gwernygaseg Road junction. This will require the area leading to the existing driveway serving the residential property of Groesfa to be altered – sketched below on the photo.

Groesfa – located between Gwernygaseg Road (left) and Talwrn Road (right)

General location of kerb line Improvements to provide a footway (of limitedand width) footway at alterations side of public house adjacent to Gwernygaseg Road, and a footway crossing point between this path and the existing pavement behind the pub in Gwernygaseg Road in front of the flats in Aldergrove Place.

Improvements to all footway crossing points at the junction areas – where currently no dropped kerbs and tactile paving.

These works will not only benefit those visiting the store, but are likely to help any pedestrians accessing the general area, particularly employees walking to and from the adjacent Five Crosses Industrial Estate.

As a result of these improvements, Highways raise no objection subject to implementation of a Traffic Regulation Order (yellow lines) to control parking and waiting, within the highway, and some further design controls and information regarding the management of service deliveries, and the

Page 38 REPORT OF THE HEAD OF COMMUNITY WELLBEING AND DEVELOPMENT – Date 7th March 2016 submission of a travel plan. Some extra information has been submitted to this regard, and Highways needs to assess that final information, and any comments will be reported in the addendum.

It is therefore considered that the amended scheme now provides a useful way forward to overcome earlier highway safety concerns. However it will also be useful for any Ruthin Road boundary treatment(s) for the site to be designed and maintained to have a low level treatment i.e. no higher than 0.5m – to allow motorists using the facility, a good clear view into site because otherwise the availability of on-site parking will be hidden because the parking area will be set at a lower level than the adjacent carriageway level. This design feature should allow motorists an early opportunity to see if there is any room to park within the site, to reduce potential for any congestion or delay within the highway. This boundary treatment can be controlled by planning condition.

Design: The store building is design to have a fairly simplistic single store gable roof design, but it is not unacceptable for the location, and this aspect of the scheme raises no issues. Scope to include a later mezzanine sales area within the building is very limited.

Neighbour concerns: The site is near to some existing residential properties, and accordingly it is noted that the closest elevation is the rear elevation of flats Nos 14 – 17 Aldergrove Place; and this is only 4m from the site boundary.

It is noted that their boundary is already adjacent to the public house car park, and therefore their residential amenity has potential to be affected by the operational activities of that existing use. However, the proposed development will increase use of the car park at other times, and in order to help off-set those impacts, the proposals incorporates a 1.2m high fence with some planting in front to help provide some screening from any car headlights using the spaces by the flats. Based upon the current situation, I believe that this new boundary treatment will help to protect their current amenities, and it would not be conducive for this fence to be increased any higher because the ground floor accommodation of the nearest properties could experience some loss of light because they are located a couple of metres below the level of the car park at that location.

The reduced size and position of new retail building will not cause any other loss of light issues to surrounding properties. Nos 18 to 21 Aldergrove Place are directly facing the building, but these are over 38m away from the side elevation of new store and the delivery area at the side of the building will be screened with a substantial fence (2.7m high) which is just below the gutters of the roof on the retail building. The nearest properties, i.e. Nos 14 – 17 Aldergrove Place are situated at an oblique angle, and the single storey height of the store will not be unduly imposing as a result. Any illuminated advertisement signage on the building/site would be controlled under other legislation. Lighting for the site has not been submitted and this should be regulated.

Page 39 REPORT OF THE HEAD OF COMMUNITY WELLBEING AND DEVELOPMENT – Date 7th March 2016

The proposed use has potential to cause some noise and disturbance issues, particularly if the store is open late at night, or if deliveries are made during quieter times of the day. The application submission has confirmed that the operational hours could be up to 07:00 to 23:00 every day. These opening times are consistent for a convenience store of this kind, but delivery times should be less than these hours because those operations have more potential to cause nuisance to adjacent residents.

Delivery details have not been fully finalised with the applicant, but at this stage it is currently confirmed that they would like to operate the earliest deliveries the same as their proposed store opening hours, e.g. 07:00 on Mondays to Saturdays, and from 10.00 am for Sundays & Bank Holidays. However the pub could have their deliveries times delayed until after 07:30am on Mondays to Saturdays.

At the other end of the day, deliveries could take place up until 21:00.

Some newspaper deliveries may also need to take place outside these times, but these will not have great significance. On Sundays and Bank Holidays the main deliveries can be limited to 10:00 to 18:00.

It is noted that a screen fence will be positioned at the side of the building, and this will help control noise from deliveries. However the main delivery vehicles (up 10.1m long HGV) will need to use the main car park area for deliveries, and this daily operational work could impact adjacent properties unless the hours are suitably controlled. I also have no noise survey evidence to consider which may help understand local background noise levels for times early in the morning, to see whether deliveries are likely to generate additional noise or not. Without this, it will be important to limit delivery times – to coincide to times when there is likely to be more activity (and noise) even though the site is located adjacent to the Ruthin Road and an industrial estate.

Therefore planning conditions to cover operational hours, delivery hours and a delivery management plan is required, together with a boundary noise control, to help protect the amenities of nearby residential property.

Following the submission of amended plans, it has been confirmed that the sloping ground between the car park and the adjacent properties might become more difficult to manage by the residents because they can currently carry out some of the maintenance from the car park area. This will become more difficult if a fence is erected along the boundary. It is unclear whether the residents have any rights to gain access to the existing private car park for this purpose, and ultimately this is a third party issue. An advisory note can be included as part of the decision to suggest that this matter is mutually examined to find a landscaping solution.

Page 40 REPORT OF THE HEAD OF COMMUNITY WELLBEING AND DEVELOPMENT – Date 7th March 2016

CONCLUSION

On the basis of the amended plans and suitable amenity and highway safety controlling conditions and other highway controls, the scheme will help regulate any adverse impacts for nearby residents and it should ensure that the use does not compromise highway safety. The measures should also make the use fairly accessible use for foot borne customers living in the local area, and therefore the proposals meets the technical and shopping policy requirements of the UDP.

RECOMMENDATION A

That the Council enters into an obligation under Section 106 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 requiring:-

Funding and implementation of a Traffic Regulation Order before the retail store is first used, for a section of the A525 Ruthin Road in close proximity to the site, to also include the junction areas of Gwernygaseg Road / Ruthin Road junction and the Minera Hall Road / Ruthin Road junction, to restrict both the parking and waiting and loading of vehicles within the highway.

The final form and amount shall be determined by the Head of Community Wellbeing and Development.

RECOMMENDATION B

That if the Obligation pursuant to Section 106 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990, as detailed above, is not completed within six months of the date of the Committee resolution, the Head of Community Wellbeing and Development be given delegated authority to REFUSE planning permission for the following reasons:-

In absence of suitable highway parking and waiting controls within close proximity of the site, the proposed development could lead to on-street parking problems within the area, to the detriment of the free flow and safety of traffic along the A-classified highway (A 525 Ruthin Road), and this would be contrary to Policies S6b) and T8 of the Wrexham Unitary Development Plan.

RECOMMENDATION C

Subject to the completion of the S106 obligation, planning permission be GRANTED subject to the following conditions:

Page 41 REPORT OF THE HEAD OF COMMUNITY WELLBEING AND DEVELOPMENT – Date 7th March 2016

CONDITION(S)

1. The development hereby permitted shall be commenced before the expiry of five years from the date of this permission. 2. The development shall only be carried out in strict accordance with the amended plan(s) dated 15 January 2016. 3. No development shall take place until a Service and Delivery Management Plan ("the SDMP") for both the existing public house and the proposed retail store, to include (but not be limited to) the details of the timing and frequency of deliveries, the type of delivery vehicles to be used, delivery vehicle movements (incorporating staggered deliveries), management of car parking to facilitate the manoeuvring of delivery vehicles and details to control and/or prevent access during non-operational times has been submitted to and approved in writing by the local planning authority. The SDMP as agreed shall be implemented in accordance with the approved details. 4. No deliveries of goods to or collection of refuse from the retail unit hereby approved shall take place outside the hours of 07.30 and 22.00 hours on Mondays to Saturdays and between 10.00 and 18.00 hours on Sundays, with the exception of delivery of newspapers. 5. No part of the development shall commence until a scheme indicating the detailed layout, design, drainage and construction of the following has been submitted to and approved in writing with the Local Planning Authority: a) Widening / improvements to the existing footways on the corner of B5426 Minera Hall Road including extension to footway along western side of Ruthin Road to proposed splitter island (proposed and existing footways to be 2m wide). b) Provision of 1.4m wide splitter island across A525 Ruthin Road in approximate position of the existing public house car park entrance, providing 2.9m minimum width running lanes. c) Provision of 1.4m wide splitter island across Minera Hall Road junction with Ruthin Road including associated dropped kerbs / tactiles. d) Improvements to kerb radius / footway on south east corner of B5430 Gwernygaseg Road junction. e) Construction of footway alongside public house along Gwernygaseg Road. f) Construction of new car park access and reinstatement of existing access to full height footway construction. g) Re-location of existing light column on corner of proposed car park access. The details as approved shall be fully implemented prior to first use of the retail store. 6. No development shall take place until samples of the materials to be used in the construction of the external facing and roofing of the building hereby permitted have been submitted to and approved in writing by the local planning authority. Development shall be carried out in accordance with the approved details. 7. No part of the development shall commence until a scheme to deal with potential contamination at the site has been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. This scheme shall include a phased

Page 42 REPORT OF THE HEAD OF COMMUNITY WELLBEING AND DEVELOPMENT – Date 7th March 2016 investigation approach to identify the extent of contamination and any measures required to remediate the site, including post-development monitoring. 8. No part of the development shall be occupied until a Verification Report which demonstrates that the remedial works approved as part of condition no. 7 above have been satisfactorily carried out, has been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. 9. The rating level of any noise generated by air handling plant associated with the development shall not exceed the pre-existing background level by more than 5dB(A) at any time. The noise levels shall be determined at the nearest noise sensitive premises and measurements and assessment shall be made in accordance with BS4142:1997 'Method of Rating Industrial Noise Affecting Mixed Residential and Industrial Areas'. 10. The retail unit hereby permitted shall not be open to customers outside the following times: 07.00 hours to 23.00 hours on any day. 11. No development shall take place until a Travel Plan has been submitted to and approved in writing by the local planning authority. The Travel Plan shall include details of a Travel Plan co-ordinator, staff travel survey, measures to encourage the use of sustainable transport, walking and cycling initiatives, publicity and marketing, setting of targets and monitoring and review of the Travel Plan together with a timetable for the implementation of each of the elements. The Travel Plan shall be implemented in accordance with the approved details and remain operational for the life of the development. 12. A Final Travel Plan shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority following the first anniversary of first use of the development. 13. The site shall be developed in accordance with the ground and / or floor levels indicated on the approved plans. No changes to floor levels or external ground levels shall be made without the prior written approval of the Local Planning Authority. 14. Within six months of the first use of the development, trees and shrubs shall be planted on the site in accordance with a scheme which has been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. 15. The landscaping scheme including the paving and footpath areas submitted and approved in connection with condition no. 14 shall be fully implemented in all respects within three months of the first use of the building with the exception of soft landscaping which shall be carried out in the first planting season (November to March) or seeding season (April to September) following the first use. 16. The landscaping scheme as carried out in connection with condition no. 14 shall be retained for a minimum of three years. Within this timescale, any planting becoming severely damaged or seriously diseased, or is in poor physiological condition and/or are removed without the written permission of the Local Planning Authority shall be replaced with trees or shrubs and within a timescale all to be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. 17. The landscaping details to be submitted in connection with condition 15 above shall indicate details for a maximum maintained height of 0.5m above the nearside edge of the carriageway.

Page 43 REPORT OF THE HEAD OF COMMUNITY WELLBEING AND DEVELOPMENT – Date 7th March 2016

18. Notwithstanding the timescales given in connection with condition 15 above, the retail use of the building shall not be used until a 1.2m high fence has been fully erected along the boundary adjacent to Nos 14 - 17 Aldergrove Place, and the fence shall thereafter be permanently retained. 19. Details of any external lighting for the site (including lighting for the shared parking area) shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority, and the lighting for those areas shall be maintained in accordance with the approved scheme unless first agreed in writing with the Local Planning Authority. 20. The retail use hereby approved shall not be used until the new vehicular access provides visibility splays of 2.4m x 43m in both directions as measured to the nearside edge of the adjoining highway. Within these splays there shall be no obstruction in excess of 1m in height above the level of the adjoining highway. The splays shall thereafter be permanently retained clear of any such obstruction to visibility. 21. The on-site parking spaces (23 no.) and turning facilities as shown on the approved site layout plan(s) 14015-T29-010 Rev G, shall be fully laid out, surfaced and drained prior to first use of the retail store. The spaces shall thereafter be permanently retained as a shared parking facility in connection with both the retail store and the public house. No segregation of spaces between the uses shall be made, and the spaces and turning facilities shall be maintained in a useable condition for those designated purposes. 22. The cycle parking facilities as shown on the approved plan shall be fully provided before the retail store is first use, and thereafter these facilities shall be maintained for use by customers. 23. No development shall commence until a drainage scheme for the site has been submitted to and approved in writing by the local planning authority. The scheme shall provide for the disposal of foul, surface and land water, and include an assessment of the potential to dispose of surface and land water by sustainable means. Thereafter the scheme shall be implemented in accordance with the approved details prior to the occupation of the development and no further foul water, surface water and land drainage shall be allowed to connect directly or indirectly with the public sewerage system 24. Construction works shall not take place outside 07.30 hours to 18.00 hours Mondays to Fridays and 08.00 hours to 14.00 hours on Saturdays nor at any time on Sundays or Bank Holidays. 25. No part of the building shall be located within the 3m of centreline of the 150mm public sewer which crosses the site. 26. No part of the development shall commence until an appropriate Dust Management Scheme has been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The dust mitigation measures as are approved shall be fully implemented for the entire duration of the construction phase. 27. No part of the development shall commence until a Construction Traffic Management Plan including provisions for contractor parking has been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority and the Plan as is approved has been fully implemented.

Page 44 REPORT OF THE HEAD OF COMMUNITY WELLBEING AND DEVELOPMENT – Date 7th March 2016

REASON(S)

1. To comply with Section 91(3) of the Town and Country Planning Act, 1990. 2. To ensure that the development fully complies with the appropriate policies and standards. 3. To ensure that deliveries to the site do not cause a nuisance to adjoining residential occupiers, in the interests of the amenities of the area, and also to ensure that delivery vehicles do not cause excessive obstruction to parking facilities on site during operational hours or discriminate parking of adjacent highways. 4. To protect the amenities of the occupiers of nearby properties. 5. To ensure that the site is made more accessible for customers arriving by foot, to help ensure that on-site parking facilities are adequate for the scale of the development based upon its location next to a busy classified road and in the interests of highway and pedestrian safety. 6. To ensure a satisfactory standard of appearance of the development in the interests of the visual amenities of the area. 7. In the interests of the amenities of the future occupants of the buildings 8. In the interests of the amenities of the future occupants of the buildings 9. To protect the amenities of the occupiers of nearby properties. 10. To protect the amenities of nearby residential property. 11. In the interests of highway safety. 12. To support the Council's approved Integrated Transport Strategy and to reduce dependency on the motor vehicle. 13. To ensure that the development fully complies with the appropriate policies and standards. 14. To ensure a satisfactory standard of appearance of the development in the interests of the visual amenities of the area. 15. To ensure a satisfactory standard of appearance of the development in the interests of the visual amenities of the area. 16. To ensure a satisfactory standard of appearance of the development in the interests of the visual amenities of the area. 17. To ensure that clear views of the car park area is maintained from the adjacent highway (Ruthin Road) to ensure that car borne customers have a clear view of the site before entering the site, to prevent congestion at this location. 18. To protect the amenities of nearby occupants of residential property. 19. In order to protect the amenities of local residents. 20. In the interests of highway safety. 21. To ensure that adequate parking and turning is provided and maintained within the site, in the interests of highway safety. 22. To ensure that the site operates with the benefit of suitable cycle parking facilities, in the interests of making the site accessible for non-car customers. 23. To prevent hydraulic overloading of the public sewerage system, to protect the health and safety of existing residents and ensure no pollution of or detriment to the environment. 24. To protect the amenities of adjacent residents.

Page 45 REPORT OF THE HEAD OF COMMUNITY WELLBEING AND DEVELOPMENT – Date 7th March 2016

25. It is unclear from the submitted plans as to whether the integrity of the public sewer will be adequately protected by the development, and the distance is required to prevent damage thereto. 26. To protect the amenities of the occupiers of nearby properties. 27. In the interests of highway safety.

NOTE(S) TO APPLICANT

You are advised that this grant of planning permission was made following the completion of an Agreement under Section 106 of the Town and Country Planning Act. Before undertaking any work under this permission you are advised to obtain full details of the Agreement and ensure that you are able to comply with its terms.

This permission is granted subject to the above conditions. Some conditions may require your attention prior to you carrying out any work on the proposal. These conditions are known as ""conditions precedent"". You should be aware that it is important that you comply with any ""conditions precedent"". If you do not, then any work you undertake on the development subject of this permission would not have planning permission.

In respect of condition 25 above, the location of the 150mm public sewer is shown approximately in the position marked on the attached Statutory Public Sewer Record. Under the Water Industry Act 1991 Dwr Cymru / Welsh Water has rights of access to its apparatus at all times. No part of the building will be permitted within 3 metres either side of the centreline of the public sewer unless separate agreement has been first obtained.

The applicant is advised that compliance with condition no. 09 does not provide an exemption from the statutory noise nuisance provisions of the Environmental Protection Act 1990. Any complaints received relating to noise from the development during the permitted hours may still be investigated using the Council's Standardised Procedure for Dealing with Noise Nuisance Complaints and legal action may be taken where appropriate.

Page 46 REPORT OF THE HEAD OF COMMUNITY WELLBEING AND DEVELOPMENT – Date 7th March 2016

- Under the Clean Air Act 1993 it is an offence for a commercial activity to burn anything that gives rise to dark smoke.

Applicants are advised that compliance with condition no. 26 does not provide an exemption from the statutory nuisance provisions of the Environmental Protection Act 1990. Under the Act dust from any type of activity can be judged to be causing a statutory nuisance to neighbouring properties. A legal notice can be served requiring that the dust nuisance is abated and failure to comply with the requirements of the notice can result in prosecution. The applicant should contact the Council's Housing and Public Protection Department on 01978 315300 for further advice and information.

Further advice on compliance with condition no. 07 may be obtained by contacting the Council's Environmental Protection Team on 01978 315733. Should the investigation identify contamination issues that may affect receptors other than the site users e.g. groundwater, then it is recommended that these works are also addressed in consultation with the Housing and Public Protection Department prior to commencement of works on site. This permission does not authorise any advertisements on or within the site. Those matters are subject to separate legislation i.e. Town and Country Planning (Control of Advertisements) Regulations,1992.

You should ensure that any difference between the plans approved under the Town and Country Planning Acts and under the Building Regulations is resolved prior to commencement of development, by formal submission of amended plans.

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

It is recommended that information outlining how the former mining activities affect the proposed development, along with any mitigation measures required (for example the need for gas protection measures within the foundations), be submitted alongside any subsequent application for Building Regulations approval (if relevant). Your attention is drawn to The Coal Authority Policy in relation to new development and mine entries available at: https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/building-on-or-within-the- influencing-distance-of-mine-entries

Page 47 REPORT OF THE HEAD OF COMMUNITY WELLBEING AND DEVELOPMENT – Date 7th March 2016

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

Property specific summary information on past, current and future coal mining activity can be obtained from: www.groundstability.com

If any of the coal mining features are unexpectedly encountered during development, this should be reported immediately to The Coal Authority on 0345 762 6848. Further information is available on The Coal Authority website at:www.gov.uk/government/organisations/the-coal-authority.

You are advised that any works to implement condition 5 above will also require separate permission of the Highways Authority under Section 278 of the the Highways Act, and those works will need to be constructed to a standard suitable for adoption by the Council for future maintenance at public expense. The works will need to be completed to the Highway Authority satisfaction before they can be fully adopted. This will include the provision of a bond to cover the estimated value of such works.

With regards to the Travel Plan, it is recommended that the developer contracts Jessica Pritchard - Regional Travel Plan Co-ordinator on Tel: 01352 704544 to discuss the proposed content of any Final Travel Plan.

In respect of the Traffic Regulation Order (TRO), you are advised to liaise with the Traffic Section (contact Darren Green) on tel no. 01987 729643 to implement the required TRO.

You are advised that the new fencing to be erected along the boundary with Aldergrove Place will make it more difficult for residents to maintain their sloping ground area between the site and the main finished ground levels of the adjoining residential site. The residents accordingly would wlecome discussion(s) with the owner(s) to see how this slope can be made more manageable for the future on their behalf during the construction phase of the development. ______

Page 48 REPORT OF THE HEAD OF COMMUNITY WELLBEING AND DEVELOPMENT – Date 7th March 2016

APPLICATION NO: LOCATION: DATE RECEIVED: P/2015 /0697 FORMER BANK CRANE STREET 16/09/2015 CEFN MAWR WREXHAM LL14 3AB COMMUNITY: CASE OFFICER: Cefn DESCRIPTION: PF DEMOLITION OF FORMER BANK BUILDING (WITHIN CEFN MAWR WARD: CONSERVATION AREA) AGENT NAME: Cefn PAUL WHALE STUDIO APPLICANT(S) NAME: 83 MR BRIAN DAVIES MR PAUL WHALE ______

THE SITE

Footprint of building in question

PROPOSAL

Conservation Area Consent is sought for the demolition of the former bank building.

HISTORY

P/1999/0140 Change of use to community centre and charity shop. Granted 11.02.2000 P/2008/0238 Erection of 4 no. two bedroom semi-detached dwellings. Granted 17.09.2008

Page 49 REPORT OF THE HEAD OF COMMUNITY WELLBEING AND DEVELOPMENT – Date 7th March 2016

P/2008/0968 Conservation Area Consent for the demolition of an existing building. Granted 03.11.2008 P/2015/0698 Erection of 3 no. three bedroom terraced houses and 1 no. detached three bedroom house. Pending.

DEVELOPMENT PLAN

The site is located within the defined Cefn Mawr settlement and the Cefn Mawr Conservation Area. Policy EC8 of the Wrexham Unitary Development Plan (UDP) and the Cefn Mawr Conservation Area Assessment and Management Plan are applicable.

CONSULTATIONS

Community Council: Supports application. Local Member(s): Cllr D R Taylor – as a member of the Planning Committee no concerns are raised at this stage. Site Notice: Expired 14.10.2015 Neighbouring Occupiers: One representation received raising the following points: - Will the buildings be built with appropriate materials to respect their position within the conservation area; - What attention to monitoring throughout the build and also where the building is situated?; - The proposed application makes nonsense of the conservation area. Has consideration been given to mining workings in the area; and - What impact will the development have upon existing access and exits and neighbouring buildings.

SPECIAL CONSIDERATIONS:

Background: The Planning Committee may recall that consideration was given to the proposed redevelopment of this site at the February meeting (P/2015/0698). It was resolved to grant planning permission upon completion of a planning obligation in relation to education contributions as well providing the requisite notification to the Health and Safety Executive due to the proximity of the site to former Flexsys Rubber Chemicals plant. The determination of this application is progressing, but remains outstanding at this time.

Visual amenity: The existing building on the site is not considered to be of any architectural merit and has a negative visual impact at a focal point within the Cefn Mawr Conservation Area. Policy EC8 of the UDP allows for demolition in a conservation area where such actions would bring about positive benefit to the conservation area’s enhancement. Whilst policy EC8 also states that planning permission should be in place for a replacement development, in this instance, I am satisfied that the demolition of the former

Page 50 REPORT OF THE HEAD OF COMMUNITY WELLBEING AND DEVELOPMENT – Date 7th March 2016 bank would bring about significant benefit to this location, even if further development is not secured at this stage. Nevertheless, I am satisfied that there is a reasonable chance that redevelopment of the site will be forthcoming. The demolition is to be welcomed. A photograph is shown below.

Building subject to application.

Representations: A single representation has been lodged on this file, but predominantly related to the proposed redevelopment of the site which has already been considered by members (P/2015/0698). I am satisfied that this proposed demolition has been given sufficient consideration in light of the proposed redevelopment of the site.

CONCLUSION

I consider that the proposed development will result in a significant visual benefit to the locality and will enhance the character of this prominent position within the Cefn Mawr conservation area. I recommend accordingly.

RECOMMENDATION: That permission be GRANTED

CONDITION(S)

1. The works hereby granted consent shall be begun before the expiry of five years from the date of this consent. 2. No part of the development shall commence until an appropriate Dust Management Scheme has been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The dust mitigation measures as are approved shall be fully implemented for the entire duration of the construction phase. 3. No demolition shall commence until a scheme of site remediation works has been submitted to and approved, in writing, by the Local Planning Authority. The site shall be cleared and retained in strict accordance with the scheme as may be approved.

Page 51 REPORT OF THE HEAD OF COMMUNITY WELLBEING AND DEVELOPMENT – Date 7th March 2016

REASON(S)

1. To comply with Section 18 of the Planning (Listed Building and Conservation Areas) Act 1990. 2. To protect the amenities of the occupiers of nearby properties. 3. To ensure a satisfactory standard of appearance of the development in the interests of the visual amenities of the area. ______

Page 52 REPORT OF THE HEAD OF COMMUNITY WELLBEING AND DEVELOPMENT – Date 7th March 2016

APPLICATION NO: LOCATION: DATE RECEIVED: P/2015 /0809 THE TOWERS NURSERY 27/10/2015 LLANGOLLEN ROAD TREVOR WREXHAM COMMUNITY: LL14 3SG CASE OFFICER: Llangollen Rural SEH DESCRIPTION: PROPOSED SINGLE STOREY WARD: BUILDING TO FORM GARAGE AND AGENT NAME: Llangollen Rural WC ON THE GROUND FLOOR WITH INDEPENDENT HOME OFFICE IN THE ROOFSPACE ON SURVEY LTD EXISTING CAR PARK TO BE USED MR PHIL HIGGINS IN CONNECTION WITH AND ANCILLARY TO THE TOWERS DAY NURSERY

APPLICANT(S) NAME: MRS ANNE ROBERTS ______

THE SITE

Proposed Garage

PROPOSAL

As above.

Page 53 REPORT OF THE HEAD OF COMMUNITY WELLBEING AND DEVELOPMENT – Date 7th March 2016

RELEVANT HISTORY

P/2015/0373 Proposed new garage and office on existing car park Application withdrawn on 26/06/2015 P/2010/0026 Relaxation of condition to increase the number of children allowed from 16 to 24. Decision Pending P/2006/0195 Porch extension. Approved on 24/03/2006 P/2004/0720 Relaxation of condition to increase the number of children allowed from 14 to 16. Approved on 06/09/2004 CB01586 Change of use of ground floor to children’s day nursery (for 14 children). Approved on 04/03/1998 37/17971 Change of use to two flats. Approved on 30/10/1995

DEVELOPMENT PLAN

Inside settlement limit and partially within Zone C2 Flood Risk. UDP Policies PS2, GDP1, EC12, EC13 and T8 apply. Local Planning Guidance Notes Nos. 16 ‘Parking Standards’ and 21 ‘Space around Dwellings’ are also relevant.

CONSULTATIONS

Community Council: Raises no objection to the development. However there is one comment in that the Community Councillors have said that in their opinion the car park will be affected as it will be considerably reduced. This will have a detrimental effect as cars will be parking on the roadway to offload the children. There is also a concern about the overhead electric cables as these could create a problem. Local Member: Re-notified 07.12.15 Highways: No objections subject to recommended conditions (please see special considerations below). Welsh Water: No objections. NRW: No objections subject to the submission of a surface water drainage scheme and scheme of flood water mitigation measures (by condition). Wales & West Utilities: Map provided which confirm that no apparatus cross the site. National Grid: Consulted 30.11.15 HSE: Does not advise against the development. Public Protection: No objection subject to recommended conditions relating to potential land contamination and noise nuisance during the construction phase. Site Notices: Expired 20.11.15 Neighbours: 7 objections to the development received for the following reasons: Loss of view;

Page 54 REPORT OF THE HEAD OF COMMUNITY WELLBEING AND DEVELOPMENT – Date 7th March 2016

The building is as big as a house; The building could be converted into a house; The office should be put in the main building; Reduction in parking and impact upon highway safety; Surface water drainage concerns; Construction noise nuisance

SPECIAL CONSIDERATIONS/ ISSUES

Background: An application was submitted last year (P/2015/0373) which was subsequently withdrawn to allow for a re-design of the scheme. This application has been submitted following lengthy negotiations with the applicant and the scheme now submitted takes full account of that which was discussed. The main issues to consider relate to the impact of the development upon local residential and visual amenity, and upon highway safety.

Design and Residential Amenity: Proposed is a single storey building with a garage and WC on the ground floor and office space in the roof void. At 5 metres high, the building is approximately 1 metre higher than the average domestic garage and there is a dormer window on the rear roof slope to achieve the necessary headroom in the roof to create a useable office space. Separation distances are in accordance with Council guidelines and there would be no significant loss of light or privacy to the surrounding dwellings, nor would there be any over dominancy of the adjacent amenity areas.

Surface Water: The site lies partially within a Zone C2 Flood Risk as defined in TAN 15 Development & Flood Risk (2004). Due to the scale and nature of the proposals, NRW has not raised any objection on flood risk grounds subject to the submission of a limited Flood Consequences Assessment and a scheme of appropriate flood proofing and mitigation measures to be incorporated into the development. These details will be secured by planning condition.

Highways, Access and Parking: The site has an existing access on to an unclassified highway which is subject to a 30 mph speed limit. Actual speeds are considered to be no greater than 20 mph due to the geometry of the road.

Planning permission was granted in 1998 for use of the ground floor of the property as a children’s day nursery. Although it appears that the access was properly laid out in accordance with the highway engineer’s recommendations, visibility is now restricted by vegetation growing behind the fence. It is essential that adequate visibility is maintained from the access and this will be secured by condition. The proposal does not increase the number of children permitted at the nursery and the proposal will not therefore intensify the use of the roads in the vicinity.

The car park where the garage is to be erected is currently suitable for the parking of 9 cars (if parked meticulously in this unmarked parking area). I am

Page 55 REPORT OF THE HEAD OF COMMUNITY WELLBEING AND DEVELOPMENT – Date 7th March 2016 aware that there are concerns in relation to the loss of parking facilities at the site. As part of the scheme it is proposed to remove an existing storage shed and some vegetation, and realign and properly mark out the parking spaces so that it will remain possible to park 9 cars within the site. There will also be room to park 2 vehicles within the garage thus parking facilities will increase from 9 to 11 spaces should planning permission be granted.

I am also aware of local concerns that customers of the nursery are not utilising the car park but instead choose to park on the road. A car parking management plan is therefore required in order to encourage customers to use the car park when dropping off and picking up their children. This will be secured by planning condition.

Other Matters: Concern has been raised in relation to the loss of view over this land; however there is no right to a view over the land and this is not a relevant planning consideration.

Concerns in relation to potential conflict with the overhead lines have been received. I confirm that National Grid has been consulted and that no objection to the development has been received.

Concerns have also been raised in respect of the impact upon residential amenity during the construction phase of the development. Conditions will be attached to any permission which restrict the hours of construction in order to limit instances of noise nuisance, along with conditions relating to the prevention of the burning of waste materials and dust management.

Comments have also been made that this building could be converted into residential use. This application is not for a residential building and must be determined on its own merits as a garage with office space above. A separate application for planning permission would be required should the applicant wish to change the use of the building in the future, and should an application be made, it will also be determined on its own merits.

CONCLUSION

The development is acceptable as according with UDP policy GDP1 and PS2 and will not be to the detriment of the character of the area. Subject to a condition ensuring that the car park is properly laid out and a condition restricting the use of the building, the development is acceptable in terms of highway safety and will not have a detrimental impact upon local residential amenity.

RECOMMENDATION: That permission be GRANTED

CONDITION(S)

1. The development hereby permitted shall be commenced before the expiry of five years from the date of this permission.

Page 56 REPORT OF THE HEAD OF COMMUNITY WELLBEING AND DEVELOPMENT – Date 7th March 2016

2. Prior to their use on the development samples of all external facing and roofing materials shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The development shall only be carried out in strict accordance with such details as are approved. 3. With the exception of those shown on the approved plan and notwithstanding the provisions of the Town and Country Planning (General Permitted Development) Order 1995 (or any order revoking, re-enacting that Order with or without modification) no windows or other openings shall be inserted in any elevation of the building or roof. 4. Use of the building shall only be for the garaging of vehicles in connection with the nursery and a WC on the ground floor, with an office in roof space in connection with and ancillary to the use of the property known as 'The Towers', as a children's day nursery only. The building shall not be converted for any other use. 5. Within six months of the first use of the development, trees and shrubs shall be planted on the site in accordance with a scheme which has been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. 6. The landscaping scheme as carried out in connection with condition no. 5 shall be permanently retained. Any planting becoming severely damaged or seriously diseased, or is in poor physiological condition and/or are removed without the written permission of the Local Planning Authority shall be replaced with trees or shrubs and within a timescale all to be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. 7. All works in relation to the implementation of this permission, including deliveries to and / or leaving the site, shall be undertaken only between the hours of 7.30 and 18.00 Monday to Friday, and 08.00 to 14.00 on a Saturday, and at no time on a Sunday or a Bank Holiday. 8. No part of the development shall commence until a scheme for the comprehensive and integrated drainage of the site indicating provision for foul water, surface water and land drainage has been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. Prior to the submission of those details, an assessment shall be carried out into the potential for disposing of surface water by means of Sustainable urban Drainage Systems (SuDS) in accordance with the principles of sustainable drainage systems set out in Technical Advice Note 15: Development and Flood Risk, and the results of the assessment shall be submitted in writing to the Local Planning Authority. Where a SuDS scheme is to be implemented, the submitted details shall: i) Provide information about the design storm period and intensity, the method employed to delay and control the surface water discharged from the site and the measures taken to prevent pollution of receiving ground water and/or surface waters; ii) Specify the responsibilities of each party for the implementation of the SuDS scheme, together with a timetable for that implementation; and, iii) Provide a timescale for implementation, management and maintenance plan for the lifetime of the development which shall include the arrangements for adoption by any public authority or statutory undertaker and any other arrangements to secure the operation of the scheme throughout its lifetime. 9. No part of the development shall be occupied until the sustainable drainage scheme for the site has been completed in accordance with condition no. 8. The sustainable drainage scheme shall be managed and

Page 57 REPORT OF THE HEAD OF COMMUNITY WELLBEING AND DEVELOPMENT – Date 7th March 2016 maintained thereafter in strict accordance with the agreed management and maintenance plan. 10. No part of the development shall commence until a scheme to deal with potential contamination at the site has been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. This scheme shall include a phased investigation approach to identify the extent of contamination and any measures required to remediate the site, including post-development monitoring. 11. No part of the development shall be occupied until a Verification Report which demonstrates that the remedial works approved as part of condition no. 10 above have been satisfactorily carried out, has been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. 12. Prior to first use of the development hereby approved the vehicular access shall provide visibility splays of 2.4 metres x 25 metres in both directions measured to the nearside edge of the adjoining highway. Within these splays there shall be no obstruction in excess of 1 metre in height above the level of the nearside edge of the adjoining highway. The splays shall thereafter be permanently retained clear of any such obstruction to visibility. 13. There shall be no gates or other means of enclosure across the vehicular access point within 5 metres of the highway boundary. 14. Prior to first use of the vehicular access hereby approved, the access shall be surfaced with hard bound materials (e.g. bituminous macadam) for a minimum distance of 5 metres behind the adjoining highway. 15. The vehicular parking and turning areas as shown on approved drawing No. 20150890 Rev A shall be fully laid out, surfaced and drained prior to first use of the development. These areas shall thereafter be permanently retained and kept free of any obstruction, and made available solely for the parking and turning of motor vehicles at all times. 16. No part of the development shall commence until a car parking management plan has been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The premises shall thereafter operate in strict accordance with the plan as is approved. 17. No part of the development shall commence until a Flood Consequence Assessment and scheme of flood proofing measures has been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The development shall only be carried out in strict accordance with such details as are approved.

REASON(S)

1. To comply with Section 91(3) of the Town and Country Planning Act, 1990. 2. To ensure a satisfactory standard of appearance of the development in the interests of the visual amenities of the area. 3. To protect the amenities of the occupiers of nearby properties. 4. To protect the amenities of the occupiers of nearby properties. In the interests of highway safety. 5. To ensure a satisfactory standard of appearance of the development in the interests of the visual amenities of the area.

Page 58 REPORT OF THE HEAD OF COMMUNITY WELLBEING AND DEVELOPMENT – Date 7th March 2016

6. To ensure a satisfactory standard of appearance of the development in the interests of the visual amenities of the area. 7. To protect the amenities of the occupiers of nearby properties. 8. To ensure satisfactory drainage of the site and to avoid flooding. 9. To ensure satisfactory drainage of the site and to avoid flooding. 10. In the interests of the amenities of the future occupants of the buildings 11. In the interests of the amenities of the future occupants of the buildings 12. To ensure that adequate visibility is provided at the proposed point of access to the highway. 13. In the interest of the free and safe movement of traffic on the adjacent highway and to ensure the formation of a safe and satisfactory access. 14. To ensure that no deleterious material is carried onto the highway, in the interests of highway safety. 15. To provide for the parking and turning of vehicles clear of the highway and to ensure that reversing by vehicles into or from the highway is rendered unnecessary in the interest of traffic safety. 16. In the interests of highway safety. 17. To enable the control of matters not detailed in the application in compliance with the appropriate policies and standards

NOTE(S) TO APPLICANT

You are advised to have regard for the contents of the enclosed local planning guidance note Management of surface water generated from new development, attached to this decision.

Further advice on compliance with condition no. 10 and 11 may be obtained by contacting the Council's Environmental Protection Team on 01978 315733. Should the investigation identify contamination issues that may affect receptors other than the site users e.g. groundwater, then it is recommended that these works are also addressed in consultation with the Housing and Public Protection Department prior to commencement of works on site.

You are advised that building work which involves work on an existing wall shared with another property, building on the boundary with a neighbouring property or excavating near a neighbouring building may require the separate consent of the neighbour under the provisions of the Party Wall Act. If you require further information or advice please contact the Building Control Section on 01978 292050.

The permission hereby granted does not authorise encroachment upon, or interference with, the adjoining property.

You are advised that the planning permission hereby granted does not authorise any building over, diversion, connection or other interference with any sewer, public or private, which crosses the site. You are advised to contact Welsh Water, PO Box 10, Treharris, CF46 6XZ (Tel: 01443 331155) in this regard, prior to undertaking any groundwork in connection with the development. Should you be required to depart from the details hereby approved, you should contact the Council's planning department to seek

Page 59 REPORT OF THE HEAD OF COMMUNITY WELLBEING AND DEVELOPMENT – Date 7th March 2016 further advice with regard to the submission of amended plans and / or a new planning application.

The applicant is advised that compliance with condition no. 7 does not provide an exemption from the statutory noise nuisance provisions of the Environmental Protection Act 1990. Any complaints received relating to noise from the development during the permitted hours may still be investigated using the Council's Standardised Procedure for Dealing with Noise Nuisance Complaints and legal action may be taken where appropriate.

Page 60 REPORT OF THE HEAD OF COMMUNITY WELLBEING AND DEVELOPMENT – Date 7th March 2016 previous surface mining sites. Although such hazards are seldom readily visible, they can often be present and problems can occur in the future, particularly as a result of development taking place.

Property specific summary information on past, current and future coal mining activity can be obtained from: www.groundstability.com

Page 61 REPORT OF THE HEAD OF COMMUNITY WELLBEING AND DEVELOPMENT – Date 7th March 2016

APPLICATION NO: LOCATION: DATE RECEIVED: P/2015 /0810 CAE MOR LLWYN MAWR 27/10/2015 PONTFADOG LLANGOLLEN WREXHAM COMMUNITY: LL20 7BE CASE OFFICER: Glyntrian JS DESCRIPTION: ERECTION OF FREE RANGE EGG WARD: PRODUCTION UNIT (16,000 BIRDS) AGENT NAME: Ceiriog Valley INCLUDING SILOS AND ROGER PARRY & ASSOCIATED WORKS (INCLUDING PARTNERS LLP GROUND LEVEL ALTERATIONS MR RICHARD CORBETT AND ALTERATIONS TO EXISTING VEHICULAR ACCESS

APPLICANT(S) NAME: E & J MORRIS ______

THE SITE

The site (2.26 hectares) is located with the Glyn Ceiriog valley area, and the site is located high above the valley area, on the south side.

The site is adjacent to B4579 Selattyn Road.

Cae Mor Farm – owned by the applicant

Application site

Page 62 REPORT OF THE HEAD OF COMMUNITY WELLBEING AND DEVELOPMENT – Date 7th March 2016

PROPOSAL

As above.

This is a revised application following the withdrawal of an earlier application made last year.

The proposed agricultural building will measure 19.8m wide and 76m long and 3.35m high to eaves and 6m high to central ridge. The roof will contain ventilation chimneys and some of these will sit above the ridgeline. The roof pitch is shown as 15 degrees, and building will require two feed silos, which are indicated to be no higher than the ridgeline of the building.

The existing sloping field is intended to be ‘cut and filled’ to give a level area for the building, and the access road and turning area will also cut into the existing slope. The footprint of the building requires the ground alterations over a 45m width to accommodate the different ground levels – which is over double the width of the actual building.

Further information has been submitted by the applicant since the submission, comprising a Landscape and Visual Assessment, an environmental geological report (to consider local water quality), and some further comments to consider

The applicant(s) have also stated that they have lived in the valley all their life, including parents and grandparents, and that the proposal invests a considerable amount of money and time. It is considered that huge efforts have been made to engage with the community, but this has been declined. It is considered that the Community Council has failed to consider the key positive facts and benefits of the scheme, namely: - Creation of employment. The eggs will go to Oakland’s Eggs in Plas Madoc, which will support employment for that area, as well as 2 full time people on the farm, and part time staff for egg packing, the feed mill in Powys, and construction workers and maintenance works for the next 20 years. - The first building of its kind in Ceiriog Valley, designed to meet the changing face of modern agriculture, and it is considerably smaller than units that are being constructed in other authorities. - There is little flat land in the valley, and future agricultural development will have to take place on the hillside. - The valley is a farming community and therefore agricultural expansion and investment should be supported. - Welsh eggs, which are packed in Wales, will provide support to the Welsh economy. - Poultry processing plants are being granted in Wrexham, and therefore it should consider the network of producer farms in the locality to support them. - The unit will have direct access from B classified road to avoid narrow lanes.

Page 63 REPORT OF THE HEAD OF COMMUNITY WELLBEING AND DEVELOPMENT – Date 7th March 2016

- Free range egg production is less intensive compared to chicken meat production which involves higher vehicle movements and larger buildings.

HISTORY

Application site P/2015/0513 Erection of free range egg production unit, access improvements and associated works (16,000 birds) Withdrawn 7.9.15

Cae Mor – land within control of applicant The farmstead house is a Grade 2 listed building. The farmstead has been subject to various planning permissions and listed building consents – see below:

P/2006/0008 Erection of agricultural buildings for storage of machinery, fodder and lambing shed. Granted 20.4.06. (The buildings measured 13.5m and 19.1m long, and 5.5m and 6.1m wide, and 4m high) P/2006/0941 Conversion of barn to part dwelling, extension to existing dwelling and alterations, removal of bathroom extension to existing dwelling and erection of garage. Granted 8.2.07 P/2006/0942 Listed Building Consent for conversion of barn to part dwelling, extension to existing dwelling and alterations. Granted 21.2.07 P/2011/0038 Erection of garage / store in revised location (amendment to permission P/2006/0941) Granted 28.2.11 P/2013/0262 Erection of swimming pool. Withdrawn 12.6.13 P/2013/0263 LBC for swimming pool. Withdrawn 12.6.13 P/2013/0754 Erection of detached swimming pool. Granted 8.1.14

DEVELOPMENT PLAN

The site is outside any settlement limit, and within a special landscape area. Policies PS2, GDP1, EC3, EC4, EC5, EC6, EC13, EC14, and T8 apply.

The site is within an identified as sub area 4: Ceiriog Valley in the Council’s adopted LANDMAP Special Planning Guidance.

The site is near to two public footpaths – PROW 25 is about 75m to the north of the site (below the site), and PROW 22 is located south of the site (above the site), and this is leads towards Cae Mor Ucha (the nearest residential property and farm). Below is a map to show the position of public footpaths and bridleways which are located close to the site.

Page 64 REPORT OF THE HEAD OF COMMUNITY WELLBEING AND DEVELOPMENT – Date 7th March 2016

PROW 24

PROW 25 Bridleway 63

Application site

PROW 22

PROW 52

CONSULTATIONS

Community Council: Objects (letter 8.12.15). The main objections are: 1) visual impact caused by large industrial scale building which would be foreign within a landscape of natural beauty; 2) possible contamination of drinking water for neighbouring properties which rely upon wells; 3) the distance of the site from existing buildings; 4) possible erosion of land where chickens range; 5) no economic benefit to community; 6) security lighting would be intrusive in a dark valley; and 7) lack of information about solar gain, range area and underground water tank.

The following has also been raised: • Cae Mor was run as a small farm until 20 years ago, and some of the land was sold on, and buildings converted, and land has been let out for grazing to local farmers. • The applicants also own Pentre Clawdd Farm on outskirts of Oswestry (approx. 7 acres). Here they have diversified the land with a caravan site, camping pods and growing and selling Christmas trees. Chicken manure from the proposal will be transported here. • A smaller egg production business in Tregeiriog ceased business after on a few years. The owner confirmed that the chickens are noisy and smelly, and

Page 65 REPORT OF THE HEAD OF COMMUNITY WELLBEING AND DEVELOPMENT – Date 7th March 2016

chicken manure should be stored 12 months before spreading on the land because of high ammonia content. • There are no other intensive farming businesses in the Ceiriog Valley. • Several discrepancies have been found with the application documents, and there relate to questions 13, 14b and 16. The Design and Access Statement also raises questions. • It is unclear how a field of 5.5 acres is large enough to support 16,000 birds because it is stated that flocks should be 800 birds per acre. • Extensive land excavation is required – and therefore it is not a level plateau area. • The site will be highly visible from B4579, and new access will make the site more visible. • Landscaping will take many years to be become tall enough to provide adequate screening. • 18 tonne vehicles will have difficulty accessing the site, as the roads are very narrow and twisty in places, and inclement weather can be experienced, and no information has been stated to stay what will happen to 11 tonnes of manure every 10 days if a collection cannot be made. • 86m of hedging will need to be removed to provide splays for the access, and this will make the building very visible from the road. • An underground tank is shown but not shown on the plans. • 400 tonnes equates to 11 tonnes of manure every 10 days. Chicken manure has high content of phosphorous, nitrogen, and potassium, and it is unlikely that all the manure can be spread on the land at Pentre Clawdd. • The ecology report is not factually correct regarding bats. There are at least 3 roosting sites within 2 km of the site. Security measures are not indicated, and this has potential to cause light pollution. • Smell and noise will be caused from the fans. This could impact other local businesses. • Contrary to several UDP policies (GDP1, EC3, and EC4). . It will offer little to the local economy which relies heavily on tourism. It does not involve the conversion of existing buildings for diversification. Not close to public transport. It will be detrimental to environment and landscape. 86m of hedgerow will be removed. Existing bluebell woodland might be damaged if included within ranging area. The adjacent

Page 66 REPORT OF THE HEAD OF COMMUNITY WELLBEING AND DEVELOPMENT – Date 7th March 2016

wildlife area will be affected if range is not large enough. The building is not close to Cae Mor. • Contrary to Landscape Character (see SPG). • Site security will not be good – 200m from house and screened from that house. • Solar gain features are not shown as part of the plans. • Surface water drainage information limited. • The building will not be unobtrusive. An isolated building should not be permitted. • The Ceiriog valley is a place of beauty and tranquillity, and many small businesses in the area are trying to promote this. • Visual character of area will be affected. Tree planting will no impact for a number of years, and will do nothing to hide the site from many viewpoints. The submitted photos are not representative of the impacts. • The field slopes at 1:20, and this will be increased in order to take the planned excavation work. The steeper slopes will be more at risk from erosion, and if the thin soils are continually scratched up, and the plants and roots destroyed, there will be nothing to prevent the soil from washing down and silting up the streams below the site. • The development could harm any prospects of the valley getting AONB status in the future. • Whilst farm diversification is supported, this is farming on an industrial scale. • Local road infrastructure is not good. • The building is not located close to the existing farmstead to accord with TAN6. • Information is lacking re impacts on local water supplies. • Local roads can be blocked with snow. In 2013, 1m of snow fell over 2 days and left many roads blocked for 2 weeks. The bird range will also not be accessible for that same time scale. • Acoustics of the valley are unique, and fans will create noise nuisance, particularly at night. • Lighting will have an impact because the site is within a dark area. • The range is not large enough, and other adjacent areas will need to be used. • During damp misty weather, fumes and odours do not escape and can build up. • The letter also contains a number of photographs to indicate some of the above impacts.

Re-notified 23.2.16

Page 67 REPORT OF THE HEAD OF COMMUNITY WELLBEING AND DEVELOPMENT – Date 7th March 2016

Local Member(s): Notified 30.10.15 Re-notified 23.2.16 NRW: No objection in principle. The proposed wash down tank must comply with the SSAFO Regulations. The proposal is not likely to affect any protected ecology sites or species, but recommendation of section 4.3 of the ecology report should be adhered to with regards to the lighting scheme, in order to avoid disturbance to bats. A suitable lighting scheme should be submitted. Importation of waste must be registered with NRW. Any waste excavation material must be disposed of satisfactorily. Welsh Water: There is no public sewerage system in the area, and satisfactory alternative provision for foul sewerage will required. Public Protection: No objection subject to conditions to control construction and operation phase. Highways: The access onto B4579 is subject to national speed limit, but it is considered that the 85th percentile speed is no more than 30mph due to the geometry of the road. The new access should provide visibility splays of 2.4m x 56m in both directions. Adequate vision splays can be achieved by removing approximately 20m of hedgerow on either side of the access, or by lowering the height of the hedgerow. The access is design with 15m radii, and the 1:30 gradient for first 10m is considered appropriate for delivery lorries. The preferred route for delivery vehicles is along B5479 from the east via Selattyn. The road varies in width along its length with some areas being narrow for simultaneous passage of vehicles. The road is clearly below current design standards and not ideal for use by HGVs. The traffic associated with the development would include one rigid commercial lorry twice a week for egg collection, and one every 9 days for delivery of feed. Whilst there are sections where two HGVs approaching at same time would need to take special measures to pass, the probability of this occurring is very limited due to the very low level of traffic being generated by the use. The local highway network is substandard, and although the development will increase HGVs, it is not considered that this will significantly affect the flow of traffic on this network. No objections are raised subject to conditions. Press Notice: Expired 4.12.15 Site Notice: Expired 23.11.15 Other Representations: 3 neighbours notified and 17 letter(s) received raising the following concerns:

Page 68 REPORT OF THE HEAD OF COMMUNITY WELLBEING AND DEVELOPMENT – Date 7th March 2016

• Visual impact. Although cladding will be green – it should be observed that its location is at the top of a hill, and it will have impact on surrounding area, particularly in winter. • External lighting might make it more visible at night. It will impact current tranquillity and non-urbanisation of the area. • The building will be the largest in the valley, with exception of Chirk Castle, and it is 38% longer than St Asaph Cathedral. Both are prominent landmarks. • The proposal would be contrary to Policy GDP1 – as it will not accord with the scale of the area, or makes a positive contribution. • It will be contrary to EC3 due to impact on the landscape. • It will be contrary to E5 because it would result in loss of visual quality and landscape character. This will be the biggest building in this part of the valley and is not in character with the site. Landscaping will take a long time (10 years plus) to be effective. Section 5.6 of UDP confirms that within the County there are areas of particularly high landscape value, and these include the Ceiriog valley. Development is often inappropriate. Maintenance and enhancement of the landscape is important. This will offer little. Visual impacts have not been appraised from relevant locations. • Impact of ammonia emissions from the site. Wet droppings and faeces will emit ammonia when it is wet. Heavy rain will flush pollutants towards the natural springs. The water will travel down to the lower valley area, and some of the springs supply existing households as a private water supply. The NRW letter makes no reference to the Dee Valley Catchment as being a Protected Drinking Water Safeguard Zone. Private water supply will be affected by additional antibiotics and nitrate infiltration. Concerned that planning rules may not protect potential pollution of current supply. • Poultry waste must be stored 40m from natural water courses, issues of seeping; 50m from spring or well (used for human consumption) and 250m from borehole used for public water supply. It should be observed that the adjacent wildlife interest field is a water supply / spring which supplies two private households and the applicant’s own property is affected by the 50m distance.

Page 69 REPORT OF THE HEAD OF COMMUNITY WELLBEING AND DEVELOPMENT – Date 7th March 2016

• Fly infestations associated with the build-up of bird droppings and faecal matter. This could be considerable. • Noise from the 4 ventilation fans which will become more distinct in low dense cloud levels. • Dust from windblown matter from the site. • Environmental impact on flora and fauna. The deposit of ammonia has a harmful effect on a variety of ecosystems including the over-enrichment of nitrogen in more sensitive ecosystems, e.g. eutrophication of surface waters, acidification of soils, oxidation of nitrates, extra nitrate into water courses and streams. The manure management plan is very insubstantial. • The high concentration of birds will lead to high concentration of aerial pollutants – from faecal matter, airborne dust, bactericidal toxins, viruses, moulds, feed particles. These will have devastating effect on wildlife, small birds, mammals – which would include the local bat population. There is significant bat activity in the area. There are badger sets below the site, and they roam up towards the upper moorlands of Llechydau. Cofnod survey which was undertaken in April states there are bat roosts. Both roosts and foraging bats (pipistrelles and long-eared) are within close radii of the building. • The ecology report is inadequate because it does not take account of every season, and there is a huge and local bat population. The area also supports nesting owls and raptors. NRW’s response is based upon their consideration of the submitted ecology report, but that is not entirely valid. • No habitat management plan has been submitted. The area is rich in wildlife. • Lighting can cause an issue for bats. • Noise will have an impact for the wildlife. Background noise levels for the area will be low, and the fans will impact on this quietness. It is unclear whether the noise levels have been measured. Noise has not been addressed adequately. Noise travels over a long distance in the valley. • The access is dangerous. The approach from B4579 is off a blind bend. Numerous cyclists use this route, and they descend the valley at considerable speed, as do vehicles. There is potential for a serious accident. • There is potential for approximately 43m of hedging to be removed in order to allow suitable visibility. Hedgerows are now regarded as one of the most valuable sites for biodiversity in farmed landscape. Birds, butterflies, moths, bats, dormice and refuge for

Page 70 REPORT OF THE HEAD OF COMMUNITY WELLBEING AND DEVELOPMENT – Date 7th March 2016

woodland and farmland plants and animals. Hedgerows have statutory protection. It is an important visual component of the landscape • The comments of NRW are noted, but would question the long term integrity of tanks and the possibility of seepage into the watercourse. • Low level lighting for the unit would be totally impractical when having to load / unload lorries and therefore bats will not be afforded protection. • The applicant has no experience of this line of business, but is expected to comply with strict legislation. Environmental and ecological issues could easily arise, and who will be accountable, and why should the immediate neighbours have to put up with it. • The proposal has been objected to previously, and it should still not go ahead. • It is questionable as to whether this is a diversification project. The application describes Cae Mor as a former farm, and most land is grazed by other farmers. The farmhouse and associated buildings have been converted into a substantial private dwelling, and the other part of the business is several miles away near Oswestry. That other farm cannot be considered as part of this farm complex. The existing farm land has been tenanted to others and the family does not live at Cae Mor in the winter. The other (flat) fields should not have been tenanted to others to be used as grazing. Their other farm is located near Oswestry and this is not tied in planning terms with the site. It is stated that this development is required to provide a sustainable smallholding to retain employment for the 2 owners, but their main employment is at a smaller site at Oswestry. Sustainability is questionable, and it might be driven by the grants that are given for production of free range eggs. If more profit is required this should be as a result of less intrusive means. No evidence has been supplied to suggest that this will be sustainable in the long term. • The proposal is contrary to Policy EC3. The building will be situated some distance from the dwelling. It will not be part of the farm complex. It will be isolated building, and these should only be allowed in exceptional circumstances – where essential and no reasonable alternative. The document showing alternative sites is somewhat misleading. There is an alternative site (between sites A and D) which could be considered. It would not interfere with overhead

Page 71 REPORT OF THE HEAD OF COMMUNITY WELLBEING AND DEVELOPMENT – Date 7th March 2016

cables, and it would no longer be an isolated building. The ‘essential’ argument is weak. • Energy generation is stated on the diversification statement, but the details of this are unclear. • The extent of the flock range is not clear, and if the area is involving public footpaths, it is not clear how those areas will be predator proof whilst maintaining access. RSPCA welfare standards for laying hens indicate that some element of rotation is required, and depending upon the ground, the stocking should be no more than 2,000 birds per hectare (or 800 birds per acre). The site area (edged red) is not large enough for this stocking density. The EU regulations state that maximum stocking densities for new units is 9 birds per m2. The size of the building would limit this to a maximum stocking density of 11,758 birds. There is no information to confirm likely biohazards for the development. • The lorry movements will impact the road because it does not carry a great deal of that type of traffic. Road is narrow and dangerous bends. Heavy snowfall can block the road. It is suggested that increased feed storage can built in to take account of that possibility but if the birds are not able to go outdoors – this may cause welfare issues for the birds. • It is unclear as to where water will be sourced for the building. This may not be sufficient. Non caged birds require 0.22 litres per day (Defra), and the stocking density would require 352 litres per day, but this could rise if temperatures are higher. Surrounding properties rely on private water supplies. • The site is within a Special Landscape Area (SLA). • Use of photovoltaic will increase visual impact of building. • Despite referring to a similar proposal at Talwrn Farm near Legacy, that proposal is next to Scottish Power industrial complex and the Legacy National Grid substation is nearby, etc. It is entirely different, and the conclusions should be disregarded. The birds for that site will be contained totally inside the building, and therefore noise and smell are also contained. • If the setting of listed building (Cae Mor) is affected, then traditional materials are required – TAN 6 (A.21). • Odour impacts have not been addressed. • A smaller development of between 5,000 to 8,000 birds may significantly reduce the impacts. • Other industrial scale developments will be encouraged to locate in the area. This will have a serious and negative impact on the Ceiriog valley to

Page 72 REPORT OF THE HEAD OF COMMUNITY WELLBEING AND DEVELOPMENT – Date 7th March 2016

maintain and enhance its status as a well-respected place of peaceful and natural beauty. Cumulative impacts will erode the special qualities of this area. • What happens to the building if the business fails? It will get converted into light industrial uses. • What happens if the business is sold? It will be claimed that a dwelling is required to support that business. • The position of the building for the range is not good, and it should be located more centrally and away from borders with dense woodland because they can cause fox problems. • The visibility splays for the access is not long enough. Tourism is also important for the valley area and visitors come because of the visual qualities of the area. • This work will blight the existing excellent work carried out on Cae Mor building.

Neighbours and objectors re-notified 23.2.16

5 letters of support have also been received, raising the following:

• Cae Mor will create necessary employment (construction and long term management of the site) for the local community and economy for the area, and should be an inspiration for other land owners and farmers as dairy beef and sheep farming is becoming more unsustainable or increasingly difficult. Without this approach, farming in the valley will disappear along with its shops, pubs and eventually its community. • The scale will not affect the local community. • The proposal will be developed in a sustainable manner. • It will help sustain farming within the Ceiriog Valley for future generations. • The entrance will be served from a main road and it will be a good safe access. • The size and scale is small in comparison with modern day units. • Consumption of free range eggs in increasing • The investment should be praised. • The objections are based upon no knowledge of modern day farming methods. • The application conforms to welfare and Defra regulations for the size of the unit.

Two local businesses (which will be connected with the development) have also raised support for the scheme. One is

Page 73 REPORT OF THE HEAD OF COMMUNITY WELLBEING AND DEVELOPMENT – Date 7th March 2016

from the egg packing station (Oaklands) in Ruabon, and they support the application, and the station is only 10 miles from the farm. The other is a supplier of agricultural feed (Wynnstay) and it is likely that a weekly delivery of (18 tonne) could be delivered by a 8 wheeled rigid body vehicle, and these deliveries take place during daily working hours. They are aware that local farmers are being encouraged to diversify as milk, beef and sheep is experiencing a down turn. Retention of employment at Wynnstay is be aided by this development.

SPECIAL CONSIDERATIONS

Background: An earlier planning application for the same development was submitted last year, and that application was subsequently withdrawn by the applicant just before it was reported to Planning Committee. As a result the officer recommendation to refuse the earlier application was not examined by your Committee.

Details: The revised application is a bit more comprehensive, and the submission confirms that Cae Mor (as owned by the applicant) is currently a sheep farm, predominantly, covering 41 acres (17 hectares) of owner occupied agricultural land. It is confirmed that Cae Mor house operates as a homestead farm (where the applicants live) and they are also connected to another farm in Shropshire (Pentreclawdd) which has diversified into tourism and Christmas trees.

The Cae Mor holding as shown by the red and blue lines of the application, and full size of both areas is 11.27 hectares (as measured from Council maps).

The proposed egg farm production element is intended to supplement income for the current farm, and a farm diversification statement has been submitted to help explain the business intentions and reasoning for the project. It has been submitted that traditional farming practices such as beef and sheep are not viable, and this is aiming to provide a holding that becomes fully productive unit that will in turn be self-sustaining and viable business. The diversification statement mentions energy generation and free range egg production as being important for the on-going business, but it also states that it is also important for efficiency and profitability.

The proposed free range egg facility will have 4 separate colonies of birds within the new building.

It is unclear from the submitted diversification statement as to whether it is wholly essential for the farm to have the chosen scale of the new egg production unit i.e. to contain 4 colonies of 4000 birds; or whether it could work as a smaller unit with fewer colonies, or whether the scale could be divided into smaller buildings. Whilst financial implications is not always important from a planning perspective, but in situations where other acknowledged harm might be caused, it seems reasonable to understand the

Page 74 REPORT OF THE HEAD OF COMMUNITY WELLBEING AND DEVELOPMENT – Date 7th March 2016 essential need in greater detail in order to see if policy exceptions can be justified in this instance.

Policy: Policy EC3 of Wrexham UDP confirms that new agricultural buildings in the countryside are acceptable in principle, but they must not be materially detrimental in terms of their impact upon the landscape. Isolated buildings are only allowed for exceptional circumstances where there is an essential agricultural need and no reasonable alternative.

In this instance, the building will not be directly adjacent to the existing farmstead building, and it will have separate and independent access to the adjoining road network. Accordingly the exceptional circumstances need to be investigated.

UDP Policy EC5 also confirms that within areas of special landscape value, although the principle of agricultural development is allowed, buildings are required to conform to a high standard of design and landscaping, and special attention must be paid to minimising visual impacts from both nearby and distant viewpoints.

In addition to the UDP policies, PPW Edition 8 is also a relevant document, and this should also be considered together with their guidance from TAN 6: Planning for Sustainable Rural Communities.

PPW8 confirms that the priorities for rural areas are: - sustainable rural communities with access to affordable housing and high quality public services; - thriving and diverse local economy where agriculture-related activities are complemented by sustainable tourism and other forms of employment in a working countryside; - an attractive, ecologically rich and accessible countryside in which the environment and biodiversity are conserved and enhanced

Para 4.11.10 of PPW recognises the importance within areas which have an established and distinctive character, that new development should promote this or reinforce the character.

The Council has adopted a SPG called Wrexham LANDMAP, and this document describes this area as: “scenic, tranquil and steep-sided valley enclosed by spurs of the Berwyn mountains, with hillside farms, wooded and farmed slopes, and small villages along the River Ceiriog”. The SPG also explains the visual character of the area – e.g. upland pastoral valley with small mosaic of fields with hedgerows and woods, and scattered stone built farms reached by steep winding lanes, and high quality landscape, sense of peace and tranquillity as well as the scenery. In terms of management, the guidance recognises the need to retain its distinctive rural character, and to avoid visually intrusive development which is not in keeping.

Page 75 REPORT OF THE HEAD OF COMMUNITY WELLBEING AND DEVELOPMENT – Date 7th March 2016

Para 7.6.5 of PPW also confirms that the Council is required to adopt a constructive approach towards agricultural development proposals, especially those which are designed to meet the needs of changing farming practices.

Para 3.1.2 of TAN 6 confirms that Planning authorities should support the diversification of the rural economy as a way to provide local employment opportunities, increase local economic prosperity and minimise the need to travel for employment. However para 3.1.3 confirms that expansion of businesses that are currently located in the open countryside can only be provided if there are no unacceptable impacts on local amenity.

Para 3.7 of TAN 6 refers to farm diversification projects and the need to take a proportionate approach to public transport and the need for improvements to the local highway network. Buildings are required to be sensitively located and new buildings can be considered. Para 3.10 also states that farm plans can be useful to help support applications for farm diversification.

As a result of the above, it is considered that there are a number of matters that are relevant, and these are raised below under separate headings.

It is considered that this application has been submitted as an agricultural diversification project rather than a non-agricultural one, and therefore the issues for this application is principally the position of the building, its scale (size of new building and associated work), and how this impacts the visual character of the area, and any other material planning considerations, including those raised by policy GDP1.

Isolated position: As mentioned above, UDP Policy EC3 confirms that new isolated buildings require special justification based on essential need, and that alternative sites have been examined.

This essential need has been partly explained, but information is a bit lacking because the chosen flock size of the venture seems to be determining the scale of the building and the range size. The need does not investigate or explain why the flock must be 16,000 for the farm as opposed to a smaller number – which could result in a smaller building(s) within the landscape; or why the flock size cannot be divided – to allow separated ranges by smaller buildings. This option may or may not be possible for a variety of justified reasons, but scope to have smaller farm building(s) closer to the existing farmhouse should not be ruled out without clear evidence.

It should be noted that Cae Mor does not have many farm buildings associated with the agricultural holding at this location, and earlier ones (which was nearer the house) were removed when renovation works to the house were undertaken.

It has been confirmed by the applicant that the use of nearer locations around the house are not good for this agricultural use because of the geometry of the approach roads, and other constraints.

Page 76 REPORT OF THE HEAD OF COMMUNITY WELLBEING AND DEVELOPMENT – Date 7th March 2016

Importantly, it should be noted that Cae Mor is a Grade 2 listed building, and that status would need to be carefully assessed if any new buildings were to be allowed closer to the building. But suitable buildings associated with the historical use of the land seems a possibility.

In terms of alternative sites, it is understood that a total of 4 sites were examined (including the current application site) by the applicant. On the basis of a single building and a flock size of 16,000, these alternatives were listed as Options A to D.

Option D has been submitted as the favoured option – causing the least disturbance, and because it has direct access to B 4579 and allows the greatest screening from further afield. The others were ruled out for various reasons – see below:

Option A - would only give a small range area, the approach road is unclassified and unsuitable for deliveries and collections, and there is no natural screening for any elevations.

Option B - would have same delivery and collection problems as Option A, the land does not have a level base, infilling material would be required to create a level area, it’s close to a public footpath, and a high voltage cable crosses the field and this would need to be moved.

Option C - was not considered suitable because the land is steeper than Option D, and large amount of excavation would be required, and the area has biodiversity interest. The site is better screened from some directions and access to B4579 can be achieved.

As stated, these alternatives only considered the same sized building, and no other alternatives. However it should be noted that Option A is located alongside an existing fence line which contains some mature trees, and therefore this is not totally devoid of natural screening. But that area is also partly occupied with a smaller timber building – which is not mentioned as an issue. Furthermore I am not certain that no deliveries or collections can be made to Cae Mor location since this is an existing house – particularly if smaller vehicles were involved, if a smaller farming egg production activity was essentially required.

Likewise, the list of alternatives has not considered the possibility of using part of the field between the areas shown as Options B and D – particularly if a smaller building unit was proposed.

Also it is unclear whether there is any scope for egg collection to involve a separate egg collection area next to the B road, etc.

Page 77 REPORT OF THE HEAD OF COMMUNITY WELLBEING AND DEVELOPMENT – Date 7th March 2016

As a further item of concern due to its isolated nature of the building, it is noted that this large farm building will have no on-site linkage / operational link with Cae Mor farmhouse – other than land ownership, and there is only a very informal pathway leading up to the site from Cae Mor house. The proposed livestock building will have its own independent access, and in physical terms the building can operate quite separately. Given this lack of useful connectivity, and if all matters concerning the application are deemed acceptable, there would be nothing to prevent Cae Mor farmhouse from being sold and occupied separately from the remaining land holding. Possibly this could then lead to requests to have new residential accommodation to be built near to the large agricultural building. In the absence of suitable interdependence with the existing farmhouse, there is a genuine concern that this could happen, particularly because the current owners are not reliant with this one farming location. Although that matter would be subject to further planning application(s), TAN 6 acknowledges the need to justify a dwelling for an agricultural need and this would need to consider former dwellings associated with the farm; those linking considerations could be viewed as tenuous given the lack of suitable physical relationship between the building and the current farmhouse.

Scale/Size of site: Based upon the flock size of 16,000 birds, the applicant will require 8 hectares of land for this flock to range outdoors. As a result, Members are advised that the range area is not just limited to the area of the application site area (as edged red) because that field area only measures 2.25 hectares. The applicant will therefore need to use adjacent agricultural land which is currently within the control of the applicant (i.e. the areas edged blue), and the scale of that land holding is large enough for the flock size.

Based upon the nature of the holding, it seems likely that western part of the existing holding (i.e. the area located to the west of the existing access road which serves Cae Mor house) will not be used as part of the range because the birds will need to cross to and from that area every day across the road; and that will require a higher degree of supervision. As a result it seems that a non-statutory wildlife site designated areas (which is given to some of the fields to the east and the north of the site) will become used as part of the range. The use of that wildlife area is not prevented by current planning controls. The impacts to this area will be examined below under the ecology heading.

Landscape and visual impacts: The application has been amended, and it includes a Landscape and Visual Impact Assessment report (dated January 2016) and this provides some useful additional information regarding the potential landscape impacts.

The report does not examine alternative sites or smaller buildings, but focuses upon the location and scale of the proposed building.

The report considers a number of viewpoints (12 no.), at various points along public roads, and bridleways and footpaths. The sensitivity of some

Page 78 REPORT OF THE HEAD OF COMMUNITY WELLBEING AND DEVELOPMENT – Date 7th March 2016 viewpoints has been assessed in relation to receptors, to assess whether the current experience of the landscape will be significantly altered by this development. A matrix to assess the magnitude of change has been used to judge this, to see if the effects are ranging between high to low degrees of sensitivity.

Based on the LVIA report, receptors such as LANDMAP, motorists and walkers/horse riders have been identified, and a number of relevant viewpoints have been considered.

The results are shown below:

Receptors Landmap – all viewpoints were seen to have impacts of high/medium sensitivity. Some had a magnitude of moderate adverse, and others had a magnitude of between slight adverse/negligible adverse. The individual effects were either moderate adverse/moderate/minor adverse Motorists – all viewpoints had medium sensitivity, and a magnitude of slight/negligible, medium or moderate The individual effects were minor or moderate Walkers and horse riders – all viewpoints had high / medium sensitivity. The magnitude was slight / negligible, and individual effects were moderate / minor.

The LVIA also confirms that these impacts do not consider the proposed landscaping scheme or any potential screening that this may provide.

Accordingly the applicant has confirmed that some of the visual impacts will be off-set by carrying out some tree planting at various locations within the site, to reinforce the long established planted northern edge to the field, and also by the new areas by the turning area/building. It is also proposed to allow existing roadside hedgerows to be supplemented, and/or allowed to grow higher.

External walls and roofing materials has been indicated to be dark green, but this choice of colour does not appear to have been informed by any assessment of the colour pallet of the area when viewing the site from any relevant viewpoints, and this potentially requires further examination to consider seasonal variation. This could be examined further if all other matters regarding the scheme are acceptable.

The assessment acknowledges that there will be some adverse on landscape fabric during the construction phase. This is principally seen as the result of trimming back and/or removal of up to 86m of field boundary hedgerow to improve visibility; and it is considered that those impacts might be less because this might be achieved by trimming back the existing hedge. Additionally the lack of vegetation within the field area to be disturbed is also a benefit for the existing landscape.

Page 79 REPORT OF THE HEAD OF COMMUNITY WELLBEING AND DEVELOPMENT – Date 7th March 2016

For the operational phase it is considered that there will be no further alterations to the landscape fabric.

In relation to the LVIA, it is observed that these viewpoint locations do not consider the possibility of cyclists or walkers using the some of the surrounding highways. Not all persons visiting this area are limited to cars along on the roads. Some will use the roads for walking, particularly if they are used to connect between existing public footpaths or bridleways. Cyclists will also visit the area since the valley area is promoted for outdoor recreation and it has a high scenic value.

It is also noted that not all the viewpoints have been have been assessed for their sensitivity to the receptors, but this is not thought to be significantly different.

The LVIA also does not directly consider the impact of changes to the existing landform from the proposed ‘cut and fill’ method of construction. The building will have a very large footprint, and given the need for the building and operational areas to have a level platform area, those areas will result in the existing field slope being disturbed over a wide area. Whilst it is useful that the development will utilise a ‘cut and fill’ method of construction to minimise some impacts (e.g. waste material), the submitted cross sections indicate that existing land levels will be vertically altered by between 3 to 4m on either side of the building, and the existing sloping ground will be adjusted from its current 10 degree slope (mostly) to allow proposed sloping ground sections between 25 to 35 degrees. As a result the extent of land that will be reformed by this one building will involve about a third of the existing field area, and it is unclear how those slopes will be managed as they might be more sensitive to erosion, particularly if used as part of the range.

It is further noted that the proposed track leading to the building from the B road will also require a degree of ‘cut and fill’ work because track will need to be more level than the current slope in order to allow HGVs near the building.

It is also difficult to gauge how much of the existing hedge will be affected by the visibility splays, and their on-going maintenance. Removal of the hedge could potential involve the loss / reduction of 86m length of hedgerow, and new tree planting and or any replacement hedgerows (behind the visibility splays) will take a long time to become more effective landscaping measures if the scale and colour of the building is more significant than thought by the LVIA. It will remain hard to soften visual impacts of such a large scaled building on sloping ground, particularly within an area that is not typically containing large agricultural buildings.

The LVIA mentions that this building will be similar to other farm buildings in this immediate area, and therefore the landscape character is not considered to be dissimilar. However, the proposed building will be significantly larger, and those buildings have a different form, and their context is different - see below:

Page 80 REPORT OF THE HEAD OF COMMUNITY WELLBEING AND DEVELOPMENT – Date 7th March 2016

Plas-onn is a well-established farm within 700m of the site, and its main agricultural building is measuring 41 x 24m, and together with an attached structure, this has a floor area of 1170m2. However this building is still 20% smaller than the proposal, and the ridgeline is just over half the length of the proposed ridgeline for the proposed agricultural building.

Cae Mor Ucha farm is located directly above the site, and this is the closest farm (just 70m away), and their main farm building is 38 x 18m, representing a floor area of 550m2. This is two thirds smaller than the proposal, and the ridgeline of the building is about 50% shorter than the proposal

The LVIA also indicates a photo of Caedicws Farm, and this property is located further up the valley past Glyn Ceiriog. The farm has a range of different buildings associated with the farm, and these are located around the farmhouse. The combined size of the farm is larger than the proposal, but the length of the longest building is still only just over half the length of the proposed development, and the site has grown (evolved) over a period of time, and the visual appearance is not seen as one large farm building in isolation of others.

External walls and roofing materials has been indicated to be dark (juniper) green, but this choice of colour does not appear to have been informed by any assessment of the colour pallet for the area based upon further examination to consider seasonal variation. This matter could be resolved by planning condition if all other matters are acceptable.

It has been mentioned that the scale of this particular egg production unit is quite a bit smaller when compared to other egg production units. Whilst this might be the case, however this particular proposal must be examined in context with the general character of this local area. The character of this valley area is not represented with large industrial scaled farm buildings. Although the principle of new agricultural development is supported within areas of Special Landscape, the impacts of those buildings still require careful consideration.

Despite the justification as submitted, there are still concerns regarding the likely visual impact of the building upon the established landscape character of the area. Whilst some visual impacts can be controlled or mitigated, this will take time. The issue of smaller buildings has also not been fully explored, or why the building is essentially required. There is also concern that if this type of development is allowed, the same visual arguments could be used and it will have potential to erode the character of the area. Whilst the building alone is currently representing an extremely small part of the Council’s defined landscape character for the Ceiriog Valley, e.g. Area 4 of Wrexham’s LANDMAP, the significance of this one building could become more substantial if repeated at other locations within the valley. It is important to understand why an exception should be made in this particular instance.

Page 81 REPORT OF THE HEAD OF COMMUNITY WELLBEING AND DEVELOPMENT – Date 7th March 2016

The application has made some comparisons with a recent appeal decision for Talwrn Farm at Legacy (P/2014/0372) which also allowed a large egg laying unit within a Special Landscape Area (SLA). Members are advised that any comparison with Talwrn Farm appeal is not justified in this instance. The visual character of that particular site/area is quite different. That building shared the existing access for the farm, and that site is next to existing industrial buildings, and the large Legacy sub-station site. The context was different in terms of visual impact.

Amenity concerns: A number of residents have raised a number of amenity concerns regarding the development, and these are raised below: a) Odour: Although this has been raised as an issue, odour impacts are not likely to be significant, and this can be effectively managed if other matters are acceptable. b) Noise: Noise is not likely to be significant subject to appropriate controls. It is not necessary to have motorised fans on the outside of vents, and typically they can sit well within the building to prevent external noise from machinery. Further details of mechanical equipment can be controlled by planning condition, if required. c) Manure management: Manure management for the building will be controlled by Control of Pollution (Silage, Slurry and Agricultural Fuel Oil) Regulations 2010 (SSAFO Regulations). This will control on-site disposal and storage, including capacity of the wash down tank facility. It is confirmed that dirty water will be collected within an underground tank, no information regarding its size, or precise position has been submitted, and further information could be required to confirm this by condition if all other matters regarding the proposal is acceptable. It is also noted that NRW has not raised any objections to the principle of development, and this is despite the use of land externally for the birds to scratch. The management of those outside areas could have implications for ecology and existing drinking water supplies, and more details will be required to firm up those arrangements.

If manure exceeds the amount that can be accommodated on-site or at the adjacent farm –alternative off-site disposal is subject to separate controls. Planning can only be concerned if the disposal needs to be more frequent than that confirmed by the application because this could have traffic implications. This will be examined in the highway section below d) Contamination of existing private water supply: Some residents have raised concern regarding on-going water quality of private supplies if the development is allowed because their properties are located below the site.

It has been confirmed that up to 10 supply locations within 1km of Cae Mor, and the submitted environmental geologist report confirms that there is potential for only two water supplies to be affected (e.g. those serving Llangwryd Uchaf and Briwant) – see extract of map below

Page 82 REPORT OF THE HEAD OF COMMUNITY WELLBEING AND DEVELOPMENT – Date 7th March 2016

It is also confirmed that sources of possible contamination to those water supplies are likely to be from: i) contaminants leached from imported fill materials used in construction; ii) spillage of fuel, disinfectant, other chemicals or washdown water; and iii) poultry manure (ammonia / oxygen demand / antibiotics).

The geologist report confirms that the water supply for Llangwryd Uchaf is described as a spring, and given its position in relation to Cae Mor farm, the springs are likely to be fed from higher ground immediately to the east of this property, and not from Cae Mor farm area. The supply for Briwant is also described as a spring, and the likely catchment area for this property is the sloping ground to the south, and it is conceivable that its catchment extends into the easternmost part of the Cae Mor.

As a result, it is proposed that mitigation measures are carried out to avoid any issues. Accordingly it has been confirmed that all imported fill materials will need to be inert, and all storage for fuel and chemicals should be contained in bunded areas and there should be safe disposal of liquids. It is also proposed that manure on external scratching areas is controlled, and a specific field area (at eastern edge of the farm holding) should only have ‘low- moderate’ intensity scratching. Further assessment may reveal that higher intensity scratching might be possible, but further assessment(s) would be required to prove this.

Page 83 REPORT OF THE HEAD OF COMMUNITY WELLBEING AND DEVELOPMENT – Date 7th March 2016

Based upon this information, it appears that the issue of contamination to private water supplies is likely to be adequately controlled, but the applicant will need to rectify any problems if 3rd party issues arise. Potentially it might be important for existing water supplies to be tested before work is commenced, and for this to be checked post development. e) Surface water drainage: Detailed design of the soakaway will need to be controlled by planning condition. Current information suggests that the design of the tank may need to large enough to deal with up to 70m3 to allow combined flows from the building and access road. Its precise design and on- going maintenance of this soakaway system is not mentioned, and those details would need to be submitted for approval, and this is important to ensure that private water supplies are not affected.

Part of the surface water drainage system might need to collect water for use by the flock, and details of this can be verified and controlled by condition if required. f) Ecology: Although the development will require either the lowering or removal of an existing hedge, the built development is principally affecting an existing field which is used to graze sheep. Therefore the ecological impacts are limited. The ancillary ranges areas, as required for the flock to have areas to scratch, have some potential to affect areas adjacent of ecological interest – particularly a non-statutory wildlife site area. However those impacts could be managed, and a suitable habitat management plan would be required to consider the sensitive areas, and it could help ensure that those areas are maintained in an ecology friendly way, including details of times of the year when those areas are used. This might also be necessary because of the need to protect private water supplies – see below.

The need for external lighting is not anticipated to be significant and information has confirmed that this will be on passive PIR sensor, with a time limit of no more than 15 minutes. The building is not operation during the night, and no other external lighting is required, and CCTV will be infrared rather than floodlights. However no precise details have been submitted and therefore a scheme of lighting will need to be controlled by planning condition. g) Highways: The application confirms that the preferred route for delivery vehicles is along B5479 from Selattyn. The road varies in width, and there is the possibility that 2 HGVs approaching each other may need to take special measures to pass, but this will not frequently occur and the development will not generate very much traffic e.g. one rigid commercial lorry twice a week for egg collection and one every nine days for feed delivery. This is considered to be insignificant in highway terms, and Highways have not objected to the development.

Although a number of objectors are concerned about this possible impact, it is noted that the development will be directly served from a B road, which serves other farms and other properties in the locality. The scale of use is not significant, and adverse weather issues will need to be examined as a

Page 84 REPORT OF THE HEAD OF COMMUNITY WELLBEING AND DEVELOPMENT – Date 7th March 2016 potential risk for the operator, and might require extra feed to be delivered during those likely periods.

Eggs will be collected and delivered to the packing station of Oaklands which is locally based in Ruabon, and therefore the distances are limited.

Other matters: In addition to the matters raised above, the following items have also been raised:

On-site drainage culvert: The Council’s flood officer has identified the possibility of a culverted watercourse that crosses the site according to records; and this might become affected by the development.

The submission acknowledges the possibility, and the submission verifies that as a precautionary measure, the applicant will construct a slit trench across the proposed line of the culvert, and if an old land drain is encountered, the drain can be diverted around the poultry unit.

It is noted that there is no immediate evidence on the ground to show a possible watercourse, and further advice regarding this matter is being sought from the flood officer, and this will be reported in the addendum. However it appears that the trench would help establish its possible presence and further detailing of any diversion would need to be submitted before any further development takes place, if all other matters are acceptable.

CONCLUSION

The principle of new agricultural buildings is the countryside is supported, but there is concern that the scale of this isolated building at this location is not fully justified at this time, and it is important to minimise visual impacts since these will be long lasting for this area. Wrexham LANDMAP has identified this area as being scenic and tranquil, and this special character is not respected by the large scale of the building. Other matters cannot be specifically raised as issues because those matters can be controlled by planning conditions if the visual impacts of this very large building could be supported. I therefore recommend accordingly.

RECOMMENDATION: That permission be REFUSED

REASON(S)

1. Notwithstanding the agricultural purpose of the proposed building, insufficient information has been submitted to justify the exceptional need for such a large scale isolated building at this particular location, which will be located on an exposed area of sloping land, which is within a Special Landscape Area which is described to be scenic and tranquil. To allow the development will cause long term detrimental visual harm to the character area, contrary to Policies EC3 and EC5 of the Wrexham Unitary Development Plan. ______

Page 85 REPORT OF THE HEAD OF COMMUNITY WELLBEING AND DEVELOPMENT – Date 7th March 2016

APPLICATION NO: LOCATION: DATE RECEIVED: P/2015 /0812 LAND NORTH OF TOTAL FITNESS 26/10/2015 STANSTY ROAD WREXHAM LL11 2BU COMMUNITY: CASE OFFICER: Rhosddu DESCRIPTION: MP RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT (24 NO. DWELLINGS) TOGETHER WITH WARD: HIGHWAYS, ACCESS AND PARKING AGENT NAME: Grosvenor ARRANGEMENTS PARRY DAVIES ARCHITECTS LTD APPLICANT(S) NAME: MR R S GRATTON MR M FORGRAVE GOWER HOMES ______P/2015/0812 THE SITE

Application site

Land leased by Total Fitness

Total Fitness

PROPOSAL

As above.

HISTORY

Whole Total Fitness Site, including application site.

Page 86 REPORT OF THE HEAD OF COMMUNITY WELLBEING AND DEVELOPMENT – Date 7th March 2016

CB1478 Residential development and alteration to existing vehicular and pedestrian access. Outline permission refused 1.12.97. Allowed on appeal 9.12.98 CB 03591 Erection of exercise and rehabilitation centre. Refused 8.11.1999. Allowed on appeal 11.7.2000 P/2001/0109 Erection of covered walkway. Granted 9.4.2001

Part of Total Fitness Site, including part of the application site.

P/2008/1152 Erection of two storey building with associated parking. Refused 16.2.2009. Allowed on appeal 8.12.2009. P/2014/0077 Renewal of previous planning permission to allow extension of time period for commencement of development of two storey office building with associated parking. Granted 27.3.2014

Part of the Total Fitness Site excluding the application site.

P/2016/0141 Proposed amendment and extension to existing car parking facilities to provide 195 spaces in total. Pending.

DEVELOPMENT PLAN

Within settlement. Policies GDP1, H2, CLF5 and T8 apply.

CONSULTATIONS

Community Council: Consulted 30.10.15 Councillor Steve Wilson: Notified 30.10.15 Councillor I David Bithell: Notified 10.11.15 Public Protection: Recommend conditions in respect of construction impacts and to require the site to be investigated for contamination and, if necessary, a remediation scheme implemented. Highways: Have made the following comments: - given that the existing highway layout fronting the site along Stansty Road/New Road already suffers from significant levels of congestion during the morning and evening peak hours I would not normally wish to support any additional development at this site which would result in an increase in traffic movements through this access onto this section of the highway network; - a previous application (P/2008/1152) was allowed on appeal subject to conditions including one to improve the site access off Stansty Road;

Page 87 REPORT OF THE HEAD OF COMMUNITY WELLBEING AND DEVELOPMENT – Date 7th March 2016

- based on the previous appeal decision it is accepted that some moderate sized development could potentially be accommodated which could operate in conjunction with the existing fitness centre; - the submitted TRICS data indicated the proposed dwellings will generate fewer vehicle movements compared with those anticipated from the previously approved offices; - even though the development will see a smaller increase in vehicle movements it is considered appropriate to request the previously approved highway improvements; - the submitted layout plan indicates the previously agreed improvements to the existing junction as recommended by the inspector under the previous appeal (P/2008/1152); - the proposed estate road layout appears acceptable. I have previously requested that driveway dimensions for each property are annotated. This detail has not been provided; - the recently conducted parking surveys observed a maximum parking accumulation of 192 spaces on Monday 25/1/2016 and 151 on Tuesday on Tuesday 26/1/2016; - the total number of existing spaces within the car park is 269. If around 49 spaces were to be lost as part of the office development then 220 would have remained for Total Fitness; - based on LPG16 the requirements for Total Fitness would be a maximum of 246 spaces; - as the parking surveys are only a snapshot it would seem sensible to provide an additional allowance to cater for any potential increase in demand for parking above 192 cars. I would recommend that 192 spaces plus a 10% are provided; - to ensure the car park is not abused by non-members I would recommend that some form of parking management is implemented. Please ask the applicant

Page 88 REPORT OF THE HEAD OF COMMUNITY WELLBEING AND DEVELOPMENT – Date 7th March 2016

to confirm what, if any parking management measures are proposed; - the submitted plan indicates the provision of 195 spaces for Total Fitness which provides very little flexibility/spare capacity should parking demand exceed recently observed parking accumulations; - the existing internal footway/cycleway leading to the fitness centre has no dropped kerb provision at the southern end which is not ideal. Welsh Water: Recommend drainage conditions. Network Rail: No objection but requests conditions in respect of the following: - Submission of a method statement and risk assessment being submitted to NR; - The erection of a trespass proof fence of at least 1.8m high be erected along the boundary with the railway; - The submission of a scheme for disposal for foul of and surface water drainage that ensures drainage is directed away from the railway line; - The submission of full details of ground levels, earthworks and excavations to be carried out near to the railway line. Education: Contributions required towards Rhosddu Primary School. Parks, Countryside, ROW: Contributions sought towards off-site public open space. Site Notice: Expired 24.11.15 Press Notice: Expired 4.12.15 Neighbours: The owners/occupiers of 41 nearby properties (including Total Fitness) notified 24.11.15. Representations received from 4 individuals expressing the following concerns: - additional traffic onto a busy road; - additional traffic congestion; - highway safety; - noise; - permission refused for 53 houses on the site in 1999 on the grounds of cost of the alterations to the Stansty Road/Rhosddu Road junction. traffic has increase in the 16 years since; - flooding; - insufficient parking retained for the gym;

Page 89 REPORT OF THE HEAD OF COMMUNITY WELLBEING AND DEVELOPMENT – Date 7th March 2016

- impact upon local infrastructure – school places, health services; - the lunacy of the application will bring the Council into severe disrepute if granted and will provoke a full investigation of the circumstances of its approval; - dispute over the site boundary; - loss of light; - the application states that the car park is unused. This is incorrect, it is not only used by staff and clients of the gym but also by the staff at the local job centre on Grosvenor Road.

SPECIAL CONSIDERATIONS

Policy: The site is not allocated for any specific use in the UDP therefore subject to complying with policy GDP1 in respect of access, siting, design and the impact upon neighbouring properties the erection of dwellings on the site accords with policy H2.

The site forms part of a car park that was provided to serve the Total Fitness gym to the south and therefore developing it will reduce the number of parking spaces available for visitors to that site. I will however the loss of parking provision in more detail below.

Design: The majority of the site is a car park although there are some soft landscaped areas, notably at the northern end of the site, along the Stansty Road frontage, in the south-eastern corner of the site as well as some small areas within the car park. However these do little to disguise the fact that the site is largely hard surfaced. Whilst there are some trees on the site none contributes significantly to the visual amenity of the area to the extent that their loss will prove harmful. There is one tree of reasonable amenity value outside of but adjacent to the south-east corner of the site. The provision of tree protection measures will be required by condition to ensure it is not adversely affected by construction works.

The proposed site plan is included below:

Page 90 REPORT OF THE HEAD OF COMMUNITY WELLBEING AND DEVELOPMENT – Date 7th March 2016

The development will provide a strong built frontage to Stansty Road. Dwellings will also front onto a new internal estate road that will also provide access to the remaining Total Fitness site. The site boundaries fronting Stansty Road will be enclosed by low brick walls. Parking will be provided either on private driveways within the curtilages of dwellings or communal parking areas located at the rear thus parked cars will not dominate the appearance of the site. In my opinion the development will enhance the appearance of the site and the immediate locality.

Amenity: The position of the proposed dwellings relative to the nearest existing dwellings is in accordance with LPG21 advice and as such the development will not prove harmful to the standard of amenity afforded to neighbouring occupiers by way of loss of light, privacy or by being visually overbearing. The position of the proposed dwellings relative to each other also accords with LPG21 and each will be provided with adequate private garden space.

The site adjoins an operational railway line and some of the proposed dwellings will also share a boundary with the remainder of the car park serving Total Fitness. A condition will be imposed to require a noise survey to be carried out prior to commencement of development and submitted along with a scheme of noise mitigation. The boundaries of the dwellings with the railway line and, if necessary, the car park can be enclosed with an acoustic fence/wall. I would also anticipate that windows with an enhanced glazing specification will need to be fitted in elevations facing the railway line.

The noise from cars entering or leaving the car park is unlikely to be significantly greater than noise from traffic passing along the nearby Stansty Road, Rhosddu Road and New Road. Nevertheless if a noise survey demonstrates it to be necessary then I would also anticipate that windows serving rooms facing the car park, site access or the highways close to the site would also need to be fitted with an enhanced glazing specification.

Page 91 REPORT OF THE HEAD OF COMMUNITY WELLBEING AND DEVELOPMENT – Date 7th March 2016

Subject to the implementation of noise mitigation measures I am satisfied that future occupiers of the development will be afforded an adequate standard of amenity.

Whilst there will inevitably be noise during construction I do not anticipate the dwellings once complete and occupied will generate significant levels of noise. Limiting the impact of construction can be addressed through the implementation of a Construction Environmental Management Plan (CEMP). This will be required by condition.

Highways: The application site currently provides access to the Total Fitness gym and as well forming part of the 269 space car park that was provided in conjunction with that development.

Site access

The existing site access onto Stansty Road will serve the development and will continue to serve as access to Total Fitness. The junction is close to the busy Stansty Road/New Road junction that suffers from significant levels of congestion at morning and evening peak periods.

Planning permission for an office development occupying approximately a quarter of the current application site was allowed on appeal in 2009. The Inspector concluded that the traffic generated by the development would not materially impact upon the free flow of traffic at the above mentioned junction nor would it materially increase the risk of accidents. The permission was subsequently renewed in 2014 and is subject to a requirement for the site access to be improved. Details subsequently approved made provision for the access to be widened to provide both left and right hand turning lanes for vehicles exiting the site onto Stansty Road.

Details submitted by the applicants have demonstrated that the 24 dwellings proposed will generate fewer additional vehicular movements than the previously approved office development. Highways have not expressed concerns about the level of traffic generated by the development but they have advised that the access improvements previously secured are still required. The plans submitted did not initially make provision for the access improvements but have subsequently been amended to do so. The implementation of these improvements will be secured by condition.

Given that the previous permission has not been implemented and the fact that a housing development is now proposed for the site I do not consider the office development to be a credible fall-back position. Nevertheless the granting of permission for that development has established the principle of an increase in traffic using the site access, albeit subject to some access improvements being carried out. I am unaware of there being any significant changes in local circumstances since the office development was granted permission, therefore as this development is also unlikely to materially impact upon the free flow of traffic or the risk of accidents at the above mentioned junction there are no valid highway safety reasons to refuse this application.

Page 92 REPORT OF THE HEAD OF COMMUNITY WELLBEING AND DEVELOPMENT – Date 7th March 2016

Parking for dwellings

The development will comprise 10 x 2 bedroom dwellings and 14 x 3 bedroom dwellings. The LPG16 maximum is 2 spaces each for the former and 3 spaces each for the latter. The submitted plans provide 2 spaces for each dwelling. Whilst this is 1 space less than the LPG16 maximum for the 3 bedroom dwellings, given the proximity of the site to the town centre and the availability of frequent public transport nearby it is unnecessary to insist upon the maximum parking provision for the proposed 3 bedroom dwellings in this instance.

Parking for Total Fitness

The LPG16 maximum parking requirement for the Total Fitness site is 246 spaces. Total Fitness currently lease the building to the south of the application site and only part of the car park – 124 spaces out of an existing total of 269. The remaining 145 spaces are not subject to the lease. Nevertheless, with the exception of the land subject to the extant planning permission for office development, in accordance with a condition attached to planning permission CB 03591 they must be retained and made available for parking.

Including spaces required for staff/visitor parking, the previously approved office development would result in the net loss of around 49 parking spaces therefore leaving 220 spaces available solely for use by staff and customers of Total Fitness. The approved plans make no provision for a segregated office carpark however the permission also does not prevent spaces being reserved solely for use in conjunction with the office. As such it is reasonable to conclude that the loss of 49 spaces has, in effect, already been accepted. If the proposed development were to go ahead it would result in the loss of 128 parking spaces thus leaving only 141 parking spaces available for use by staff and customers of Total Fitness.

In order to establish existing levels of parking demand the applicants commissioned for four separate surveys during January. The surveys were carried out on a Monday (evening), Tuesday (evening), Friday and Saturday (all day). These demonstrate that peak demand occurs on Monday and Tuesday evenings. Between 6:15pm and 6:30pm on the Monday 192 spaces were occupied – the highest level of demand on any of the four days.

In response to the survey findings the applicants have submitted a plan demonstrating that a total of 195 spaces can be provided to serve Total Fitness. These include the existing spaces within the land leased by Total Fitness, spaces provided on the land not subject to the lease or this planning application as well as newly constructed spaces. The alterations required to provide 195 spaces are subject to a separate application for planning permission (P/2016/0141) currently being considered. I am nevertheless satisfied that the applicants have demonstrated that additional parking spaces can be provided for the Total Fitness site.

Page 93 REPORT OF THE HEAD OF COMMUNITY WELLBEING AND DEVELOPMENT – Date 7th March 2016

Highways have recommended that 192 parking spaces plus 10% more are provided to cater for any additional demand; however I do not consider this to be necessary. In my opinion the surveys demonstrate that there is only likely to be demand for around 192 parking spaces for a relatively short period of time. I also understand that the applicants have liaised with Total Fitness who confirmed that January is the busiest period of year for the gym and that attendance, along with car parking demand, decreases in subsequent months. The surveys therefore represent worst case assessment of parking demand.

In addition to the above, the report accompanying the parking surveys suggests that the car park is used by non-gym members. This is something that was also suggested in a 2008 parking survey submitted in support of the application for the office development and it is worth noting that an objector has stated that the car park is used by individuals who work on Grosvenor Road

Whilst there does not appear to have been any detailed investigation into the numbers of spaces regularly taken up by non-gym members/staff, access to the car park is unrestricted and the owners do not currently appear to carry out any form of parking enforcement. It is therefore reasonable to conclude that the car park is used by non-gym members/staff and that parking demand for the gym alone is in fact lower the parking surveys suggest. I understand that Total Fitness are considering introducing car park management measures to prevent use by non-gym members/staff however because the car park is not subject to this application it is not possible to impose conditions to require these measures to be implemented in conjunction with the development. However it is something that I shall give consideration to prior to the determination of the application for alterations to the car park.

I appreciate that a reduction in the number of parking spaces and/or the introduction of car park management scheme will mean that anyone who uses the car park but does not attend or work at the gym will have to park elsewhere but this is not a relevant material consideration. Irrespective of whether the proposed development is implemented the use of the car park by anyone other than gym members or staff is entirely at the discretion of the landowner and could be stopped at any time. It would be unreasonable to refuse permission for this development or insist upon higher levels of on-site parking to cater for demand that is not directly connected with the operational use of the gym.

Taking all of the above into account, in my opinion the provision of 195 parking spaces for use by Total Fitness will adequately cater for peak demand for the majority of the time.

Public Open Space: In accordance with policy CLF5, on-site public open space should be provided on all developments of 10 or more dwellings. However the policy also makes provision for financial contributions to be paid towards off-site provision where the development is unsuitable for on-site provision and where it will not place significant pressure on existing facilities in

Page 94 REPORT OF THE HEAD OF COMMUNITY WELLBEING AND DEVELOPMENT – Date 7th March 2016 the area. Local Planning Guidance Note 10 advises that the Council may agree to off-site provision where less than 20 dwellings are proposed.

Notwithstanding the fact that 24 dwellings are proposed, the site is relatively restricted, particularly in width, so in my opinion it is not suitable for on-site public open space provision. It would therefore be reasonable the secure a contribution towards off-site provision in this instance.

The Parks, Countryside and Rights of Way Manager has confirmed that £24,000 would allow for the play equipment within the open space bounded by Rhosddu Road and Garden Road approximately 400 metres from the site to be replaced. I understand it will also need to be extended to accommodate new play equipment. There is currently a shortfall in children’s equipped play equipment in Rhosddu that the replacement and extension of the existing play area will help to reduce. Improving the existing play area will also ensure that the development does not place undue pressure on existing open space provision.

Drainage: Subject to a condition specifying the location of a foul drainage condition Welsh Water have not objected to the development therefore I have no reason to conclude that the existing foul sewer network in the locality is unable to cater for additional demand arising from the development.

The site is suitable for soakaway drains and I am satisfied that the implementation of a detailed surface water drainage scheme will ensure the development will not be at risk of flooding nor cause flooding in the vicinity. A surface water drainage scheme will be required by condition.

Community infrastructure: Education has not objected to the development but has confirmed that contributions towards primary education are required. These will be secured via a planning obligation. In the absence of an objection from Education I can only conclude that, subject to funding being secured, there will be sufficient scope to increase school capacity to cater for additional demand arising from the development.

There is no UDP policy or Local Planning Guidance Notes that impose a requirement for the developments to provide or make contribution towards health care facilities.

Other Matters: An objector disputes the boundary of the application site however I have compared the submitted plans with the Land Registry title plans and can find no inconsistency between two. I therefore have no reason to believe that the application site encroaches onto land owned by the occupiers of neighbouring properties. In any case boundary disputes are outside of the scope of planning control.

A condition will be imposed to secure a fence along the boundary with the railway line in accordance with Network Rail’s requirement and an advisory note will be attached to advise the applicants to contact Network Rail in respect of a risk assessment. In respect of the other matters raised by

Page 95 REPORT OF THE HEAD OF COMMUNITY WELLBEING AND DEVELOPMENT – Date 7th March 2016

Network Rail, I have dealt with drainage above and the submitted plans confirm that ground levels adjacent to the boundary with the railway are going to remain unaltered.

CONCLUSION

The current application proposes a development that will enhance the appearance of the site and will not prejudice the standard of amenity afforded to occupiers of adjacent properties or highway safety. The proposals are in therefore in accordance with the relevant UDP policies.

RECOMMENDATION A

That the Council enters into an Obligation under Section 106 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 to secure:

- payment of a financial contribution Rhosddu Primary School in accordance with the formula set out Local Planning Guidance Note 27;

- a financial contribution of £24,000 towards the replacement/upgrading of the Rhosddu Road play area.

That the Head of Community Wellbeing and Development be given delegated authority to approve the final form and content of the Obligation.

RECOMMENDATION B

Upon completion of the Planning Obligation that permission be GRANTED subject to the following conditions:

CONDITION(S)

1. The development hereby permitted shall be commenced before the expiry of five years from the date of this permission. 2. The development shall be carried out in strict accordance with the following approved drawings: i) drawing no. 15.5554/1 Revision F: Site Layout Plan ii) drawing no. 15.5554/D1 Revision D: Roads and Levels iii) drawing no. 15.5554/K1: Kendal - 3 Block iv) drawing no. 15.5554/K2: Kendal - 3 Block v) drawing no. 15.5554/K3: Kendal - 4 Block vi) drawing no. 15.5554/W1 Revision A: Whitby vii) drawing no. 15.5554/D/H1: Durham-Hampton viii) drawing no. 15.5554/D/H2: Durham-Hampton 3. No part of the development shall commence until a scheme to deal with potential contamination at the site has been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. This scheme shall include a phased investigation approach to identify the extent of contamination and any measures required to remediate the site, including post-development monitoring.

Page 96 REPORT OF THE HEAD OF COMMUNITY WELLBEING AND DEVELOPMENT – Date 7th March 2016

4. No part of the development shall be occupied until a Verification Report which demonstrates that the remedial works approved as part of condition no. 03 above have been satisfactorily carried out, has been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. 5. No part of the development shall commence until the following have been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority: i) a noise survey to determine noise levels within the site during the day time and night time both has been carried out; and ii) a detailed report of the survey findings together with a scheme of noise mitigation. Each dwelling requiring noise mitigation shall not be occupied until the mitigation measures have been implemented in full in strict accordance with the scheme as approved. 6. No part of the development shall commence until a scheme for the comprehensive and integrated drainage of the site indicating how foul water, surface water and land drainage will be dealt with has been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The scheme as approved shall be implemented in accordance with a timescale to be agreed as part of the submitted details and maintained thereafter. 7. Foul water drainage from the site shall only discharge to the public sewerage system between manholes SJ09836029 and SJ09835030 8. Development shall not commence until a Construction Environment and Management Plan has been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. Construction shall thereafter be carried out in strict accordance with the details as approved. 9. No part of the development shall commence until scheme showing the full details of layout, design, drainage and construction of the improvements to the site access to the site from Stansty Road has been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. No dwelling shall be occupied until the scheme has been implemented in full. 10. No part of the development shall commence until a detailed Arboricultural Method Statement has been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. No development or other operations shall take place except in strict accordance with the Method Statement as is approved. The Method Statement shall include the following: a) A specification for tree protection fencing and ground protection measures that comply with British Standard 5837:2012; b) A Tree Protection Plan showing the location of the trees to be removed and retained with their crown spreads, Root Protection Areas, Construction Exclusion Zones, and location of protective fencing and ground protection measures accurately plotted; c) A full specification for any access, driveway, path, underground services or wall foundations within retained tree Root Protection Areas or Construction Exclusion Zone, including any related sections and method for avoiding damage to retained trees; d) Details of general arboricultural matters including proposed practices with regards to cement mixing, material storage and fires; e) Details of the frequency of supervisory visits and procedures for notifying the findings of such visits to the Local Planning Authority; f) Method for protecting retained trees during demolition works;

Page 97 REPORT OF THE HEAD OF COMMUNITY WELLBEING AND DEVELOPMENT – Date 7th March 2016 g) Details of all proposed tree works, including felling and pruning. 11. Within three months of commencement of development, full details of a hard and soft landscaping scheme together with a timescale for implementation of works shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. 12. The landscaping scheme submitted and approved in connection with condition no. 11 shall be fully implemented in all respects within the agreed timescale and in strict accordance with the approved scheme. 13. The estate roads and footways shall be progressively constructed to base coat standard from the junction with Stansty Road across the frontage of each plot prior to occupation of the building erected thereon. 14. Prior to the first occupation of any dwelling hereby granted permission a trespass proof fence of at least 1.8m high shall be erected along the full length of the eastern boundary of the site in accordance with details that shall first have been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The fence shall thereafter be permanently retained and maintained. 15. The vehicular parking and turning areas as shown on approved drawing(s) No(s). 15.5554/1 Revision E: Site Layout Plan shall be fully laid out, surfaced and drained prior to first use of the development. These areas shall thereafter be permanently retained and kept free of any obstruction, and made available solely for the parking and turning of motor vehicles at all times. 16. No private surface water run off shall be permitted to flow from the development site onto the adjoining highway. An Aco drain or similar shall be provided across the approved access to intercept any such run off prior to first use of the development. 17. No part of the development shall commence until a minimum of 195 parking spaces have been provided for use in conjunction with the gym to the south of the site. Thereafter that number of spaces shall be made permanently available for use in conjunction with that premises.

REASON(S)

1. To comply with Section 91(3) of the Town and Country Planning Act, 1990. 2. To ensure that the development fully complies with the appropriate policies and standards. 3. In the interests of the amenities of the future occupants of the buildings 4. In the interests of the amenities of the future occupants of the buildings 5. In the interests of ensuring the amenity of future occupiers of the development. 6. To ensure satisfactory drainage of the site and to avoid flooding. 7. To protect the integrity of the public sewerage system and prevent hydraulic overloading of the public sewerage system. To protect the health and safety of existing residents and to ensure no detriment to the environment. 8. To protect the amenities of the occupiers and users of nearby properties and land. 9. To ensure the formation of a safe and satisfactory access.

Page 98 REPORT OF THE HEAD OF COMMUNITY WELLBEING AND DEVELOPMENT – Date 7th March 2016

10. To ensure the work is carried out to accepted arboricultural practices for the long term wellbeing of the tree(s). 11. To ensure a satisfactory standard of appearance of the development in the interests of the visual amenities of the area. 12. To ensure a satisfactory standard of appearance of the development in the interests of the visual amenities of the area. 13. In the interests of highway safety. 14. To protect the railway from unauthorised access. 15. To provide for the parking and turning of vehicles clear of the highway and to ensure that reversing by vehicles into or from the highway is rendered unnecessary in the interest of traffic safety. 16. In the interests of highway safety. 17. In the interests of ensuring adequate off-street parking is provided for the adjacent site.

NOTE(S) TO APPLICANT

Prior to any works commencing on site a method statement and risk assessment must be submitted to Network Rail's Asset Protection Engineer ([email protected]) for approval. This must take full account of the consultation response received from Network Rail dated 6 November 2015.

Page 99 REPORT OF THE HEAD OF COMMUNITY WELLBEING AND DEVELOPMENT – Date 7th March 2016 purposes. Failure to obtain a Coal Authority Permit for such activities is trespass, with the potential for court action.

Property specific summary information on past, current and future coal mining activity can be obtained from: www.groundstability.com

RECOMMENDATION C

That if the Obligation pursuant to Section 106 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 is not completed within six months of the date of the Committee resolution the Head of Community Wellbeing and Development be given delegated authority to refuse the application for the following reasons:-

No contribution has been made towards the provision of additional primary. Without this additional provision, there is insufficient school capacity to cater for the development. As such the development does not accord with policy GDP2 of the Wrexham Unitary Development Plan.

No contribution has been made towards the provision of public open space. In the absence of a contribution the development does not accord with policy CLF5 of the Wrexham Unitary Development Plan. ______

Page 100 REPORT OF THE HEAD OF COMMUNITY WELLBEING AND DEVELOPMENT – Date 7th March 2016

APPLICATION NO: LOCATION: DATE RECEIVED: P/2015 /0899 16 - 18 GROSVENOR ROAD 25/11/2015 WREXHAM LL11 1BU COMMUNITY: CASE OFFICER: Rhosddu DESCRIPTION: MP DEMOLITION OF 18 GROSVENOR ROAD AND PARTIAL DEMOLITION WARD: OF16 GROSVENOR ROAD (WITHIN AGENT NAME: Grosvenor GROSVENOR ROAD MONTPELIER ESTATES CONSERVATION AREA) LTD

APPLICANT(S) NAME: MONTPELIER ESTATES LTD ______P/2015/0899 THE SITE

Application site

PROPOSAL

As above.

HISTORY

P/2013/0368 Conservation Area Consent for demolition/removal of two 'system' built prefabricated single storey buildings. Granted 18.7.2013

Page 101 REPORT OF THE HEAD OF COMMUNITY WELLBEING AND DEVELOPMENT – Date 7th March 2016

P/2014/0062 Demolition of no 18 and conversion and extension to no 16 to provide 21 no extra care apartments. Refused 24.3.14 P/2014/0063 Demolition of no. 18 Grosvenor Road (within a Conservation Area). Refused 24.3.14 P/2014/0373 Demolition of no.18 and conversion and extension of no.16 to provide 20 no. extra care apartments. Granted 28.7.14 P/2014/0374 Demolition of no. 18 Grosvenor Road (within a Conservation Area). Granted 28.7.14 P/2015/0900 Erection of 34 bed care home (class c2) together with provision of 10 car parking spaces. Pending – see following agenda item.

DEVELOPMENT PLAN

Within Grosvenor Road Conservation Area. Policies EC7 and EC8

CONSULTATIONS

Community Council: Consulted 27.11.15 Local Member: Notified 27.11.15 Wrexham Civic Society: Consulted 27.11.15 Site Notice: Expired 18:11.2015. Press Notice: Expired 8.1.2016 Neighbours: The owners/occupiers of 18 nearby dwellings notified 27.11.15 .

SPECIAL CONSIDERATIONS

Policy: Policy EC8 states that demolition of any building within a Conservation Area will only be permitted in certain circumstances. Of direct relevance to this proposal is the requirement that permission has been granted for a suitable replacement building. Circular 1/98 (para 33) also advises that consent for demolition should not be given unless there are acceptable and detailed proposals for redevelopment.

No.16 and no.18 Grosvenor Road are identified within the adopted Grosvenor Road Conservation Area Character Assessment and Management Plan as being of visual interest and part of an important townscape group. Additionally both buildings help uphold the strong building line along Grosvenor Road, a key feature of the street scene.

Conservation Area consent for the demolition of no.18 was granted in 2014 and planning permission was granted for the conversion of and extension of no.16 to provide extra care apartments. The principle of demolishing no.18 has therefore already been accepted albeit in conjunction with a different proposal for the redevelopment of the site.

The current application seeks consent for the complete demolition of no.18 and the partial demolition of no.16. The existing frontage and the side (south- west elevation) of no.16 is to be retained and incorporated into the

Page 102 REPORT OF THE HEAD OF COMMUNITY WELLBEING AND DEVELOPMENT – Date 7th March 2016 development that is subject to planning application P/2015/0900 (see separate agenda item).

No. 18 Grosvenor Road, by itself, is not of high architectural merit. No.16 is of architectural merit and those sections of the building that contribute most to the street scene and the Conservation Area will be retained.

The proposals for the redevelopment of the site are considered in detail in the following agenda item however I am satisfied that a high quality development is proposed that will enhance the Conservation Area. The proposed demolition works are therefore justified in this instance.

CONCLUSION

The proposed demolition works will allow the site to be redeveloped in a way that will enhance the Conservation Area. The proposals are therefore in accordance with policies EC7 and EC8.

RECOMMENDATION: That Conservation Area Consent is GRANTED

CONDITION(S)

1. The works hereby granted consent shall be commenced before the expiry of five years from the date of this consent. 2. The building shall not be demolished until a copy of a contract for the carrying out of the works of redevelopment of the site has been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority.

REASON(S)

1. To comply with Section 18 of the Planning (Listed Building and Conservation Areas) Act 1990. 2. To ensure that redevelopment of the site takes place immediately following demolition of the existing building, thereby ensuring that an unattractive gap does not exist in the street scene to the detriment of the character and appearance of the area. ______

Page 103 REPORT OF THE HEAD OF COMMUNITY WELLBEING AND DEVELOPMENT – Date 7th March 2016

APPLICATION NO: LOCATION: DATE RECEIVED: P/2015 /0900 16 - 18 GROSVENOR ROAD 25/11/2015 WREXHAM LL11 1BU COMMUNITY: CASE OFFICER: Rhosddu DESCRIPTION: MP ERECTION OF 34 BED CARE HOME (CLASS C2) TOGETHER WITH WARD: PROVISION OF 10 CAR PARKING AGENT NAME: Grosvenor SPACES MONTPELIER ESTATES LTD APPLICANT(S) NAME: MONTPELIER ESTATES LTD ______P/2015/0900 THE SITE

Application site

PROPOSAL

As above.

HISTORY

P/2013/0368 Conservation Area Consent for demolition/removal of two 'system' built prefabricated single storey buildings. Granted 18.7.2013

Page 104 REPORT OF THE HEAD OF COMMUNITY WELLBEING AND DEVELOPMENT – Date 7th March 2016

P/2014/0062 Demolition of no 18 and conversion and extension to no 16 to provide 21 no extra care apartments. Refused 24.3.14 P/2014/0063 Demolition of no. 18 Grosvenor Road (within a conservation area). Refused 24.3.14 P/2014/0373 Demolition of no.18 and conversion and extension of no.16 to provide 20 no. extra care apartments. Granted 28.7.14 P/2014/0374 Demolition of no. 18 Grosvenor Road (within a Conservation Area). Granted 28.7.14 P/2015/0899 Demolition of 18 Grosvenor Road and partial demolition of 16 Grosvenor Road (within Grosvenor Road Conservation Area). See previous agenda item.

DEVELOPMENT PLAN

Within settlement and Grosvenor Road Conservation Area. The site forms part of an area covered by policy E7. Policies GDP1, H11, EC7, EC8 and T8 also apply.

CONSULTATIONS

Community Council: Consulted 27.11.15 Local Member: Has made the following comments; concerned at the low number of parking spaces; concerned about access to/from Grosvenor Road – one of the main routes into Wrexham. Public Protection: Have made the following comments: - recommend conditions regarding construction impacts; - does have concerns regarding external amenity due to traffic noise. The Environoise survey suggests that noise levels in the garden area will vary between 53-55dB LAeq(16-hour) with noise mitigation. It should be noted that both the WHO and BS8223 recommend that noise levels for external amenity spaces should be less than 50dB LAeq(16-hour) to prevent moderate annoyance with 55dB LAeq(16-hour) regarded as an upper limit in order to prevent serious annoyance for occupants. Highways: Have made the following comments: - splays of 2.4 metres x 43 metres in both directions required; - the southerly access provides splays in excess of 2.4m x 43m in both directions; - the central access point suffers from poor visibility of approximately 2.4 x 11m in both directions. Visibility is impeded by the existing

Page 105 REPORT OF THE HEAD OF COMMUNITY WELLBEING AND DEVELOPMENT – Date 7th March 2016

1.6m high pillars located either side of the access. I would suggest that the existing brick pillars and wall are lowered to a maximum height of 1m above the adjoining road level in order to maximise visibility; - the turning head provides adequate turning space for refuse and delivery vehicles with a maximum length of 9m. I understand it is intended to utilise a private waste company. This details will need to be controlled via a Service and Delivery Management Plan; - LPG16 would normally require a maximum of 1 car space per 2 bed spaces equating to a maximum requirement for 17 spaces; - consideration will need to be given to the proximity of the site to the town centre, existing car parks and public transport. It is proposed to provide 14 parking spaces which equates to 82% parking provision compared to maximum standards; - the Transport Statement suggests that other sites around the country typically generate 3-4 visits per day by visitors with car ownership for residents being zero. I understand that 30 staff will be employed and will operate a shift system. It is anticipated that 70% of the 12 staff who would be on site at any one time would arrive by way. I understand that a condition will be included to prevent residents from parking at the site; - I understand there are significant on-street parking problems in close proximity to the site along Gerald Street and Vernon Street. Any potential shortfall in parking at the development site may well lead to additional parking along these streets. However given the nature of the development site and its close proximity to the town centre I would consider parking provision to be adequate; - recommend a Construction Traffic Management Plan prior to commencement of works; - no objection and recommend conditions. NRW: No objection but has the following comments: - NRW is satisfied that the bat survey by Clwydian Ecology has been carried out to an acceptable standard. The report states that there was no evidence that the structures were currently being used as bat roosts and that they had low potential as a roost. It is therefore

Page 106 REPORT OF THE HEAD OF COMMUNITY WELLBEING AND DEVELOPMENT – Date 7th March 2016

unlikely that bats or their roosts will be impacted upon by the proposed works; - Conditions should be attached to any planning permission to ensure that the recommendations within the report are carried out so as to avoid damage to bats; - Regarding the drainage report, we recommend that you consult your local drainage engineers to ensure that the proposal to drain surface water to soakaways is acceptable, if the sewerage undertaker will not accept surface water from the proposal. We also recommend that you consult Welsh Water. Welsh Water: Recommend drainage conditions. Wrexham Civic Society: Consulted 27.11.15 Site Notice: Expired 18.12.15 Press Notice: Expired 8.1.16 Neighbours: The owners/occupiers of 18 nearby dwellings notified 27.11.15. 4 individual representations received, a 5 signature petition and a 60 signature petition received, both from the Gerald Street Action Group, objecting to the application (2 of the signatories to each petition had also sent individual representations) and expressing the following concerns: - lack of on-site parking; - additional traffic along Grosvenor Road; - suitability of the location for a care home; - impact upon local infrastructure such as utilities; - planning permission has already been granted for a similar facility on the opposite end of Grosvenor Road; - there are existing parking problems along Gerald Street and Vernon Street; - additional on-street parking along Gerald Street and Vernon Street; - the cumulative impact of this development and the one at the opposite end of Grosvenor road will be highly detrimental to the well-being of residents locally and could lead to a legal challenge to the Council; - the application has not been posted in areas which will be most affected; - oppose any further development of the site until consideration and progress has been made on parking initiatives locally; - the closure of St Marks multi-storey car park has resulted in the loss of 300 parking spaces;

Page 107 REPORT OF THE HEAD OF COMMUNITY WELLBEING AND DEVELOPMENT – Date 7th March 2016

- traffic along Grosvenor Road causes gridlock – it is the main route in and out of town.

SPECIAL CONSIDERATIONS

Policy: The site lies within the built up area of Wrexham and in an area where commercial office development is directed by policy E7. The policy does not seek to resist the loss of commercial offices from Grosvenor Road nor does it explicitly prevent changes or use/redevelopment for other purposes. Accordingly there is no policy objection in principle to the proposed development.

Policy H11 is broadly supportive of proposals for care homes provided:

- the development accords with Policy GDP1; and - adequate garden area for the amenity of residents can be provided; and - in the case of change of use, the existing building is of an adequate size for the use proposed without substantial extension; and - the facility is accessible to community facilities (e.g. shops, post office, doctor's surgery, etc.).

I will comment on each of the above in more detail below.

Design: The site is prominently situated on Grosvenor Road, one of the principal routes into Wrexham Town Centre and the one of the key roads within the Grosvenor Road Conservation Area.

The re-development of the site will involve the complete demolition of no.18 Grosvenor Road and partial demolition of no.16. The merits of the proposed demolition works are considered in my report for the parallel application for Conservation Area Consent (P/2015/0899) – see the preceding agenda item.

The front elevation of the development is shown below.

The proposals in respect of no.16 retain and respect its traditional Edwardian character and take account of the importance of the building within the street scene by incorporating its front and side elevations into the new development.

Page 108 REPORT OF THE HEAD OF COMMUNITY WELLBEING AND DEVELOPMENT – Date 7th March 2016

In designing the three storey building that will be built alongside no.16 Grosvenor Road the applicants have taken into account the massing and scale of it and other nearby buildings whilst proposing something that is contemporary and distinctive. There will be a recessed glazed link between front elevations of retained section of no.16 and the new build parts of the development ensuring the appearance of there being two distinct and separate buildings is retained. On balance I am satisfied that the development enhances the appearance of the site, the wider street scene and in turn the Conservation Area.

The new building will extend towards the rear of the site although this section will largely be screened from view by adjacent buildings as well as the existing and proposed front elevations of the development. The rear section of the development will not impact significantly upon the street scene and will preserve the Conservation Area.

Whilst significant reconstruction works to no.16 are proposed, given that the resulting appearance of the development will enhance both the appearance of the site and Conservation Area I am satisfied that the proposals accord with parts a) and c) of policy H11.

Amenity of future occupiers: There will be garden areas to the rear and side of the buildings with a cumulative area of 700 square metres that well located so as to be readily accessible from within the site.

Because of the edge of town centre location of the site it is subject to noise particularly from passing traffic. I note that Public Protection has expressed some concern that even with mitigation the noise level within the proposed garden areas are likely to be above the noise levels considered by BS8233:2014 and the World Health Organisation as likely to cause ‘moderate annoyance’ and close to levels considered likely to cause ‘serious annoyance’. However paragraph 7.7.3.2 of BS8233:2014 also advises that:

“In higher noise areas, such as city centres or urban areas adjoining the strategic transport network, a compromise between elevated noise levels and other factors, such as the convenience of living in these locations or making efficient use of land resources to ensure development needs can be met, might be warranted. In such a situation, development should be designed to achieve the lowest practicable levels in these external amenity spaces, but should not be prohibited.”

In my opinion the above advice is applicable to the site and if an overly restrictive approach were taken to this type of development or to residential developments in or on the edge of town centres then it would prejudice the re- use of existing buildings and/or the redevelopment of previously developed sites.

The fabric of the buildings themselves is likely to help limit the impact of noise within the garden area at the rear however mitigation will be required to reduce noise levels within the garden area to the side of the building. The

Page 109 REPORT OF THE HEAD OF COMMUNITY WELLBEING AND DEVELOPMENT – Date 7th March 2016 intention is that this will be provided via a boundary wall. In my opinion the development has therefore been designed to minimise noise levels within the site taking account of its location. Full details of the design of the wall as well as a requirement for it to be erected prior to the first occupation of the development will be secured by condition. Subject to the erection of the wall, the garden area will adequately provide for the amenity of future occupiers and the proposals accord with part b) policy H11.

In addition to noise mitigation for the boundary wall, the development will need to incorporate noise mitigation into the fabric of the building, for example enhanced glazing specifications. A noise assessment accompanying the application makes a number of recommendations in this regard. The implementation of the measures recommended will be secured by condition.

Location of the development: The site is only a short distance from the town centre, where a range of facilities and public transport is available. As such the proposals accord with part d) of policy H11.

Impact upon neighbours: The nearest properties in residential use are some 30 metres from the site. I consider this to be far enough away to ensure the development does not adversely impact upon residential amenity by way of loss of light, privacy or by being visually overbearing.

The Council does not have any adopted standards in respect of space between care homes and nearby commercial premises. Local Planning Guidance Note 21 only provides guidance regarding separation distances between existing and proposed residential properties. Nevertheless I am satisfied that both the scale of the development and the distance to neighbouring properties is such that it will not prejudice their continued use.

Vehicular Access and Parking: The existing vehicular accesses to the site are to be retained. The south-western access has adequate visibility in both directions and will serve a bin store/service area at the rear of the site as well as 10 parking spaces. Visibility from the existing central access is obstructed by existing brick pillars that are approximately 1.6 metres high. To ensure adequate visibility is provided, the reduction in height of these pillars will be required by condition. The central access will serve 4 parking spaces. Pedestrians will be able to enter and leave the site via either access.

Whilst I appreciate that Grosvenor Road is a busy road into Wrexham, particularly at peak times it must be remembered that the site is currently occupied by two buildings with a combined floor area of just over 1000 square metres that were last used as offices (Class B1 use) and could be re-used for that purpose if the site were not developed as proposed. In my opinion it is unlikely that the development will significantly increase the amount of traffic entering/leaving the site compared to the existing permitted use nor is it likely to significantly increase the amount of traffic using Grosvenor Road.

The Transport Assessment submitted with the application states that car ownership within the type of assisted living accommodation proposed will be

Page 110 REPORT OF THE HEAD OF COMMUNITY WELLBEING AND DEVELOPMENT – Date 7th March 2016 zero and based on experience from other sites during the week, there are likely to be 3-4 visitors per day equating to a maximum demand for 4 visitor parking spaces.

The site will employ 30 people employed in three shifts. The maximum number of staff likely to be on site at any one time is 12, although fewer staff will be on site during the night. Using typical journey to work modal share for the area, the Transport Assessment anticipates that 70% of staff will travel to the site by car equating to a maximum demand for 8 parking spaces for staff.

Initially the provision of 10 parking spaces was proposed however amended plans have been submitted making provision for 14 spaces. Local Planning Guidance Note 16 allows for a maximum of 1 parking space per 2 bed spaces for care home developments which equates to 17 spaces for this proposal. The proposed parking provision is therefore 82% of the maximum but in excess of the anticipated maximum demand.

The site is easily accessible by public transport with the bus station on King Street only a short distance away. Wrexham Central and General Railway stations are approximately 500 and 600 metres away respectively. There are also several taxi businesses operating within the town centre. The site is therefore highly accessible by means other than the private car. In any case, the site is within walking distance of a number of town centre car parks so visitors will not be denied relatively easy access to the site.

Highways have referred to a condition being imposed to prevent residents of the development parking at the site. In my opinion such a condition would be very difficult to monitor and enforce. In any case, in light of the above I do not consider it necessary to seek to impose any controls over how the car park is used.

Whilst I note the concerns of the residents of Gerald Street and Vernon Street, in light of the above it is unlikely that there will be a significant if any increase on-street parking problems along those streets as a result of the development. The fact that the site will be provided with 3 fewer spaces than the LPG16 maximum would therefore not be a valid reason to refuse planning permission in this instance.

Highways have requested a condition be imposed to require construction traffic management plan however I do not consider this to be necessary in this case. The site is just over a quarter of a hectare in size and only around 20% is currently occupied by buildings with the remainder being hard surfaced. Were the development to go ahead around 30% of the site would be occupied by buildings so there is and will continue to be a considerable amount of space within the site available for contractors to park and for vehicles making deliveries to or collections from the site to unload/load. Vehicles travelling to/from the site will do so via the existing accesses onto Grosvenor Road.

Other Matters: Concerns have been expressed that those most affected by the application were not notified about it. The application was however

Page 111 REPORT OF THE HEAD OF COMMUNITY WELLBEING AND DEVELOPMENT – Date 7th March 2016 publicised in accordance with statutory requirements and individual notification letters were sent to the occupiers of properties bordering/close to the site. No letters were sent to occupiers of dwellings in Gerald Street or Vernon Street, however none physically adjoins the site and the nearest is in excess of 70 metres away.

CONCLUSION

The development will make a valuable contribution towards the provision of accommodation or older residents in a sustainable location without adversely impacting upon adjacent properties or highway safety. It will also enhance the character of the site and wider Grosvenor Road Conservation and is therefore in accordance with the relevant UDP policies.

RECOMMENDATION: That permission be GRANTED

CONDITION(S)

1. The development hereby permitted shall be commenced before the expiry of five years from the date of this permission. 2. The development shall only be carried out in strict accordance with the details shown on the following approved drawing and contained within the application documentation: i) 1477/F03/S02/Revision-E: Site Plan; ii) 1477/F03/004/Revision-A: Proposed Elevations; iii) 1477/F03/005/Revision-A: Proposed Elevations; iv) 1477/F03/001/Revision C: Ground Floor Plan; v) 1477/F03/002/Revision D: First Floor Plan; vi) 1477/F03/003/Revision C: Second Floor Plan; vii) 1477/F03/S04: External Works viii) ADL130 Revision A: Landscaping. 3. No part of the development shall commence until an appropriate Dust Management Scheme has been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The dust mitigation measures as are approved shall be fully implemented for the entire duration of the construction phase. 4. With the exception of the proposed demolition works, no part of the development shall commence until a scheme for the comprehensive and integrated drainage of the site indicating how foul water, surface water and land drainage will be dealt with has been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The scheme as approved shall be implemented in accordance with a timescale to be agreed as part of the submitted details and maintained thereafter. 5. No part of no.16 Grosvenor Road shall be demolished until a scheme detailing the measures that will be put in place to secure and protect those parts of the building labelled 'Red indicates existing retained building' on approved drawings 1477/F03/001/Revision C: Ground Floor Plan, 1477/F03/002/Revision D: First Floor Plan and 1477/F03/003/Revision C: Second Floor Plan and 'Existing facades to be retained' on approved drawing 1477/F03/S04: External Works throughout the demolition and construction phases of the development has been submitted to and approved in writing by

Page 112 REPORT OF THE HEAD OF COMMUNITY WELLBEING AND DEVELOPMENT – Date 7th March 2016 the Local Planning Authority. The development shall thereafter only proceed in strict accordance with the scheme as approved. 6. The development shall not be used unless the recommendations made in sections 8.1, 8.2 and 8.3 of the Environoise Noise Assessment to Support Planning Application dated 12 November 2015 have been implemented in full. 7. The development shall not be used the new 2.0m brick wall shown on approved drawing ADL130 Revision A: Landscaping has been erected in accordance with full details that shall first have been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. 8. The development shall not be used until a Service and Delivery Management Plan has been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The Service and Delivery Management Plan shall include (but not be limited to) the arrangements to be put in place for the collection of refuse from the site. The site shall thereafter operate in strict accordance with the Service and Delivery Management Plan as approved. 9. Prior to their use on the development samples of all external facing and roofing materials shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The development shall only be carried out in strict accordance with such details as are approved. 10. No new or replacement windows or doors shall be installed until drawings to scale 1:5 and 1:20 fully detailing all new or replacement windows and doors have been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The details shall fully describe the proposed materials, decorative/protective finishes, cross sections for glazing bars, sills, heads etc, method of opening and glazing type. Windows and doors shall thereafter only installed in strict accordance with such details as are approved. 11. The development shall be carried out in strict accordance with section 8: Conclusions, Impacts and Mitigation for Bats of the Clwydian Ecology Protected Species Survey dated 27 September 2015. 12. The landscaping scheme approved as part of this application shall be fully implemented in strict accordance with approved drawing no. ADL130 Revision A: Landscaping within three months of the first use of the development with the exception of soft landscaping which shall be carried out in the first planting season (November to March) or seeding season (April to September) following the first use. 13. The vehicular parking and turning areas as shown on approved drawing(s) No(s). 1477/F03/S02/Revision E: Site Plan shall be fully laid out, surfaced and drained prior to first use of the development. These areas shall thereafter be permanently retained and kept free of any obstruction, and made available solely for the parking and turning of motor vehicles at all times. 14. Prior to first use of the development hereby approved the vehicular accesses shall provide visibility splays of 2.4 metres x 43 metres in both directions measured to the centreline of the adjoining highway. Within these splays there shall be no obstruction in excess of 1 metre in height above the level of the adjoining highway. The splays shall thereafter be permanently retained clear of any such obstruction to visibility. 15. Prior to first use of the development hereby approved, the accesses shall be surfaced with hard bound materials (e.g. bituminous macadam) for a minimum distance of 5 metres behind the adjoining highway.

Page 113 REPORT OF THE HEAD OF COMMUNITY WELLBEING AND DEVELOPMENT – Date 7th March 2016

16. No private surface water run off shall be permitted to flow from the development site onto the adjoining highway. An Aco drain or similar shall be provided across the approved access to intercept any such run off prior to first use of the development. 17. All works in relation to the implementation of this permission, including deliveries to and / or leaving the site, shall be undertaken only between the hours of 7.30 and 18.00 Monday to Friday, and 08.00 to 14.00 on a Saturday, and at no time on a Sunday or a Bank Holiday. 18. Notwithstanding the provisions of the Town and Country Planning (General Permitted Development) Order 1995 (or any order revoking, re- enacting that Order with or without modification), no gate, fence, wall or other means of enclosure shall be erected, constructed or placed across the access within 5 metres of the highway boundary under Class A, of Schedule 2 Part 2

REASON(S)

1. To comply with Section 91(3) of the Town and Country Planning Act, 1990. 2. To ensure that the development fully complies with the appropriate policies and standards. 3. To protect the amenities of the occupiers of nearby properties. 4. To ensure that effective drainage facilities are provided for the proposed development, and that no adverse impact occurs to the environment or the existing public sewerage system. 5. In the interests of preserving the character of the Conservation Area. 6. In the interests of the amenity of the future occupiers of the development. 7. In the interests of the amenity of the future occupiers of the development and to ensure a satisfactory standard of appearance of the development in the interests of the visual amenities of the area. 8. To ensure adequate arrangements are in place to allow for the servicing of the site. 9. To ensure a satisfactory standard of appearance of the development in the interests of the visual amenities of the area. 10. To ensure a satisfactory standard of appearance of the development in the interests of the visual amenities of the area and to preserve the character of the Conservation Area. 11. In order to protect wildlife interests, which are afforded special protection. 12. To ensure a satisfactory standard of appearance of the development in the interests of the visual amenities of the area. 13. To provide for the parking and turning of vehicles clear of the highway and to ensure that reversing by vehicles into or from the highway is rendered unnecessary in the interest of traffic safety. 14. To ensure that adequate visibility is provided at the proposed point of access to the highway. 15. To ensure that no deleterious material is carried onto the highway, in the interests of highway safety. 16. In the interests of highway safety. 17. To protect the amenities of the occupiers of nearby properties.

Page 114 REPORT OF THE HEAD OF COMMUNITY WELLBEING AND DEVELOPMENT – Date 7th March 2016

18. In the interests of highway safety.

NOTE(S) TO APPLICANT

Page 115 REPORT OF THE HEAD OF COMMUNITY WELLBEING AND DEVELOPMENT – Date 7th March 2016

Property specific summary information on past, current and future coal mining activity can be obtained from: www.groundstability.com

Page 116 REPORT OF THE HEAD OF COMMUNITY WELLBEING AND DEVELOPMENT – Date 7th March 2016

APPLICATION NO: LOCATION: DATE RECEIVED: P/2015 /0928 SITE OF FORMER ROSEMARY 08/12/2015 NURSERIES BURTON HALL ROAD ROSSETT WREXHAM COMMUNITY: LL12 0AR CASE OFFICER: Rossett SEH DESCRIPTION: INSTALLATION OF 7 NO BELOW WARD: GROUND GAS TANKS (IN AGENT NAME: Rossett RETROSPECT) PARRY DAVIES ARCHITECTS LTD APPLICANT(S) NAME: MR LEE MYTTON ______

THE SITE

4 No. LPG Tanks

3 No. Tanks

PROPOSAL

As above

RELEVANT HISTORY

P/2013/0783 16 DWELLINGS INCLUDING ASSOCIATED ACCESS(S) AND WITHDRAWN LANDSCAPING P/2014/0292 16 DWELLINGS INCLUDING APPROVED ASSOCIATED ACCESS(S) AND 01/09/2014 LANDSCAPING

Page 117 REPORT OF THE HEAD OF COMMUNITY WELLBEING AND DEVELOPMENT – Date 7th March 2016

DEVELOPMENT PLAN

Previously developed site adjacent to the settlement limit of Burton. UDP Policies PS2 and GDP1 apply.

CONSULTATIONS

Community Council: Consulted 14.12.2015 Local Member: There must be no servicing access from Rosemary Lane as it is single track at that point. Highways: No objection subject to conditions restricting the parking of delivery vehicles clear of the adopted highway. (See special considerations below) Public Protection: No comments or observations. Site Notice: Expired 06.01.2016 Neighbours: 20 objections received raising the following: - The tanks are too close to residential properties; - Rosemary Lane could be blocked whilst the tanks are filled and re-filled. This would have an unacceptable impact upon local residents’ amenity and free flow of all road users including emergency vehicles, bus service and pedestrians; - LPG Regulations have been breached.

SPECIAL CONSIDERATIONS/ ISSUES

Background: This is a full application for the installation of 7 no. below ground gas storage tanks, in retrospect. The tanks will supply the residential development (15 dwellings) currently under construction. The tanks are locked in order to prevent any interference with the contents and as the tanks are below ground they have little or no impact upon the visual amenities of the area. The main issue to consider therefore relates to the potential blocking of the highway by gas delivery vehicles, preventing the free flow of traffic on Rosemary Lane.

Highways: As confirmed by the Delivery Management Plan (DMP), the delivery tankers will park within the confines of development site and the tanks will be re-filled by means of retractable pipe. Given that the submitted DMP will ensure that the position of the delivery vehicle will not adversely impact upon the free flow of the traffic on the adopted highway, there are no objections to the development on highway safety grounds. A condition should be attached to any permission to prevent the tankers parking on Rosemary Lane.

Other Matters: Concerns have been raised that the tanks are in breach of LPG regulations. Whilst this not a relevant planning consideration, documents have been submitted by a competent body which provide a declaration of conformity of the LPG system and the tanks comply to British Standards and European Requirements.

Page 118 REPORT OF THE HEAD OF COMMUNITY WELLBEING AND DEVELOPMENT – Date 7th March 2016

CONCLUSION

The proposal is acceptable as being in accordance with UDP Policies GDP1 and PS2, and I recommend accordingly.

RECOMMENDATION: That permission be GRANTED

CONDITION(S)

1. All LPG deliveries to the tanks hereby approved shall be made in strict accordance with the Delivery Management Plan submitted and approved as part of this application, and no delivery vehicle shall park on Rosemary Lane at any time for the purposes of re-filling these tanks.

REASON(S)

1. In the interests of highway safety.

______

Page 119 REPORT OF THE HEAD OF COMMUNITY WELLBEING AND DEVELOPMENT – Date 7th March 2016

APPLICATION NO: LOCATION: DATE RECEIVED: P/2015 /0962 CAE BACH ELLESMERE ROAD 24/12/2015 BRONINGTON WREXHAM SY13 3HD COMMUNITY: CASE OFFICER: Bronington DESCRIPTION: MP USE OF LAND AND FARM BUILDING AS FARM ACTIVITY CENTRE WARD: (LEISURE) (TO BE USED 48 DAYS AGENT NAME: Bronington PER ANNUM) AND AS DIY WEDDING MR TIM EVANS VENUE (12 PER ANNUM) AND SITING OF PORTABLE TOILET BLOCK

APPLICANT(S) NAME: MR & MRS MIDDLETON FARM ADVENTURE ______P/2015/0962 THE SITE

Existing farm building

Proposed WC block

Application site

Page 120 REPORT OF THE HEAD OF COMMUNITY WELLBEING AND DEVELOPMENT – Date 7th March 2016

PROPOSAL

The applicant is seeking to use the 2.6ha site and existing 385 sq.m building for 48 days per year as a farm activity centre and for 12 days per annum as a DIY wedding venue. When the site is used as a farm activity centre visitors will be able to engage in the following sheep gathering, tractor driving, pig herding, welly throwing, egg throwing, tug of war, greasy pole and a farm related relay race. When the land is not in use as a farm activity centre or as a wedding venue it will be used for agricultural purposes.

No building works are proposed within the site although a portable WC building is to be sited adjacent to the south-east elevation of the existing building.

HISTORY

P/2004/0845 Erection of agricultural livestock/fodder buildings. Granted 11.8.2004 P/2008/1007 Erection of agricultural building. Granted 3.11.2008.

DEVELOPMENT PLAN

Outside of settlement limit. Policies GDP1, EC6, E5 and T8 apply.

CONSULTATIONS

Community Council: The Council wishes to strongly object to the application based on the following reasons: - The effect this planning application would have on the local community has not been taken into consideration; - Lack of Engagement with the local community. The applicant has not made any attempt to engage with Bronington Community Council and local residents about application, as advised by planning guidelines; - Notification of the planning application. Several of the immediate neighbours to the proposed site did not receive any notification from WCBC about the planning application; - Planning Policy. The applicant has used Welsh Government Planning Policy as opposed to the WCBC Local Plan which is apparently now out of date. The existing Local Plan ought to be taken into consideration until the new Local Plan has been adopted; - Road traffic safety:- Proposed access to the site is on an accident hotspot on the A495. Some years ago, a planning application for a

Page 121 REPORT OF THE HEAD OF COMMUNITY WELLBEING AND DEVELOPMENT – Date 7th March 2016

garden centre on the same stretch of road was refused due to road traffic safety concerns for site access off the A495; - The A495 Whitchurch to Welshampton road is regarded as one of the most dangerous roads in Britain. This is according to ITV programme Police Camera Action. The programme worked with the European road safety organisation EuroRAP to analyse main roads by compiling the number of serious injuries against the volume of traffic; - Parking. Concerns were raised regarding access to the proposed car park as this would create additional volumes of traffic queueing to enter and depart from the site; - Noise levels. The proposed site is sited next door to the church. It would be highly inappropriate for events to take place at the site when a funeral is taking place at the church. This proves the point that there has been no consideration for the effect on the local community; - Ecology concerns. There are a number of buzzards in the area; - License to supply alcohol. The Council notes that the venue does not intend to apply for a licence to supply alcohol at events. Alternatively, people attending the site are welcome to bring their own supply of alcohol. This has the potential to cause anti-social behaviour for the immediate neighbours with people drinking late into the night and loud noise levels. The Council requests clarification who will police / supervise the site overnight when events / weddings are taking place at the site; - The proposed site has not been actively farmed for many years, therefore the planning application does not comply with the current planning policy for diversification for rural enterprise; - Size of Site. The site owned by the applicant in Yorkshire is 178 acres – plenty of space for all the activities than take place at the site. The proposed site in Bronington is just 7 acres. The Council feels that the proposed site is not large enough to accommodate all the activities that are proposed at the site; - Promotion of the Site. Concerns were raised as the site has been actively promoted as a

Page 122 REPORT OF THE HEAD OF COMMUNITY WELLBEING AND DEVELOPMENT – Date 7th March 2016

venue since January. This is prior to any planning decision being made; - Shooting Range. Safety concerns were raised regarding the proximity of the site to the neighbouring Shooting Range. The rearing of pheasants takes place at the Shooting Range. The proposed activities at the site would be disruptive to the rearing of the pheasants. This in turn would then affect the economic viability of a well-established, local business. Local Member: Notified initially 29.12.2015 and regarding amended description of development 18.1.2016 Public Protection: The weddings will be subject to Temporary Events Notices (TENs) with the Council’s Licencing Section. There will be opportunity to control amplified music noise via the TENs regime. The other activities shouldn’t cause any issues to noise sensitive properties greater than 250 metres away. Highways: Have made the following comments: - Visibility splays of 2.4 x 160 metres to the west and 2.4 x 215 metres to the east required. The existing/proposed access provides splays in excess of the requirements; - The existing access is approximately 4.9m wide and is gated 5.5m behind the highway. The access is surfaced with loose bound materials; - I understand the maximum length of vehicles utilising the site will be a 33 seater 8 metre long minibus. On this basis I would recommend a minimum 4.8m wide access. Such an access should be surfaced with hard bound materials for a minimum distance of 10m behind the highway with not gates erected within 10 metres of the highway; - The site appears to be served by a narrow single track (typically 2.4m wide) surfaced with loose bound materials which leads to the existing building. It would be considered beneficial to improve this track to accommodate the simultaneous passage of 2 no. vehicles (e.g. 5m width); - In terms of parking provision the submitted layout plan appears to indicate the provision of 10 parking spaces next to the main building and 20 spaces within the existing field fronting the site. There would also appear to be scope to accommodate significantly more parking within the site which could also be sited on reinforced grass mesh;

Page 123 REPORT OF THE HEAD OF COMMUNITY WELLBEING AND DEVELOPMENT – Date 7th March 2016

- The submitted DAS indicates that the number of guests attending any wedding would rarely exceed 100. Such events typically involve car sharing, taxis and the use of mini-buses. The proposed site is therefore considered capable of accommodating adequate parking provision to cater for such an event; - No objection subject to conditions. Welsh Water: Consulted 29.12.15 NRW: No objection. Site Notice: Expired 26.1.15 Neighbours: The owners/occupiers of 11 properties notified initially 5.1.2016 and regarding amended description of development 18.1.2016. 16 representations received objecting to the development and raising the following concerns/issues: - Highway safety; - No parking for buses; - Coaches parking to unload/load on the highway; - Need for adequate parking; - Parking may overspill onto the road; - Not in keeping with the character of the village; - Unsuitable location; - Limited economic benefits. Any further job creation can only be justified by further commercial activities, more and/or longer days; - Noise; - Impact upon the elderly residents of the vicarage; - Risk of guests wandering off the site; - Proximity to Bronington Parish Church and disruption to weddings, christenings and funerals held there; - Impact upon wildlife/protected species; - The applicants have already appointed a site manager and advertised the opening of the business; - The site is not a working farm; - This is not farm diversification; - Two adjoining plots have approval for the use of firearms. During the shooting season organised shoots use the land and the wood is used for pheasant rearing. The same land is used annually for grazing of sheep and horses; - Consumption of alcohol and drugs on site; - People will have to use other facilities such as hotels, public houses, B & Bs, caterers and

Page 124 REPORT OF THE HEAD OF COMMUNITY WELLBEING AND DEVELOPMENT – Date 7th March 2016

suppliers outside of the area. Little benefit to the Bronington Community/the local shop; - Disturbance/noise from potential use of fireworks; - Difficult if not impossible for any restrictions to be observed at all times; - Impact upon livestock in adjoining fields; - Size of the site/space available for proposed activities; - Space available for the animals on site; - Where the animals will be kept on site; - Welfare of the animals kept on site; - Will there be a need for office space; - Use of the building/site for more than 12 days proposed for weddings – setting up and clearing away the day before/after; - Nowhere to stay in the locality; - Impact upon emergency services; - Rubbish/litter; - Proximity of the activities to the site boundaries; - Position of portable toilet relative to adjoining land; - Potentially disruptive to pheasants on adjacent land; - There is already a well-established equestrian centre nearby; - No hardstandings shown in front of toilet block; - No vehicular access shown to allow for cleaning or supplying; - Fire risk assessment has not been evaluated; - No details of outside lighting – this will be intrusive; - No details of power supply - power supplied by a generator will increase noise; - Nothing in the application that retains the agricultural use of the land. What is being applied for is a mixed use; - No provision for disabled people; - Assessment of efficiency of existing trees to provide screening should have been carried out and a tree management plan put forward. A tree management plan was required under the 2008 permission; - Operating hours – difficult to see how 9am-5pm accommodate weddings; - No swept path analysis provided; - Road speed assessment should be required; - Whether the numbers of animals kept on site represent a viable agricultural business; - Changes to the character of the site;

Page 125 REPORT OF THE HEAD OF COMMUNITY WELLBEING AND DEVELOPMENT – Date 7th March 2016

- Nothing to show how Health and Safety standards will be maintained; - The applicant has no control over the number of people that will attend events or vehicle numbers; - No details of how weddings guests will cross the field; - No circulation areas within the site; - The site is not sustainable; - Biodiversity and landscape assessment should be carried out; - A community impact assessment and transport impact assessment should be carried out; - No tourism benefits; - The assertion the application complies with UDP policies is incorrect.

SPECIAL CONSIDERATIONS

Policy: Both local and national planning policies are broadly supportive of new businesses being located in the countryside.

Policy E5 allows for small scale employment development in the countryside through the re-use of existing buildings subject to:

The proposals according with policy GDP1; The building being structurally sound and capable of re-use without extensive rebuilding; Any inherent characteristics of merit are retained; The building and curtilage do not constitute and undesirable intrusion into the landscape, create access problems nor require provision of services at public cost.

The policy does not include a definition of what is considered ‘small scale’, however given that the size of the building and adjoining land, the fact that up to 4 people will be employed as well as the limited number of days the site will be used for the proposed purposes in my opinion the development constitutes a small scale employment development and therefore policy E5 is applicable. I will consider the issues covered by a)-d) in more detail below.

In addition to the above, Planning Policy Wales (Chapter 7) is supportive of diversifying the rural economy and advises that new businesses are essential to sustain and improve rural communities.

Finally the provisions of Part 4 of the Town and Country Planning (General Permitted Development) Order 1995 must also be taken into account. These would allow the land (but not the building) to be used for up to 28 days per year for a wide range of non-agricultural uses, including the proposed uses. As such the principle of using the site for non-agricultural purposes, albeit for fewer days than proposed, is already established.

Page 126 REPORT OF THE HEAD OF COMMUNITY WELLBEING AND DEVELOPMENT – Date 7th March 2016

Use of the site: Whether the site constitutes a farm has been questioned by a number of objectors, however the lawful permitted uses of the site is for agriculture irrespective of whether or not it forms part of a larger agricultural holding or is currently actively used for that purpose.

The proposed uses do not prevent the site from being used for agriculture for the 305 days of the year that wedding or farm activity events are not held at the site. There is no requirement for the applicant to demonstrate that the use of the site for agriculture is viable, indeed there is no requirement to actually use the land for agriculture or forestry. Provided the site is not used for any other purpose (without planning permission) then there is no breach of planning control.

The applicants have confirmed that those holding wedding events will be given access to the site to set up the day before and to clear the site the day after. I do not consider that this would constitute a material change of use.

Economic Benefits: The details submitted suggest that the site currently provides work for 2 part time employees but that this will increase to 4 if the proposed uses are granted permission.

I note that the employment and economic benefits of the development have been questioned given the limited number of employees and the lack of associated businesses in the immediate locality such as visitor accommodation. However the development will provide job opportunities that currently do not existing in the locality.

I appreciate that other than a small shop/post office there are no other facilities in Bronington, however it is reasonable to assume that some of those attending weddings or farm activity days will stay in visitor accommodation in wider area and/or use other facilities in other nearby settlements such as shops, public houses and restaurants, thus helping to support and sustain existing businesses.

Given the proximity of the site to the border with Shropshire and to Whitchurch in particular, it is likely that visitors to the site may well be of benefit to businesses located outside of the County Borough as well as within it. However Planning Policy Wales does not advise that it is only the area immediately around a development or the local authority area within which it is located that must derive benefits from it in order for it to accord with planning policy. Furthermore local residents are just as likely to be dependent upon businesses in towns like Whitchurch for employment, retail and leisure as they are upon businesses within the County Borough. Any benefits derived by businesses in the wider locality as a result of the development will therefore be of benefit to local residents, even if indirectly.

Visual Impact: No extensions or significant alterations to the existing building are proposed. An existing opening in the northern elevation of the building is to be reduced in size and sliding doors to enclose this and another opening at

Page 127 REPORT OF THE HEAD OF COMMUNITY WELLBEING AND DEVELOPMENT – Date 7th March 2016 the southern end of the building are to be installed. This will result in minimal change to the appearance of the building and will not impact significantly upon the wider landscape.

The proposed WC building will be 9.6m long, 3m wide, 2.6m high with a mono-pitched roof and clad in timber. It will be sited adjacent to the southern elevation of the existing farm building. Its position, size and appearance means it will not be prominent nor will it detract from the appearance of the site or the wider rural landscape.

Other than the WC building no other works, such as the laying or hard standings, the erection of permanent catering facilities or means of enclosure are proposed. Where there are areas with high footfall will use ground protection mats, which can be easily removed when not required. The applicant has also confirmed that other than some picnic tables that will be stored in part of the existing building when not in use, all other items such as seating and catering equipment will be brought on site for the events held there.

Parking will be provided in an existing hard surfaced yard immediately to the north of the building as well as adjacent to the northern boundary of the site east of the access. The latter will be provided on reinforced grass mesh. Overflow parking will also be provided using ground protection mats that can be removed when not in use/required. The provision of parking areas will therefore not result in any significant changes to the appearance of the site.

Highways have requested that the site access be surfaced with hard bound materials for the first 10 metres from the boundary with the A495. The access is already hard surfaced, albeit with loose materials. Replacing this with a hard bound material will not significantly alter the appearance of the site.

I appreciate that the appearance of the site will change when weddings or farm activities are held at the site as a result of parked vehicles, external seating and external catering facilities however the impact will be temporary and will occur for a limited period. Indeed for 305 days or 84% of the year, the appearance of the site will remain largely unchanged. The proposals will therefore not significantly alter or adverse impact upon the rural character of the locality.

Size of the site: I note the concerns that the site is too small for the proposed uses particularly as a farm activity centre, however I have no reason to believe that this is in fact the case. The submitted details suggest that when the site is used as farm activity centre it will be attended by up to three groups of 15 people each at any one time. The size of the site may well limit the scope of some activities, such as tractor driving or, depending on the number of people who attend at any one time, place limits on the number of activities that can take place simultaneously. However it will be for the site manager to ensure that individual events and activities can take place within the space available.

Page 128 REPORT OF THE HEAD OF COMMUNITY WELLBEING AND DEVELOPMENT – Date 7th March 2016

With regards to weddings, the submitted details suggest that these may be attended by up to 100 people. Given that the site is 2.6 hectares in area, which equates to 26 squares per guest, there is more than sufficient space to cater for this use.

Amenity: The nearest dwellings are around 250 metres from the site. Given this distance the only potential risk to amenity is noise.

Weddings held at the site will be subject to Temporary Event Notices (TENs) issued under the Licencing Act 2003. The playing of amplified music and the sale of alcohol is controlled via the TENs regime. Despite the TENs regime noise is nevertheless a relevant planning consideration. The applicant has confirmed that when weddings are held the site will be in use between 9am and midnight. I consider it reasonable to impose a planning condition to limit the times when the site can be used for weddings to those proposed.

The farm activity centre use will operate between 9am and 5pm and taking the distance to the nearest dwellings into account as well as the fact that background noise in the vicinity of the site is higher due to traffic passing along the A495 I do not anticipate it generating levels of noise that will cause the occupiers of those dwellings significant disturbance. It is also of note that Public Protection have advised that they do not anticipate the farm activity centre use causing significant issues for noise sensitive properties (i.e. dwellings). A condition will be imposed to limit the operating times to those proposed.

The applicant has confirmed that the site is not connected to mains electricity therefore a generator will need to be used when electricity is required. I appreciate that these will generate noise, however it is possible to source low noise generator. In my opinion those holding weddings are likely to want to use to avoid significant disturbance to the event so are likely to hire generators that do not generate significant noise. Furthermore given the distance to the nearest properties I consider it unlikely that the use of a generator will result in significant disturbance to their occupiers.

The submitted details do not indicate whether there will be firework displays on site in conjunction with the weddings held. Given that the proposal is for a DIY wedding venue then it is unlikely that the applicants would be able to comment on this matter at this stage. In any case, the display of fireworks is a matter outside of the scope of planning control. The display of fireworks is controlled via the Fireworks Regulations which, other than on a limited number of occasions such as Bonfire Night or New Year’s Eve, prevent displays taking place between 11pm and 7am.

The control of litter and rubbish within the site will be a matter for the site operator/manager.

Impact upon Bronington Parish Church: The western site boundary is around 175 metres from the boundary of the church yard and over 200 metres from the church itself, with two fields in between. Views of the site from the

Page 129 REPORT OF THE HEAD OF COMMUNITY WELLBEING AND DEVELOPMENT – Date 7th March 2016 churchyard are partially obscured by existing trees and hedges. Whilst I understand the concerns about the possible impact of the development upon weddings, christenings or funerals held at the church, given the distance I consider it unlikely that the proposals will significantly prejudice the use of the church or churchyard.

Impact upon adjacent land: Some concern has been expressed about the potential impact upon adjacent land and businesses.

The submitted plans do not provide for any ‘buffer’ between the areas where activities will take place and the site boundary. However it will be for the operators of the events held at the site to ensure that activities, items or litter do not stray onto adjoining land.

I understand that the adjacent site is used for pheasant rearing and for game shooting. Whilst concerns have been expressed that the activities may prove disruptive to pheasants I have not been provided with any evidence that this will in fact be the case. It would therefore be very difficult to justify refusal on the grounds that the proposals will adversely impact upon an adjoining business.

Despite the concerns raised, I have also not been provided with any evidence that the proposed uses are incompatible with the use of adjacent land as a shooting range. In any case, it is for the operators of the shooting range to ensure that any events they have do not threaten the safety of the users of adjacent land, including the application site.

With regards impact upon the use of adjoining fields for agriculture, many fields adjoin sites that are used for non-agricultural purposes. I therefore see no reason why the proposals will prejudice the ability of the owners of adjacent land to continue to farm that land, including keeping livestock on it.

The proposed WC building will be 2.5 metres from the north-eastern boundary of the site. Given its size and function it is unlikely to prejudice or impact upon the use of adjoining land.

Consumption of alcohol: As noted above the sale of alcohol on the site is controlled via the TENs regime. The consumption of alcohol brought onto the site as opposed to any sold on the site is outside of the scope of planning control or licensing control. The behaviour of anyone on site who consumes alcohol will ultimately be the responsibility of the site manager and/or those holding events at the site. It will also be a matter for the site operator to ensure that no illegal substances are used on the site.

Ecology: Whilst noting the concerns about the impact of the proposals on wildlife, the site has been subject to an ecological survey which concludes that there is no significant risk of the development adversely impacting upon protected species. There are records of Great Crested Newts in the area however the report accompanying the survey recommends that provided any works at the site are carried out in accordance with a scheme of reasonable

Page 130 REPORT OF THE HEAD OF COMMUNITY WELLBEING AND DEVELOPMENT – Date 7th March 2016 avoidance measures the development will not adversely impact upon this species. NRW have not objected to the application therefore subject to a condition to require the implementation of the proposed reasonable avoidance measures I have no reason to conclude that the proposals will adversely impact upon any statutorily protected species or sites.

Animal welfare: The applicant has not specified how many animals will be kept on site when farm activity days are held, where enclosures will be or where animals that are kept on the site when it is for agriculture will be moved to in order for the proposed uses to take place. It will be for the applicant to decide how many animals are kept on site at any one time, taking into account animal welfare requirements, as well as to make arrangements for any animals that are kept on site at other times to be moved elsewhere. Animal welfare is not a material planning consideration.

Access and parking: Visibility at the site access is adequate in both directions. The site access is also wide enough to enable simultaneous access and egress to/from the site. Highways have not objected to the application therefore I have no reason to conclude that the traffic generated by the development will be prejudicial to highway safety.

The details submitted suggest up 45 people will attend the farm activity centre at any one time and up to 100 people will attend weddings held at the site. I would anticipate that there will be a high degree of car sharing amongst those attending events at the site, particularly weddings. Furthermore the applicant anticipates that mini-buses will be used to transport people to/from events held at the site.

Permanent parking spaces will be provided adjacent to the building (10 spaces including 2 mobility spaces) and near to the northern boundary of the site (20 spaces). An area for around 18 overflow parking spaces is also shown on the submitted plans therefore up to 48 parking spaces can be made available. I consider the permanent parking provision will be adequate for the farm activity centre and the total number of spaces that can be provided to be adequate for wedding events.

I am aware of concerns that coaches would have difficulty entering the site and/or would stop on the A495 to unload/load. No provision for coaches to enter, park or manoeuvre within the site has been made however the applicant has confirmed that the largest vehicles they anticipate entering the site will be 30 seat mini-buses. Whilst it would be possible for the site operator/manager to prevent coaches from entering the site, I accept that it would not be possible for them to prevent coaches stopping on the highway to unload/load. This is also a matter that is outside of the scope of planning control.

Coaches waiting on the highway as well as pedestrians potentially crossing the A495 would be prejudicial to highway safety as well as the safety of those attempting to cross the road. Whilst the possibility of coaches being used to transport people to/from the site cannot be ruled out, granting permission

Page 131 REPORT OF THE HEAD OF COMMUNITY WELLBEING AND DEVELOPMENT – Date 7th March 2016 does not mean that they will be used. In my opinion it would be reasonable to impose a condition to require a transport management plan in order to ensure the applicant makes it clear to prospective users of the site that coaches cannot be used to transport people to/from the site. I also consider it reasonable to grant permission for a temporary 12 month period initially. If highways issues do occur they would be a relevant consideration if the applicant sought a permanent planning permission.

The existing site access is surfaced with loose bound materials and has a gate 5.5 metres from the highway boundary. Highways have requested that any gates be 10 metres back from the highway boundary and that the access be surfaced with hard bound materials for that distance. These measures would ensure that vehicles, including a mini-bus, can pull off the highway and not obstruct the A495 even if gates are closed. The use of hard bound materials will also ensure that loose materials are not tracked onto the highway by vehicles leaving the site.

Some concern has been expressed about people attempting to walk from the site along the highway, particularly those under the influence of alcohol. This is a matter outside of the scope of planning control. In the first instance it is for those attending events at the site to display a degree of personal responsibility and not put themselves in danger. It is also for those holding events at the site to ensure individuals do not put themselves in danger.

Drainage: Foul drainage from the WC building will be via a septic tank. Given that NRW have not raise any objections to the application I have no reason to conclude that this method of drainage is inappropriate. The suitability of the septic tank that is installed will be dealt with under Building Regulations.

The submitted plans do not provide any details of how the septic tank will be serviced, however it will within 5 metres the parking area located adjacent to the building. I am therefore satisfied that it will be in a convenient location to be serviced.

Other Matters: Concern has been expressed that the applicant has already employed someone to work at the site and has advertised the opening of the business despite the fact that planning permission has not yet been granted. This is not a material planning consideration and any arrangements made in advance of the determination of the application have been made at the applicants own risk.

Whilst it has been suggested that the applicant may want to increase the number of days the site is used for non-agricultural purposes in future, I am only able to consider the application on the basis of what has been proposed. It would not be possible to sustain a refusal of permission of a development because the applicant may want to extend or change the proposals in future. If the applicant wanted to increase the number of days the land is used or to extend the range of activities that can be carried out at the site then this will need to be subject to a separate application. The merits of any future

Page 132 REPORT OF THE HEAD OF COMMUNITY WELLBEING AND DEVELOPMENT – Date 7th March 2016 proposals will be considered in light of the policies and circumstances that apply at that time.

Some objectors have referred to a potential housing development on the edge of Bronington and the traffic/highway implications were it as well as the proposals subject to this application to proceed. I am not currently considering any planning applications for residential development in/on the edge of Bronington therefore I cannot comment upon or take into account of the cumulative impact of the two developments.

There is no planning policy requirement for an application of the type/size proposed to be accompanied by a transport assessment or a community impact assessment.

Fire risk assessments fall outside of the scope of planning control, although means of escape from the building is dealt with under Building Regulations. It is also the operator of the site to ensure that the events held at there do not pose a fire risk and that all relevant health and safety legislation is complied with.

The application forms submitted suggest that details of the proposals were submitted to Bronington Community Council prior to the submission of the application although this is disputed by the Community Council. There is currently no statutory requirement for the applicant to carry out pre-application consultations for this type of proposal. The lack of any engagement with the Community Council or local residents is therefore not a material planning consideration.

CONCLUSION

The proposed uses can take place without harming the rural character of the site and its immediate surroundings and, subject to planning conditions, without significant harm to the amenity of the occupiers of dwellings in the vicinity. The site has a safe means of access and adequate on-site parking will be provided.

I acknowledge that there is a risk that coaches could be used to transport groups to/from the sure and that no on-site provision for larger vehicles is made. However I believe this matter can be addressed by way of a transport management plan and by granting a temporary permission to allow the operation of the site to be reconsidered after an initial 12 month period.

Subject to the conditions discussed above I am satisfied the proposals accord with the relevant UDP policies.

Page 133 REPORT OF THE HEAD OF COMMUNITY WELLBEING AND DEVELOPMENT – Date 7th March 2016

RECOMMENDATION: That permission be GRANTED

CONDITION(S)

1. The site shall cease for the purposes subject to this planning permission after 30 June 2017. 2. The site shall not be used as a wedding venue for more than 12 days in any calendar year and shall not be used as a farm activity centre for more than 48 days in any calendar year. The site shall not be used at any other time for any purpose other than for agriculture or forestry. 3. Notwithstanding the provisions of Class D2 of the Schedule to the Town and Country Planning (Use Classes) Order 1987 (or any statutory instrument revoking and re-enacting that Order with or without amendment) when used as a farm activity centre the site shall only be used for the precise purposes specified on the approved Addendum to DAS: List of activities for Farm Adventure events. 4. The uses hereby granted permission shall not commence until a transport management plan has been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. Thereafter, when the site is used as a wedding venue or as a farm activity centre, it shall be used in strict accordance with the approved transport management plan. 5. No part of the site shall be used as a wedding venue other than between 9am and 12am. 6. No part of the site shall be used as a farm activity centre other than between 9am and 5pm. 7. Prior to first use of the development hereby approved the vehicular access shall provide visibility splays of 2.4 metres x 160 metres to the south west and 2.4 metres x 215 metres to the north east measured to the nearside edge of the adjoining highway. Within these splays there shall be no obstruction above the level of the adjoining carriageway. The splays shall thereafter be permanently retained clear of any such obstruction to visibility. 8. The vehicular access hereby approved shall be a minimum width of 4.8 metres. 9. Prior to first use of the vehicular access hereby approved, the access shall be surfaced with hard bound materials (e.g. bituminous macadam) for a minimum distance of 10 metres behind the adjoining highway. 10. Prior to the first use of the site for the purposes subject to this permission, any gate or other means of enclosure across the site access within 10 metres of the highway boundary shall be removed. Thereafter, notwithstanding the provisions of Class A, of Schedule 2 Part 2 of the Town and Country Planning (General Permitted Development) Order 1995 (or any order revoking, re-enacting that Order with or without modification), no gate, fence, wall or other means of enclosure shall be erected, constructed or placed across the access within 10 metres of the highway boundary. 11. The vehicular parking and turning areas as shown on the approved Site Plan shall be fully laid out prior to first use of the site for the purposes subject to this permission. These areas shall thereafter be permanently retained and kept free of any obstruction, and made available solely for the parking and

Page 134 REPORT OF THE HEAD OF COMMUNITY WELLBEING AND DEVELOPMENT – Date 7th March 2016 turning of motor vehicles when the site is in use for the purposes hereby granted planning permission. 12. The development shall be carried out in strict accordance with the approved Site Plan and the approved Elevation Plans. REASON(S)

1. To allow the impact of the site to be reassessed, particularly with regards to highway safety. 2. In the interests of protecting the rural character of the site and its surroundings. 3. In the interests of protecting the rural character of the site and its surroundings. 4. In the interests of highway safety. 5. To protect the amenities of the occupiers of nearby properties. 6. To protect the amenities of the occupiers of nearby properties. 7. To ensure that adequate visibility is provided at the proposed point of access to the highway. 8. To ensure the formation of a safe and satisfactory access. 9. To ensure that no deleterious material is carried onto the highway, in the interests of highway safety. 10. In the interests of highway safety. 11. To provide for the parking and turning of vehicles clear of the highway and to ensure that reversing by vehicles into or from the highway is rendered unnecessary in the interest of traffic safety. 12. In the interests of protecting the rural character of the site and its surroundings and to protect the amenities of the occupiers of nearby properties.

______

Page 135 REPORT OF THE HEAD OF COMMUNITY WELLBEING AND DEVELOPMENT – Date 7th March 2016

APPLICATION NO: LOCATION: DATE RECEIVED: P/2016 /0011 KINGDOM HALL OF JEHOVAHS 07/01/2016 WITNESSES PARK STREET RHOSDDU WREXHAM COMMUNITY: LL11 2NN CASE OFFICER: Rhosddu MP DESCRIPTION: CHANGE OF USE FROM PLACE OF WARD: WORHSHIP (USE CLASS D1) TO AGENT NAME: Grosvenor BUILDING FOR REHERSALS AND MR ANDREW ROBERTS PERFORMANCE (MIXED USE)

APPLICANT(S) NAME: MR ANDREW ROBERTS ______P/2016/0011 THE SITE

Application site

PROPOSAL

The applicants are a theatre company and are proposing to change the use of the building from a place of worship (a Class D1 use) to a place for rehearsals and performances. Whilst the details submitted describe this as a mixed use,

Page 136 REPORT OF THE HEAD OF COMMUNITY WELLBEING AND DEVELOPMENT – Date 7th March 2016 places for rehearsals and performances fall within Class D2 assembly and leisure.

HISTORY

P/2013/0134 Demolition of existing building and outline application for residential development. Granted 2.4.2013

DEVELOPMENT PLAN

Within settlement limit. Policies GDP1 and T8 apply.

CONSULTATIONS

Community Council: Consulted 12.1.16 Local Member: Notified 12.1.16 Public Protection: Recommend a noise condition. Highways: Have made the following comments: - visibility splays of 2.4 x 25m in to the south- west measured to the centreline of the highway normally required; - visibility from the existing access appears adequate; - the existing access is approximately 7.2m wide and takes the form of a dropped kerb crossing; - the existing car park appears capable of accommodating approximately 8 cars. Based on LPG16 the proposed development would normally require a maximum of 10 parking spaces; - given the sustainable location of the site and its previous use as a place of worship, no objections to the proposed development on highway grounds; - conditions recommended. Site Notice: Expired 15.1.16 Neighbours: The owners/occupiers of 39 nearby properties notified 18.1.16 and the owner/occupier of 1 further property notified on 26.1.16. 5 representations received expressing the following concerns: - parking - operating hours - noise; - proposed change of use must only be to residential; - anti-social behaviour

Page 137 REPORT OF THE HEAD OF COMMUNITY WELLBEING AND DEVELOPMENT – Date 7th March 2016

SPECIAL CONSIDERATIONS

Policy: There are no specific UDP policies that deal with the change of use of buildings to leisure use. The only policies directly applicable are GDP1 in respect of amenity, highway safety and both GDP1 and T8 in respect of parking provision.

Amenity: No alterations or extensions to the building are proposed therefore the development will not impact upon the amenity of nearby occupiers by way of loss of light, privacy or by being visually overbearing.

The applicant’s initial intentions are to use the building primarily for rehearsals as well as providing some ancillary office space for Tip Top Productions – a local theatre company. In the longer term small scale productions may also be staged at the site. Whilst the proposals are described as mixed use both rehearsals and theatre performances fall within Class D2 (Assembly and Leisure).

Both rehearsals and live performances have the potential to generate noise, particularly if amplifiers are used. However whilst acknowledging that this type of use has the potential to cause noise nuisance, Public Protection have not objected and instead have recommended that a condition be imposed to limit noise levels.

I recognise that the above mentioned condition will not control noise from visitors arriving at or departing from the site. However the operating times of the premises are to be 10am to 10pm. The applicant has indicated that during the week it is only likely to be the office that is actually in use during the day with rehearsals and performances taking place in the evenings and/or at weekends. I would expect visitors to disperse relatively quickly once rehearsals or performances have finished thus limiting any disruption. In any case, the risk of noise from visitors arriving at/leaving the site is no greater than were it to remain in use as a place of worship. The proposed use is unlikely to present any significant risk of increased anti-social behaviour in the vicinity. The behaviour of those travelling to/from the site is however outside of the scope of planning control.

Subject to the condition recommended by Public Protection as well as a condition to limit the use of the building to the hours proposed, in my opinion the development is unlikely to give rise to significant disturbance to the occupiers of neighbouring properties.

Parking: Visibility from the site access is adequate therefore the development is unlikely to prejudice highway safety.

In accordance with LPG16 a maximum of 8 parking spaces are permitted for the existing use compared to 10 for the proposed use. There is space within the site to accommodate up to 8 vehicles, 2 less than the maximum. I do not consider this to be a matter of significant concern in this instance.

Page 138 REPORT OF THE HEAD OF COMMUNITY WELLBEING AND DEVELOPMENT – Date 7th March 2016

The site is well located to be accessed on foot, by public transport or taxi in addition to private cars by those attending rehearsals or performances. I would also anticipate that, particularly in the case of performances, the site is likely to be attended by couples or groups who travel together in one vehicle.

I am aware that properties in the vicinity of the site do not have off-street parking and that on-street parking is a common occurrence along both Park Street and Prices Lane. However even if demand for parking equalled LPG16 maximum, this is unlikely result in a significant increase in on-street parking in the vicinity of the site to the extent that it gives rise to or significantly exacerbates existing parking problems.

CONCLUSION

The proposed change of use accords with the relevant UDP policies.

RECOMMENDATION: That permission be GRANTED

CONDITION(S)

1. The development hereby permitted shall be commenced before the expiry of five years from the date of this permission. 2. The A-weighted equivalent continuous noise level (LAeq) emanating from the application site, as measured 1 metre from any facade of any noise sensitive premises over any 5 minute period with amplified music taking place shall not increase by more than 3dB when compared to a similar measurement, from the same position, and over a comparable period, with no amplified music taking place. The unweighted equivalent noise level (Leq) in the 63Hz Octave band, measured using the ""fast"" time constant, inside any living room of any noise sensitive premises, with the windows open or closed, over any 5 minute period with amplified music taking place, shall show no increase when compared to a similar measurement, from the same location(s), and over a comparable period, with no amplified music taking place. No sound emanating from the establishment shall be audible within any noise sensitive premises between 23.00 and 07.00 hours 3. No use of the development shall be made before 10.00 hours or after 22.00 hours on any day. 4. Prior to first use of the development hereby approved the vehicular access shall provide a visibility splay of 2.4 metres x 25 metres to the south- west measured to the centreline of the adjoining highway. Within these splays there shall be no obstruction above the level of the adjoining carriageway. The splays shall thereafter be permanently retained clear of any such obstruction to visibility. 5. The vehicular parking and turning areas as shown on approved Block/Site Plan shall be fully laid out, surfaced and drained prior to first use of the development. These areas shall thereafter be permanently retained and kept free of any obstruction, and made available solely for the parking and turning of motor vehicles at all times. 6. Notwithstanding the provisions of the Town and Country Planning (General Permitted Development) Order 1995 (or any order revoking, re-

Page 139 REPORT OF THE HEAD OF COMMUNITY WELLBEING AND DEVELOPMENT – Date 7th March 2016 enacting that Order with or without modification), no gate, fence, wall or other means of enclosure shall be erected, constructed or placed across the access within 5 metres of the highway boundary under Class A, of Schedule 2 Part 2

REASON(S)

1. To comply with Section 91(3) of the Town and Country Planning Act, 1990. 2. To protect the amenities of the occupiers of nearby properties. 3. To protect the amenities of the occupiers of nearby properties. 4. To ensure that adequate visibility is provided at the proposed point of access to the highway. 5. To provide for the parking and turning of vehicles clear of the highway and to ensure that reversing by vehicles into or from the highway is rendered unnecessary in the interest of traffic safety. 6. To ensure a satisfactory standard of appearance of the development in the interests of the visual amenities of the area. ______

Page 140 REPORT OF THE HEAD OF COMMUNITY WELLBEING AND DEVELOPMENT – Date 7th March 2016

APPLICATION NO: LOCATION: DATE RECEIVED: P/2016 /0021 PENUEL CHAPEL PANDY HAFOD Y 13/01/2016 GARREG GLYN CEIRIOG WREXHAM LL20 7PD COMMUNITY: CASE OFFICER: Llansantffraid Glyn DESCRIPTION: MP Ceiriog DEMOLITION OF PART OF EXISTING BUILDING, ERECTION OF NEW EXTENSION AND AGENT NAME: WARD: ALTERATIONS AND EXTENSION TO BLUEPRINT Ceiriog Valley PREVIOUSLY GRANTED BALCONY ARCHITECTURAL SERVICES LTD APPLICANT(S) NAME: MR STEVEN ELTHAM MRS S WHITE ______P/2016/0021 THE SITE

Application site

PROPOSAL

As above.

HISTORY

P/2012/0403 Change of use of former chapel to 3 bedroomed dwelling with associated alterations. Granted 3.9.2012 P/2016/0130 Application for approval of details reserved by conditions

Page 141 REPORT OF THE HEAD OF COMMUNITY WELLBEING AND DEVELOPMENT – Date 7th March 2016

imposed under planning permission P/2012/0403. Condition 3 - photographic survey, Condition 4 - window details, Condition 5 - balcony screen details. Pending.

DEVELOPMENT PLAN

Outside of settlement and within a Special Landscape Area. Policy GDP1 applies.

CONSULTATIONS

Community Council: No objection Local Member: Notified 18.1.16 NRW: Have the following comments: - The application site lies within Zone C2 as defined in TAN 15 Development & Flood Risk (2004) and shown on Welsh Government's Development Advice Map; - The proposal is to extend the habitable residential area of the property to areas at a lower elevation. Given the existing use of the property and the scale of this development, and in the absence of a flood consequences assessment, we would not object to the proposals. However, we would strongly recommend that the applicant is made aware of the flood risks and advised to produce a limited flood consequences assessment in order that any appropriate flood mitigation measures can be incorporated as part of the development; - The application site was previously subject to ecological survey and assessment. This report concluded that the application site did not support protected species; - We have no information that suggests that conditions on site have materially changed. We therefore consider the proposal is not likely to be detrimental to the maintenance of the favourable conservation status of any populations of European or British protected species; - The applicants must minimise discolouration to the watercourse from the construction works. Silty water should be treated, either through the use of settlement lagoons, or tanks, or discharged across a grassed area. For work in river channels the use of coffer dams is recommended, to keep river water out of the working area. River crossings must be kept free from mud or dust deposits. Oil and chemical

Page 142 REPORT OF THE HEAD OF COMMUNITY WELLBEING AND DEVELOPMENT – Date 7th March 2016

storage must be kept away from the watercourse, on an impervious base, within a bund, and secured. Absorbents or a suitable spill kit must be kept on site for use in the event of an emergency. Site Notice: Expired 10.2.16 Neighbours: The owners/occupiers of 3 nearby properties notified 20.1.16 : - parking provision for the site; - current sewerage system cannot accept any more households; - on adjacent land there is a Tree Preservation Order. Concerned that trees have already been removed without permission; - the applicant states the site cannot be seen. - this is false; - proposed extension would also the visual aesthetics of the beautiful viewpoint and the hamlet itself.

SPECIAL CONSIDERATIONS

Background: Planning permission was granted in 2012 to convert Penuel Chapel to a single dwelling and works to convert the building have started. The current application seeks permission for works not covered by that planning permission.

Basement extension: There is an existing single storey building immediately to the south east of the former chapel. This roof of this structure is at approximately the same level as the ground floor of the former chapel. The extant permission makes provision for this space to be used for ancillary domestic/storage purposes and for its flat roof to form the parking area for the converted chapel.

The applicant is proposing to remove and replace the existing structure with a new flat roof building that is 25% larger, primarily as a result of it abutting rather than being detached from the former chapel. This will allow an internal connection to be made between the extension and a basement room in the former chapel. The roof of the structure will provide a parking area that is to be enclosed by a low wall at the side and rear.

The proposed extension will not significantly alter the appearance of the site and will have no greater impact upon the locality than the structure it replaces. It will also result in no greater impact upon the amenity of the occupiers of nearby dwellings.

Whilst noting the comments made by NRW, the extant structure has permission to be used in conjunction with the chapel when converted to and occupied as a dwelling. The proposed extension is at no greater risk of flooding than the extant structure therefore I do not consider it necessary to

Page 143 REPORT OF THE HEAD OF COMMUNITY WELLBEING AND DEVELOPMENT – Date 7th March 2016 require a flood consequences assessment. I will however attach an advisory note recommending the applicant incorporate flood proofing/mitigation measures into the development.

Extension to entrance: The roof over the existing front entrance is to be extended to provide a 2.2 x 2.5m open sided porch. This addition is in keeping with the appearance of the existing building and will not result in any additional impacts upon neighbouring occupiers.

Extension and alterations to balcony: The extant permission allows for a balcony to be erected adjoining the rear (south-west facing) elevation of the building. The applicant is posing a small extension to it (approximately 3.7m long) that will wrap around the southern corner of the building. The extension will not result in any material increase in overlooking of neighbouring properties.

The remainder of the balcony will remain as previously proposed in terms of size and position although the submitted plans show that will be constructed with supporting piers rather than being a cantilevered structure. This change will not result in any additional impact upon nearby properties nor will it significantly alter the appearance of the development, indeed by itself it would be considered a non-material amendment.

Other Matters: The objector has expressed a number of concerns that are not addressed above and/or fall outside of the scope of this application:

Parking

The parking arrangements for the site are the same as previously approved, albeit being on top of the proposed extension. The proposed access arrangements to the site are also unchanged. It is not possible to reconsider whether the parking and access arrangements are acceptable because the applicant could simply provide them in accordance with the previously approved plans if the current application were unsuccessful.

Drainage

The drainage arrangements for the site (a connection to the public sewerage system) were considered when the original planning permission was granted. Welsh Water did not object to the previous application. The current application does not propose any changes to the drainage arrangements nor will the proposals put any additional pressure on the foul sewer network.

Removal of trees

The site is not covered by a tree preservation order. Whilst there is a TPO covering land on the opposite side of the River Teirw to the site I have not been provided with any evidence to suggest the applicants have carried out works to the protected trees. In any case, the proposed extensions and

Page 144 REPORT OF THE HEAD OF COMMUNITY WELLBEING AND DEVELOPMENT – Date 7th March 2016 alterations to the building do not require the removal of any substantial trees or trees covered by the TPO.

CONCLUSION

The proposals accord with policy GDP1.

RECOMMENDATION: That permission be GRANTED

CONDITION(S)

1. The development hereby permitted shall be commenced before the expiry of five years from the date of this permission. 2. The development shall only be carried out in strict accordance with the details shown on the following approved drawing and contained within the application documentation: i) drawing W108/004: Site Plan and Location Plan; ii) drawing W108/003 Sheet 1 of 4 Revision A: Ground Floor; iii) drawing W108/003 Sheet 3 of 4 Revision A: Lower Floor; iv) drawing W108/003 Sheet 4 of 4 Revision A: Elevations. 3. No facing or roofing materials shall be used other than materials matching those used on the existing building. 4. The 1.8m high opaque glazed screen shown on approved drawing W108/003 Sheet 4 of 4 Revision A: Elevations shall be provided prior to the first use of any part of the balcony also shown on that drawing and shall thereafter be permanently retained.

REASON(S)

1. To comply with Section 91(3) of the Town and Country Planning Act, 1990. 2. To ensure that the development fully complies with the appropriate policies and standards. 3. To ensure a satisfactory standard of appearance of the development in the interests of the visual amenities of the area. 4. To protect the amenities of the occupiers of nearby properties.

NOTE(S) TO APPLICANT

Due to its proximity to the River Teirw, you are advised to consider incorporating flood mitigation/proofing measures into the lower floor extension. ______

Page 145 REPORT OF THE HEAD OF COMMUNITY WELLBEING AND DEVELOPMENT – Date 7th March 2016

APPLICATION NO: LOCATION: DATE RECEIVED: P/2016 /0040 38 PARK ROAD TANYFRON 21/01/2016 WREXHAM LL11 5SG COMMUNITY: CASE OFFICER: Brymbo DESCRIPTION: SEH OUTLINE APPLICATION TO ERECT 1 NO DWELLING AND CONSTRUCT WARD: NEW ACCESS ON PART OF AGENT NAME: Brymbo GARDEN AREA OF 38 PARK ROAD BLUEPRINT ARCHITECTURAL APPLICANT(S) NAME: SERVICES LTD MS A WILLIAMS DAFYDD EDWARDS ______

THE SITE

Proposed dwelling

Approximate location of trees

PROPOSAL

As above. Arboricultural Impact Assessment and finished floor levels submitted in support of the application.

HISTORY

6/18466 Erection of a single dwelling. Granted 08/10/1990 P/2015/0520 Erection of a single dwelling. Refused 07/12/2015

Page 146 REPORT OF THE HEAD OF COMMUNITY WELLBEING AND DEVELOPMENT – Date 7th March 2016

DEVELOPMENT PLAN

Within a defined settlement limit. UDP Policies GDP1, PS1, PS2, PS3, PS4, H2, EC4 and T8 apply. Local Planning Guidance Notes Nos. 16 ‘Parking Standards’, 17 ‘Trees and Development’ and 21 ‘Space around Dwellings’ are also relevant.

CONSULTATIONS

Community Council: Consulted 25/01/2016 Local Member: Notified 25/01/2016 Public Protection: No objection subject to recommended condition restricting hours of construction works and advisory notes. Highways: No objection subject to recommended conditions (see special considerations below). Welsh Water: No objection subject to recommended conditions and advisory notes. NRW: No objections. The development is unlikely to have an adverse effect on bats. Site Notice: Expired 15/02/2016 Neighbours: Two online comments received raising the following concerns: - St Albans Road already has parking congestion problems. To create another access will further reduce the availability of on street parking for the existing residents; - The building will lead to a loss of light and privacy to the adjacent property negatively impacting upon the occupiers’ wellbeing; - Loss of view. Two online comments received in support of the application: - There are no objections to these plans being fulfilled; - Good opportunity to decrease the number of cars on the street; - The open and unused plot should be developed into a safer space.

SPECIAL CONSIDERATIONS/ISSUES

Background: Planning permission for the erection of a single dwelling on this site was refused by the planning committee last year (P/2015/0520). The reasons for the refusal of permission were given as the development would be unattractive and would be to the detriment of residential amenity. This application is again in outline for the erection of 1 no. single dwelling, with all matters relating to access, layout, scale, appearance and landscaping reserved for subsequent approval. The indicative site layout plan has been

Page 147 REPORT OF THE HEAD OF COMMUNITY WELLBEING AND DEVELOPMENT – Date 7th March 2016 amended in an attempt to address the previous concerns and the main issues to consider relate to impact of the development upon the street scene, residential amenity and upon highway safety.

Design and Residential Amenity: The dwelling has been moved closer to the site frontage so that it now fits in better with the existing pattern of housing development which fronts the highway (see figures 1 and 2 below). The development as proposed would accord with the street scene and make a positive contribution to the visual amenities of the area. The indicative layout plan has also demonstrated that the site is large enough to accommodate a single dwelling whilst providing adequate on-site outdoor space which would not be shaded by the mature trees along the rear of the site. Having also considered the properties around the site, it is possible to achieve the erection of a dwelling in this location without having a significant impact up local residential amenity, and by virtue of its scale, design and relocated footprint away from the adjoining property, the dwelling would not have an over dominant impact upon the garden areas of the adjacent dwellings.

Fig 1. Previously refused Fig 2. Proposed amended site layout site layout (P/2015/0502)

Highways: The development site is situated on an unclassified highway which is subject to a 20 mph speed limit. However, due to the geometry of the road, typical speeds are considered to be no more than 20 mph. Welsh Government guidelines recommend the provision of visibility splays from the access point measuring 2 x 25 metres. Visibility at the proposed access meets with this recommendation and on-site parking can be readily provided for both the existing and proposed dwellings in accordance with LPGN No. 16 ‘Parking Standards’. The highway authority raises no objections to the proposed development on highway safety grounds subject to conditions to secure onsite parking and the creation of a safe and satisfactory vehicular access.

Trees: There are two significant trees located to the rear of the site, just outside of the site boundary and outside of the control of the applicant. Whilst the building can be sited such that it will not impact upon their health and

Page 148 REPORT OF THE HEAD OF COMMUNITY WELLBEING AND DEVELOPMENT – Date 7th March 2016 stability, these trees could have a significant impact upon the proposed outdoor amenity area (rear garden) in terms of over dominancy and over shadowing / shading. The dwelling has been moved further away from these trees (see figures 1 and 2 above) and the garden area significantly increased in size, thus securing the satisfactory amenity of the future occupiers of the development.

Other Matter: Concerns has been raised at the potential loss of view across the development site. There is no right to a view across the land and this is not a relevant planning consideration or this application.

CONCLUSION

The proposal is in accordance with local policies PS2, PS4, GDP1 and EC4. To allow the development would make a positive contribution to the visual amenities of the area and would not be to the detriment of highway safety or the residential amenities of the existing local residents or the future occupiers of the development.

RECOMMENDATION: That permission be GRANTED

CONDITION(S)

1. Approval of the following details shall be obtained from the Local Planning Authority before any part of the development is commenced: a. the layout of the building(s) b. the scale of the building(s) c. the appearance of the building(s) d. the means of access to the site and building(s) e. the landscaping of the site. 2. Plans and particulars of the reserved matters referred to in condition 1 (above) shall be submitted in writing to the Local Planning Authority before the expiry of three years from the date of this permission. The development shall only be carried out in strict conformity with such details as are approved. 3. The development hereby approved shall be commenced before the expiry of five years from the date of this permission or before the expiry of two years from the date of approval of the last of the reserved matters required to be approved, whichever is the later. 4. All works in relation to the implementation of this permission, including deliveries to and / or leaving the site, shall be undertaken only between the hours of 7.30 and 18.00 Monday to Friday, and 08.00 to 14.00 on a Saturday, and at no time on a Sunday or a Bank Holiday. 5. No land drainage run-off or surface water shall be permitted to discharge or connect to the public sewerage system, either directly or indirectly, and foul and surface water shall be drained separately from the site. 6. Details of all of the proposed finished floor levels, boundary treatments and any retaining walls in and around the site shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority as part of the reserved matters application. The boundary treatments as are approved shall be fully

Page 149 REPORT OF THE HEAD OF COMMUNITY WELLBEING AND DEVELOPMENT – Date 7th March 2016 implemented in strict accordance with the details as are approved prior to first use of the development and thereafter permanently retained. 7. The contents of the indicative site plan submitted in support of this application shall not be regarded as representing an approved site layout or scale of development. 8. Details of the proposed vehicular parking facilities for both the proposed and existing dwellings shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority as part of the reserved matters application. The facilities as are approved shall be fully laid out surfaced and drained prior to first use of the development, and shall thereafter be permanently retained and kept free of all obstruction and made solely available for the parking and turning of vehicles at all times. 9. Prior to first use of the development hereby approved the vehicular access shall provide visibility splays of 2.0 metres x 25 metres in both directions measured to the nearside edge of the adjoining highway. Within these splays there shall be no obstruction above the level of the adjoining carriageway. The splays shall thereafter be permanently retained clear of any such obstruction to visibility. 10. There shall be no gates or other means of enclosure across the vehicular access point within 5 metres of the highway boundary. 11. Prior to first use of the vehicular access hereby approved, the access shall be surfaced with hard bound materials (e.g. bituminous macadam) for a minimum distance of 5 metres behind the adjoining highway. 12. No private surface water run off shall be permitted to flow from the development site onto the adjoining highway. An Aco drain or similar shall be provided across the approved access to intercept any such run off prior to first use of the development.

REASON(S)

1. To comply with the provisions of the Town and Country Planning (Development Management Procedure) (Wales) Order 2012 2. To comply with Section 92 of the Town and Country Planning Act, 1990. 3. To comply with Section 92 of the Town and Country Planning Act, 1990. 4. To protect the amenities of the occupiers of nearby properties. 5. To protect the integrity of the public sewerage system and prevent hydraulic overloading of the public sewerage system. To protect the health and safety of existing residents and to ensure no detriment to the environment. 6. To ensure a satisfactory standard of appearance of the development in the interests of the visual amenities of the area and to protect the amenities of the occupiers of nearby properties. 7. To ensure that all details are reserved for future consideration. 8. To provide for the parking and turning of vehicles clear of the highway and to ensure that reversing by vehicles into or from the highway is rendered unnecessary in the interest of traffic safety. 9. To ensure that adequate visibility is provided at the proposed point of access to the highway.

Page 150 REPORT OF THE HEAD OF COMMUNITY WELLBEING AND DEVELOPMENT – Date 7th March 2016

10. In the interest of the free and safe movement of traffic on the adjacent highway and to ensure the formation of a safe and satisfactory access. 11. To ensure that no deleterious material is carried onto the highway, in the interests of highway safety. 12. In the interests of highway safety.

NOTE(S) TO APPLICANT

The applicant is advised that compliance with condition no. 04 does not provide an exemption from the statutory noise nuisance provisions of the Environmental Protection Act 1990. Any complaints received relating to noise from the development during the permitted hours may still be investigated using the Council's Standardised Procedure for Dealing with Noise Nuisance Complaints and legal action may be taken where appropriate.

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 0800 917 2652

Page 151 REPORT OF THE HEAD OF COMMUNITY WELLBEING AND DEVELOPMENT – Date 7th March 2016

The permission hereby granted does not authorise encroachment upon, or interference with, the adjoining property.

Your attention is drawn to Highway Supplementary Notes Numbered 1, 3, 4 and 5 on the enclosed "Applicants' Rights and General Information".

______

Page 152 REPORT OF THE HEAD OF COMMUNITY WELLBEING AND DEVELOPMENT – Date 7th March 2016

LIST OF DELEGATED DECISIONS ISSUED

OVE P/2014/0592 LAND ADJOINING AND EAST OF, OUTLINE APPLICATION FOR FAIRLEIGH, STATION ROAD, RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT WITH GRANTED OVERTON, WREXHAM, LL13 0LJ MATTERS RESERVED EXCEPT ACCESS. 23/02/2016

WRR P/2015/0257 80 RHOSDDU ROAD, WREXHAM, CONVERSION AND EXTENSION TO LL11 2NP EXISTING OUTBUILDING TO FORM GRANTED ADDITIONAL LIVING ACCOMMODATION AND PROVISION 16/02/2016 OF ADDITIONAL ROOF CANOPY

ISY P/2015/0443 DEMON TWEEKS, UNIT 75, ASH EXTENSION TO EXISTING ROAD SOUTH, WREXHAM WAREHOUSE TO PROVIDE 3625 GRANTED INDUSTRIAL ESTATE, WREXHAM, SQUARE METRES OF ADDITIONAL LL13 9UG FLOOR SPACE 21/01/2016

ESC P/2015/0792 TALWRN FARM, TALWRN ROAD, APPLICATION FOR APPROVAL OF LEGACY, WREXHAM, LL14 4ER DETAILS RESERVED BY DISCHARGED CONDITIONS IMPOSED UNDER PLANNING PERMISSION 02/02/2016 P/2014/0372 - CONDITION 4 - EXTERNAL MATERIALS CONDITION 5 - SITE ACCESS PLAN CONDITION 7 - CONSTRUCTION AND OPERATIONAL TRAFFIC MANAGEMENT PLAN CONDITION 11 - UNDERGROUND DIRTY WATER STORAGE TANK CONDITIONS 12 & 13 - DRAINAGE DESIGN CONDITION 14 - OVERALL SITE LAYOUT AND GROUND WORKS CONDITION 15 - UNDERGROUND AND OVERHEAD SERVICES CONDITIONS 16 & 18 - LANDSCAPING SCHEME, MAINTENANCE AND MANAGEMENT PLAN CONDITION 20 - EXTERNAL LIGHTING

W04000237 P/2015/0801 FORMER DUSSEKS SITE, WATERY APPLICATION FOR APPROVAL OF ROAD, , WREXHAM, LL13 7SY DETAILS RESERVED BY GRANTED CONDITION NO. 19 OF PLANNING PERMISSION P/2009/0903 - FULL 09/02/2016 ELEVATION DETAILS OF PROPOSED BIN AND CYCLE STORES

HOL P/2015/0825 BARN 1, HOLT LODGE FARM, CONVERSION OF BARN TO FORM 1 HUGMORE LANE, LLANYPWLL, NO DWELLING TOGETHER WITH GRANTED WREXHAM, LL13 9YE TWO STOREY REAR EXTENSION

29/01/2016

Page 153 REPORT OF THE HEAD OF COMMUNITY WELLBEING AND DEVELOPMENT – Date 7th March 2016

HOL P/2015/0826 BARN 1, HOLT LODGE FARM, LISTED BUILDING CONSENT TO HUGMORE LANE, LLANYPWLL, CONVERT BARN TO 1 NO GRANTED WREXHAM, LL13 9YE DWELLING TOGETHER WITH TWO STOREY REAR EXTENSION 29/01/2016

MAE P/2015/0828 1 HILL CREST, PENLEY, WREXHAM, FIRST FLOOR EXTENSION OVER LL13 0NL EXISTING FLAT ROOF GARAGE GRANTED AND FLAT ROOF ENTRANCE PORCH, INSTALLATION OF 16/02/2016 GROUND FLOOR BAY WINDOW AND NEW STYLE WINDOWS AND REMOVAL OF EXISTING STONE PANELS

GWE P/2015/0849 61, CHESTNUT AVENUE, REAR EXTENSION SUMMERHILL, WREXHAM, LL11 4UH GRANTED

16/02/2016

WRC P/2015/0871 SPARKLES DAY NURSERY, PRINCE RETENTION AND CONTINUED USE CHARLES ROAD, WREXHAM, LL13 AS STORAGE OF MOBILE UNIT GRANTED 8TH (PREVIOUSLY GRANTED TEMPORARY PERMISSION UNDER 16/02/2016 CODE NO P2010/0707)

ROS P/2015/0873 THE COACH HOUSE, TREVALYN CONSERVATORY EXTENSION TO HALL, CHESTER ROAD, ROSSETT, REAR GRANTED WREXHAM, LL12 0HH

10/02/2016

ROS P/2015/0874 THE COACH HOUSE, TREVALYN LISTED BUILDING CONSENT HALL, CHESTER ROAD, ROSSETT, CONSERVATORY EXTENSION TO GRANTED WREXHAM, LL12 0HH REAR

10/02/2016

GRE P/2015/0893 HILBRE, MARFORD HILL, MARFORD, ALTERATIONS AND EXTENSION WREXHAM, LL12 8TA GRANTED

10/02/2016

MAE P/2015/0913 PENLEY MILL, LION LANE, PENLEY, GARAGE EXTENSION TO SIDE WREXHAM, LL13 0LY GRANTED

10/02/2016

MAR P/2015/0918 ERDDIG HALL, ERDDIG, WREXHAM, LISTED BUILDING CONSENT FOR LL13 0YT ALTERATIONS TO TWO GARAGES GRANTED TO PROVIDE SUITABLE ACCOMMODATION FOR 02/02/2016 EDUCATION GROUPS VISTING ERDDIG

Page 154 REPORT OF THE HEAD OF COMMUNITY WELLBEING AND DEVELOPMENT – Date 7th March 2016

MAR P/2015/0919 ERDDIG HALL, ERDDIG, WREXHAM, ERECTION OF NEW SMALL LL13 0Y CATERING FACILITY AND TWO GRANTED COMPOST TOILET UNITS WITHIN THE WOLF'S DEN AREA OF 26/01/2016 WOODLAND OUTSIDE THE FORMAL GARDENS

GRE P/2015/0921 KINGSLEY, PANT LANE, GRESFORD, WORKS TO 2 NO TREES - GAGE WREXHAM, LL12 8EU (T2) LIGHT PRUNING, UP TO GRANTED APPROXIMATELY 1.5 M TO REDUCE END LOADING OF FRUIT 29/01/2016 BEARING LIMBS, AIMING TO MAINTAIN THE NATURAL BALANCE AND SHAPE OF THE TREE. BEECH TREE (T3) COMPLETE CROWN REDUCTION OF 2 - 3 M, IN LINE WITH PREVIOUS PRUNING APPROXIMATELY 7 YEARS AGO TO AVOID BRANCHES TOUCHING NEIGHBOURING PROPERTY WHILST MAINTAINING THE NATURAL BALANCE AND SHAPE OF THE TREE. NO BRANCHES OF MORE THAN 70 MM DIAMETER WILL BE REMOVED. (TREES PROTECTED BY TPO WCBC NO 7)

COE P/2015/0922 TAWELWCH, HEOL MAELOR, WORKS TO 2 MONTEREY CYPRESS COEDPOETH, WREXHAM, LL11 3LR - CROWN RAISE OVER DRIVEWAY GRANTED TO PROVIDE CLEARANCE AT 5.0M FROM GROUND LEVEL AND 29/01/2016 ROADWAY IN POPLAR CLOSE, REDUCE HEIGHTS BY 5.0 M AND RE-SHAPE TO SUIT FORM AND SEVER AND REMOVE IVY FROM BOTH TREES (TREES PROTECTED BY TPO WMBC NO 154)

WRR P/2015/0925 GLYNDWR UNIVERSITY, MOLD OAK (T28) - CROWN RAISE TO ROAD, WREXHAM, LL11 2AW PROVIDE 3.0M CLEARANCE ABOVE GRANTED ACCESS ROAD AND REDUCE INDIVIDUAL BRANCHES TO 29/01/2016 PROVIDE 2.0M FROM GARAGE ROOF (TREE PROTECTED BY TPO WMBC NO 109)

ROS P/2015/0929 STRATHALYN, LLAY ROAD, CYPRESS (T33) REMOVE BACK TO ROSSETT, WREXHAM, LL12 0HS BASE A BRANCH LEANING OVER GRANTED PATHWAY (PROTECTED BY TPO WCBC 97) 04/02/2016

OVE P/2015/0930 PENYLLAN COTTAGE, PENYLLAN DEMOLITION OF SINGLE AND TWO STREET, OVERTON, WREXHAM, , STOREY EXTENSIONS AND GRANTED LL13 0EE ERECTION OF NEW TWO STOREY EXTENSION 23/02/2016

Page 155 REPORT OF THE HEAD OF COMMUNITY WELLBEING AND DEVELOPMENT – Date 7th March 2016

WRR P/2015/0937 THE SIDINGS, FORMER REMPLOY APPLICATION FOR APPROVAL OF SITE, RAILWAY ROAD AND STANSTY DETAILS RESERVED BY DISCHARGED ROAD, STANSTY, WREXHAM, LL11 CONDITIONS IMPOSED UNDER 2DN PLANNING PERMISSION 02/02/2016 P/2015/0228:- CONDITION 3 - SUBMISSION OF A SCHEME OF NOISE MITIGATION IN RESPECT OF EACH DWELLING SUBJECT TO PLANNING PERMISSION P/2015/0228 CONDITION 4 - SUBMISSION OF A SCHEME FOR THE COMPREHENSIVE AND INTEGRATED DRAINAGE OF THE SITE INDICATING PROVISION FOR FOUL WATER, SURFACE WATER AND LAND DRAINAGE CONDITION 6 - SUBMISSION OF FULL DETAILS OF A HARD AND SOFT LANDSCAPING SCHEME TOGETHER WITH A TIMESCALE FOR IMPLEMENTATION OF WORKS

OVE P/2015/0943 11, HILL CREST, PENLEY, WREXHAM, FIRST FLOOR EXTENSION OVER LL13 0NL GARAGE, WITH SINGLE STOREY GRANTED EXTENSIONS TO FRONT AND REAR OF PROPERTY 03/02/2016

CEF P/2015/0945 LAND OPPOSITE TYN Y PISTYLL, APPLICATION FOR APPROVAL OF WEST OF DELPH ROAD, PENYCAE, DETAILS RESERVED BY DISCHARGED WREXHAM, LL14 1TU CONDITIONS IMPOSED UNDER PLANNING PERMISSION 10/02/2016 P/2015/0092 CONDITION 21 - SUBMISSION OF VERIFICATION REPORT WHICH DEMONSTRATES THAT THE APPROVED REMEDIAL WORKS HAVE BEEN SATISFACTORY CARRIED OUT. CONDITION 23 - SUBMISSION OF A SCHEME OF TREE PLANTING ALONG THE SOUTH AND SOUTH WEST BOUNDARY OF THE SITE TOGETHER WITH A TIMESCALE FOR THE IMPLEMENTATION

RUA P/2015/0946 2 STAFF BUNGALOWS, WYNNSTAY APPLICATION FOR APPROVAL OF PARK, RUABON, WREXHAM, LL14 CONDITIONS IMPOSED BY DISCHARGED 6LW PLANNING PERMISSION P/2015/0360: CONDITION 4 - 02/02/2016 PREPARATION OF ON SITE MATERIALS SAMPLE BOARD CONDITION 6 - SUBMISSION OF DETAILED ARBORICULTURAL METHOD STATEMENT CONDITION 7 - SUBMISSION OF COMPREHENSIVE HARD AND SOFT LANDSCAPING SCHEME

Page 156 REPORT OF THE HEAD OF COMMUNITY WELLBEING AND DEVELOPMENT – Date 7th March 2016

WRA P/2015/0948 20, FFORDD ELAN, WREXHAM, LL12 GROUND FLOOR EXTENSION AND 7RG INTERNAL ALTERATIONS GRANTED

02/02/2016

GWE P/2015/0950 5, SUNNYACRE, GWERSYLLT, EXTENSION TO BUNGALOW WREXHAM, LL11 4RH GRANTED

02/02/2016

CEF P/2015/0954 22, HIGH STREET, RHOSYMEDRE, CHANGE OF USE FROM WREXHAM, LL14 3YE HAIRDRESSERS TO RESIDENTIAL GRANTED

02/02/2016

RUA P/2015/0955 CAMBRIAN HOUSE, CHURCH INSTALLATION OF REPLACEMENT STREET, RUABON, WREXHAM, LL14 TIMBER WINDOWS TO FRONT GRANTED 6DS ELEVATION

02/02/2016

WRR P/2015/0956 LIBRARY ARTS CENTRE CAR PARK, T1 - MULTI STEM PRUNUS DULCIS, OFF CHESTER STREET, WREXHAM, SECTION FELL AND GRIND STUMP, GRANTED LL13 8BG, REPLACE WITH 12-14 CM EUONYMOUS EUROPAEUS 'RED 25/01/2016 CASCADE' T2 - PRUNUS AVIUM CV NORTHERN SIDE OF CROWN ONLY: CARRY OUT SELECTIVE REDUCTION OF BRANCHES BY NO MORE THAN 3 M TO IMPROVE CCTV VISIBILITY OF PAY AND DISPLAY MACHINE (TREES PROTECTED BY TPO NO 12 - DENBIGHSHIRE)

GWE P/2015/0960 SUES SALON, GLANLLYN ROAD, CHANGE OF USE TO DOG BRADLEY, WREXHAM, LL11 4BB GROOMING PARLOUR GRANTED

02/02/2016

WRR P/2015/0961 30, EDINBURGH ROAD, GARDEN REAR UTILITY EXTENSION AND VILLAGE, WREXHAM, LL11 2RG ALTERATIONS TO ROOF GRANTED

22/02/2016

CEF P/2015/0963 OLD BANK BUILDING, WELL STREET, INSTALLATION OF 4 NO CEFN MAWR, WREXHAM, LL14 3AE ROOFLIGHTS TO REAR SLOPE OF GRANTED HOUSE ROOF (IN RETROSPECT)

02/02/2016

LLA P/2015/0964 PARKLEIGH OFFICES, MINERS VARIATION OF CONDITION 4 ROAD, LLAY INDUSTRIAL ESTATE, IMPOSED UNDER PLANNING GRANTED LLAY, WREXHAM, LL12 0PJ PERMISSION CODE NO P/2015/0168 TO ALLOW CONTROLLED SURFACE 02/02/2016 WATER DRAINAGE DISPOSAL TO THE PUBLIC SEWERAGE SYSTEM

Page 157 REPORT OF THE HEAD OF COMMUNITY WELLBEING AND DEVELOPMENT – Date 7th March 2016

BRO P/2015/0965 3 GREEN MEADOWS, NEW SINGLE-STOREY REAR THERAPY BROUGHTON, WREXHAM, LL11 6SG ROOM EXTENSION GRANTED

02/02/2016

WRC P/2015/0966 TENPIN, 36 EAGLES MEADOW, , DISPLAY OF 2 NO INTERNALLY WREXHAM, LL13 8DG ILLUMINATED FASCIA SIGNS AND 1 GRANTED NO INTERNALLY ILLUMINATED WALL TOTEM 02/02/2016

WRR P/2015/0969 , COLEG CAMBRIA YALE, RHOSDDU YEW - REDUCE BY TWO METRES ROAD, , WREXHAM, LL12 7AA TOP AND SIDE (REVIEW IN A GRANTED YEARS TIME) BIRCH - REMOVE BRANCHES BY ONE METRE IN 04/02/2016 DIRECT CONTACT WITH STREET LIGHT (NO 17) AND PHONE LINES. LIME - TO POLLARD AND REMOVE SUCKERS (TREES PROTECTED BY TPO WMBC NO 11)

WRA P/2016/0002 CHERRY HILL CHILDRENS DAY RETENTION AND CONTINUED USE NURSERY, 91, BORRAS PARK ROAD, OF TEMPORARY NURSERY GRANTED BORRAS, WREXHAM, LL12 7TF ACCOMMODATION (PREVIOUSLY GRANTED UNDER CODE 02/02/2016 P/2012/0469)

BRN P/2016/0003 OAK VIEW, CHAPEL LANE, VARIATION OF CONDITION 6 OF BRONINGTON, SY13 3HP BRN 18393 AND CONDITION 5 OF GRANTED BRN 20152 TO PERMIT OCCUPANCY BY RURAL 10/02/2016 ENTERPRISE WORKERS

WRA P/2016/0005 6, LISBURNE GROVE, WREXHAM, APPLICATION FOR NON MATERIAL LL13 9TJ AMENDMENT TO PLANNING GRANTED PERMISSION P/2015/0451 - REVISION TO FACING AND 02/02/2016 ROOFING MATERIALS (TIMBER GARAGE, ONDULINE CORRUCATED ROOFING)

GLY P/2016/0006 THE MULBERRY INN, OLD ROAD, ERECTION OF ONE PAIR OF SEMI- LLWYNMAWR, WREXHAM, LL20 7BB DETACHED TWO-STOREY REFUSED DWELLINGS

16/02/2016

GRE P/2016/0007 25 HOLLYFIELD, GRESFORD, SINGLE-STOREY GARAGE WREXHAM, LL12 8HD EXTENSION TO REAR AND NEW GRANTED FRONT PORCH

02/02/2016

WRR P/2016/0008 WILLIAMS AND GLYN, 13 LORD DISPLAY OF REPLACEMENT STREET, WREXHAM, LL11 1LH SIGNAGE - 1 NO FASCIA SIGN, 1 NO GRANTED ILLUMINATED PROJECTING SIGN AND 1 NO. ATM 10/02/2016

Page 158 REPORT OF THE HEAD OF COMMUNITY WELLBEING AND DEVELOPMENT – Date 7th March 2016

OVE P/2016/0015 ROSE HOUSE, 3 SCHOOL LANE, FELLING AND REMOVAL OF OVERTON, WREXHAM, LL13 0ES APPROXIMATELY 15 NO LEYLANDII GRANTED (WITHIN OVERTON CONSERVATION AREA) 24/02/2016

LLR P/2016/0016 CANAL WHARF AND DOCK HOUSE, 1. SYCAMORE (OVERHANGING CANAL WHARF, TREVOR, FOOTPATH AND DRIVEWAY) - PART CONSENT LLANGOLLEN, WREXHAM, LL20 7TY CROWN LIFT TO GIVE 5.5 M APPROX. GROUND CLEARANCE IN 25/02/2016 ALL DIRECTIONS AND CUT IVY AT BASE, 2. ASH (TWIN STEMMED) - FELL TO GROUND, 3. ASH (MULTI STEMMED) - REDUCE HEIGHT BY 2M APPROX. AND REDUCE SIDE BRANCHES BY 1M APPROX., 4. BOUNDARY HEDGE / TREES (ADJACENT TO FIELD) - HOLLY / SYCAMORE / FALLEN STEMS - CUT TO GROUND LEVEL, ASH (TRIPLE STEMMED) - FELL TO NEAR GROUND LEVEL, SYCAMORE (3 STEMS) FELL TO GROUND LEVEL, ASH X 2 (LARGER TREES) - CROWN REDUCE BY 2M APPROX AND REMOVE DEAD BRANCHES, SYCAMORE - CROWN REDUCE BY 2M APPROX, ASH - REMOVE, CUTTING BACK TO MAIN STEM 5. CYPRESS (OPPOSITE TELFORD PUBLIC HOUSE BY WALL) - FELL IN SECTIONS TO AS NEAR GROUND LEVEL AS POSSIBLE, REMOVE ALL ARISINGS FROM SITE (WITHIN PONTCYSYLLTE AQEDUCT CONSERVATION AREA).

WRO P/2016/0019 VACANT SITE LAND WEST OF, APPLICATION FOR APPROVAL OF CROESNEWYDD ROAD, WREXHAM, DETAILS RESERVED BY GRANTED LL13 7YP CONDITIONS IMPOSED UNDER PLANNING PERMISSION 17/02/2016 P/2014/0665: CONDITION 10 - SUBMISSION OF DETAILS OF THE EXTENT, GRADIENT AND HEIGHT OF THE APPROVED MOUNDS INCLUDING CROSS SECTION DETAILS; CONDITION 13 - SUBMISSION OF FULL DETAILS OF A HARD AND SOFT LANDSCAPING SCHEME TOGETHER WITH A PLAN INDICATING THE POSITION, DESIGN, MATERIALS AND TYPE OF BOUNDARY TREATMENT AND TIMESCALE FOR IMPLEMENTATION OF WORKS; CONDITION 24 - SUBMISSION OF DETAILS OF THE MEANS OF VENTILATION FOR THE EXTRACTION AND DISPERSAL OF COOKING SMELLS, INCLUDING DETAILS OF ITS METHOD OF

Page 159 REPORT OF THE HEAD OF COMMUNITY WELLBEING AND DEVELOPMENT – Date 7th March 2016

CONSTRUCTION, ODOUR CONTROL MEASURES, ITS APPEARANCE AND FINISH.

GWE P/2016/0020 ALLANDALE, 2 HILL STREET, TWO-STOREY SIDE EXTENSION SUMMERHILL, WREXHAM, LL11 4UA GRANTED

08/02/2016

GRE P/2016/0025 LAND ADJACENT TO, RED LION APPLICATION FOR NON-MATERIAL PUBLIC HOUSE, MARFORD HILL, AMENDMENT TO PLANNING GRANTED MARFORD, WREXHAM, LL12 8SN PERMISSION P/2014/0813 TO AMEND POSITION OF ENTRANCE 02/02/2016 AND ATM

COE P/2016/0034 SITE OF FORMER BAKERY, HIGH APPLICATION FOR NON-MATERIAL STREET, COEDPOETH, WREXHAM, AMENDMENT TO CONSENT REF: GRANTED LL11 3PD P/2015/0892 TO AMEND SIZE OF 2 NO INTERNALLY ILLUMINATED 22/01/2016 FASCIA SIGNS TO FRONT ELEVATION

WRO P/2016/0035 NOS 89 91 92 AND 94, BRYN OFFA, , ERECTION OF 1.8M HIGH WREXHAM, LL13 7UE CONCRETE POST AND TIMBER GRANTED PANEL FENCE TO REAR BOUNDARY AND REPLACEMENT 16/02/2016 1.8M HIGH TIMBER GATE TO SIDE OF NO. 91

WRO P/2016/0041 FORMER DUSSEKS SITE, WATERY APPLICATION FOR NON MATERIAL ROAD, WREXHAM, LL13 7SY AMENDMENT TO PLANNING GRANTED PERMISSION P/2009/0903 - AMENDMENT TO LAYOUT AND 15/02/2016 LANDSCAPE PLANS AND VARIATION OF THE WORDING OF CONDITION NOS. 9 AND 20 TO REFLECT THE CHANGES IN LANDSCAPE AND PARKING PLAN REFERENCES.

WRA P/2016/0042 OLD GIRLS SCHOOL SITE, THE APPLICATION FOR PRIOR GROVES, PENYMAES AVENUE, NOTIFICATION OF PROPOSED GRANTED WREXHAM, LL12 7AP DEMOLITION OF FORMER SECONDARY MODERN SCHOOL 23/02/2016

CHI P/2016/0044 OLD SCHOOL HOUSE, HOLYHEAD LISTED BUILDING CONSENT FOR ROAD, CHIRK, WREXHAM, LL14 5NA REPLACEMENT WINDOWS TWO GRANTED FIRST FLOOR BEDROOM WINDOWS, TWO LIVING ROOM 23/02/2016 WINDOWS, A LANDING WINDOW, A RECEPTION WINDOW AND A KITCHEN WINDOW

GRE P/2016/0051 24, MEADOWS VIEW, MARFORD, SINGLE STOREY SIDE EXTENSION WREXHAM, LL12 8LR GRANTED

23/02/2016

Page 160 REPORT OF THE HEAD OF COMMUNITY WELLBEING AND DEVELOPMENT – Date 7th March 2016

CEF P/2016/0055 26 EMMANUEL GROVE, CEFN MAWR, PROPOSED OFF STREET PARKING WREXHAM, LL14 3PS ON GRASS VERGE ADJOINING NO GRANTED 26

24/02/2016

ESC P/2016/0056 LAND TO THE REAR OF, 16 AND 16A, ERECTION OF 3 BEDROOM DDOL, BERSHAM, WREXHAM, LL14 DETACHED DWELLING REFUSED 4HN

23/02/2016

GLY P/2016/0058 BRYN Y GROES, LLWYNMAWR, APPLICATION FOR NON MATERIAL LLANGOLLEN, WREXHAM, LL20 7BB AMENDMENT TO PLANNING APPROVED PERMISSION P/2015/0639 TO ALLOW TWO ADDITIONAL ROOF 10/02/2016 LIGHTS AND INTERNAL ALTERATIONS

RUA P/2016/0059 TIR Y FRON, LLANGOLLEN ROAD, TWO STOREY EXTENSION RUABON, WREXHAM, LL14 6RW GRANTED

24/02/2016

RHO P/2016/0061 LAND NORTH OF, 8 GRANGO LANE, APPLICATION FOR APPROVAL OF PONCIAU, WREXHAM, LL14 1ER DETAIL RESERVED BY CONDITION GRANTED NO 11 OF PLANNING PERMISSION P/2012/0364 - SUBMISSION OF 09/02/2016 ACCESS SCHEME

WRA P/2016/0062 LAND ADJACENT TO CHERRY HILL APPLICATION FOR NON MATERIAL NURSERY, ACCESSED OFF, AMENDMENT TO PLANNING GRANTED DALESIDE AVENUE, BORRAS PARK, PERMISSION P/2014/0565 TO WREXHAM, LL12 7TF INCREASE SIZE OF GARAGE 02/02/2016

GRE P/2016/0069 PLOT 12, QUARRY BROW, APPLICATION FOR NON MATERIAL MARFORD, WREXHAM, LL12 8SJ AMENDMENT TO PLANNING GRANTED PERMISSION P/2013/0707 TO REMOVE CONDITIONS 3, 4 AND 5 11/02/2016 (ALL RELATING TO THE CODE FOR SUSTAINABLE HOMES), AMENDMENT TO THE DESIGN OF THE GARAGE AND RELOCATION AND AMENDMENT TO THE LAYOUT OF THE HEAD OF THE PRIVATE ROAD

WRO P/2016/0071 PENTRE BACH, RUTHIN ROAD, APPLICATION FOR APPROVAL OF WREXHAM, LL13 7TU DETAILS IMPOSED BY CONDITION GRANTED NO 14 OF PLANNING PERMISSION P/2007/1187 - SUBMISSION OF 05/02/2016 DETAILS OF BOTH HARD AND SOFT LANDSCAPING WORKS FOR THE SITE

Page 161 REPORT OF THE HEAD OF COMMUNITY WELLBEING AND DEVELOPMENT – Date 7th March 2016

LLA P/2016/0074 UNIT B REAR OF HONEYCROWN CHANGE OF USE OF REAR BAYS LTD, MINERS ROAD, LLAY TO GYMNASTICS FACILITY GRANTED INDUSTRIAL ESTATE, LLAY, WREXHAM, LL12 0PJ 23/02/2016

ABE P/2016/0084 LLWYN ONN WATER TREATMENT APPLICATION FOR PRIOR WORKS, CEFN ROAD, WREXHAM, NOTIFICATION OF PROPOSED GRANTED LL13 9TT DEMOLITION OF REDUNDANT DE- COMISSIONED WATER 23/02/2016 TREATMENT BUILDING AT EASTERN BOUNDARY OF SITE COMPRISING, CONCRETE TANKS AND ELECTRO-MECHANCIAL EQUIPMENT PREDOMINANTELY LOCATED WITHIN A STEEL PORTAL FRAME BUILDING

GWE P/2016/0094 LYNWOOD, 57 HIGH STREET, APPLICATION FOR APPROVAL OF GWERSYLLT, WREXHAM, LL11 4LE DETAILS RESERVED BY GRANTED CONDITIONS IMPOSED UNDER PLANNING PERMISSION 16/02/2016 P/2015/0291 CONDITIONS 19 AND 20 - LANDSCAPING

GRE P/2016/0096 RANDLES RISE, MARFORD HILL, APPLICATION FOR A NON- MARFORD, WREXHAM, LL12 8TA MATERIAL AMENDMENT TO GRANTED PLANNING PERMISSION P/2015/0195 - ALTERATION TO 16/02/2016 DESIGN OF GLAZING ON REAR ELEVATION AND RE-POSITIONING OF DOOR

Page 162