Public Document Pack

Planning, Taxi Licensing & Rights of Way Committee

Meeting Venue Council Chamber - Neuadd Maldwyn, Welshpool, Powys

Meeting Date Thursday, 12 January 2017 County Hall Llandrindod Wells Meeting Time Powys 10.00 am LD1 5LG

For further information please contact Carol Johnson 5th January, 2017 01597826206 [email protected]

AGENDA

1. APOLOGIES PTLRW1 - 2017

To receive apologies for absence.

2. MINUTES OF THE PREVIOUS MEETING PTLRW2 - 2017

To authorise the Chair to sign the minutes of the previous meeting of the Committee held on 15th December, 2016 as a correct record.

(To Follow)

Planning

3. DECLARATIONS OF INTEREST PTLRW3 - 2017

a) To receive any declarations of interest from Members relating to items to be considered on the agenda. b) To receive Members' requests that a record be made of their membership of town or community councils where discussion has taken place of matters for the consideration of this Committee. c) To receive declarations from Members of the Committee that they will be acting as 'Local Representative' in respect of an individual application being considered by the Committee. d) To note the details of Members of the County Council (who are not Members of the Committee) who will be acting as 'Local Representative' in respect of an individual application being considered by the Committee. 1 4. PLANNING APPLICATIONS FOR CONSIDERATION PTLRW4 - 2017 BY THE COMMITTEE

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

(Pages 5 - 6)

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

(To Follow)

4.2. P/2014/0482 Land adjacent Glyndwr, Garth Owen, Newtown, Powys, SY16 1JP (Pages 7 - 26)

4.3. P/2016/0721 Plot adjacent to Fir House, Churchstoke, Montgomery, Powys, SY15 6AH (Pages 27 - 54)

4.4. P/2016/0326 Land off Gwelfyn, Gwelfyn, Carreghofa, Llanymynech, Powys, SY22 6LA (Pages 55 - 88)

5. DECISIONS OF THE HEAD OF REGENERATION, PTLRW5 - 2017 PROPERTY AND COMMISSIONING ON DELEGATED APPLICATIONS

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

(Pages 89 - 106)

6. APPEAL DECISIONS PTLRW6 - 2017

To receive the Planning Inspector's decisions regarding appeals.

(Pages 107 - 120) Rights of Way

7. DECLARATIONS OF INTEREST PTLRW7 - 2017

To receive declarations of interest in respect of the next item on the agenda.

8. HIGHWAYS ACT 1980, SECTION 118 AND 26 PTLRW8 - 2017 PUBLIC PATH ORDER PROPOSAL

To consider: Proposal to extinguish bridleway DT1697 and footpaths DT1681 and DT1680 (part) and creation of new bridleway DT1687 (A) and footpath DT1680 (A) at Glangwy Farm, Builth Road, LD2 3RL (Community of Disserth and Trecoed). Proposal to extinguish part of bridleway 5, near to Dolyrerw Farm, Rhosferig (Community of Cilmery).

(Pages 121 - 140)

9. HIGHWAYS ACT 1980, SECTION 119 PUBLIC PATH PTLRW9 - 2017 ORDER PROPOSAL

To consider: Proposal to divert Footpath LF104, Brynhoveth (Community of Llanbadarn Fawr). Proposed abandonment of 2007 Order and making of new public path diversion Order.

(Pages 141 - 154) This page is intentionally left blank PTLRW4 - 2017

Planning, Taxi Licensing and Rights of Way Committee 12th January 2017

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

Applications for consideration by Committee:

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

P/2014/0482 Outline: Residential development (All Matters Reserved)

Newtown Land adjacent Glyndwr, Garth Owen, Newtown, Powys, SY16 1JP

310320 290448.96 D & G Projects (Mid Wales) Ltd, C/O Cross Chambers, High Street, Newtown, Powys, SY16 2NY 12/05/2014 Recommendation:

Conditional Consent - subject to a Section 106 agreement

P/2016/0721 Outline (some matters reserved): Development of up to 45 dwellings and associated works to include demolition of Churchstoke existing building

Plot adjacent to Fir House, Churchstoke, 327536.18 293922.46 Montgomery, Powys, SY15 6AH

Powys County Council, Spa Road East, 26/07/2016 Engineering Design, Powys County Hall, Llandrindod Wells, Powys, LD1 5LG

Recommendation:

Conditional Consent - subject to the legal department drafting an appropriate draft legal agreement for a future landowner to enter into upon the sale of land.

Page 5 P/2016/0326 Outline: Erection of up to 3 dwellings and construction of vehicular access

Carreghofa Land off Gwelfyn, Gwelfyn, Carreghofa, Llanymynech, Powys, SY22 6LA

325940.13 320757.75 Mr David Wyatt, Ty Coch Cottage, Llynclys, Oswestry, SY10 8LJ

08/04/2016 Recommendation: Conditional Consent

Page 6 PTLRW4 - 20172

Planning, Taxi Licensing and Rights of Way Committee Report

Application No: P/2014/0482 Grid Ref: 310320 290448.96

Community Newtown Valid Date: Officer: Council: 12/05/2014 Louise Evans

Applicant: D & G Projects (Mid Wales) Ltd, C/O Cross Chambers, High Street, Newtown, Powys, SY16 2NY

Location: Land adjacent Glyndwr, Garth Owen, Newtown, Powys, SY16 1JP

Proposal: Outline: Residential development (All Matters Reserved)

Application Application for Outline Planning Permission Type:

The reason for Committee determination This application requires a committee determination as it has been called in by the Local Member, Cllr Mills.

Site Location and Description This application is in respect of residential development at land to the south west of Garth Owen, Newtown. The indicative plans submitted with the application detail the provision of 25 dwellings on the site including four 1 bedroom flats, three self-build plots and 18 semi- detached three and four bedroomed units. Access is proposed off the U4208 known as Glyndwr and traffic calming measures are proposed in the form of speed cushions along Glyndwr, Cedewain and Hafren.

Consultee Response Town Council First response No objection to the housing development.

The Town Council have listened to and given consideration to residents’ concerns and wish the following to be noted please:  Health and Safety during construction especially with regards to access to the site along the narrow road with on street parking.  Increased traffic after construction, due to new development again along narrow access roads.  Adequate parking on new development.

Second response The council is pleased the research has been undertaken, notes the additional traffic information, and wishes to make the following comments: a) Construction Phase: that roads to the site need to be of a sufficiently robust standard to take modern heavy construction traffic, and that any damage is made good.

1 Page 7

b) Post Construction: the traffic figures reveal considerable traffic movement in the area, especially Plantation Lane, and the Town Council’s concerns submitted in June 2014 remain and are restated.  Health and Safety during construction especially with regards to access to the site along the narrow road with on street parking.  Increased traffic after construction, due to new development again along narrow access roads.  Adequate parking on new development.

Building Control The proposed work will require building regulations approval.

Local Highway Authority First response The Highway Authority is unable to support this application without knowing the exact number of properties that are going to be constructed as the width of the approach roads will have a bearing on how many properties can be served off this type of highway hierarchy. I note from the plans submitted that there are no detailed access geometry and visibility splays in order for us to determine whether a safe means of access can be created. I appreciate the site is sloping and that significant engineering works will be required, will any of the soil be removed from the site? How is the highway surface water drainage going to be disposed? lt is noted from a site visit that there are a number of dwellings that park on the approaching estate roads as they do not have dedicated “off-street” parking facilities, and especially opposite the proposed new access. Has the developer considered providing a dedicated private car-park for the existing residents within the curtilage of this site. This would take some of the pressure of the existing streets. Additionally, there is no traffic calming along Garth-Owen, which I suspect is down to having parked cars on the existing highway. I have asked our Traffic Engineer to assess the proposal to see if traffic calming will be required as a result of this development. If so, this will need to be provided by the developer at their cost.

I am unable to confirm whether adequate parking has been provided within the site as no floor plans have been produced, however I acknowledge the scheme is for outline only so these plans may not have been drawn up. It should be noted that 1 parking space is required per bedroom to accord with CSS All Wales Parking Guidelines 2008.

I appreciate the site is located in a sustainable location is close to the local schools and leisure facilities, however as the site is not accessed by a bus route the majority of residents will drive to and from facilities.

In view of the above the HA recommend that the application is withdrawn in its current format or REFUSED in the interests of highway safety.

Second response As per my previous correspondence on this planning application, I can confirm that a Traffic study has taken place with identifies the existing and proposed traffic levels. Whilst, I appreciate the concerns of local residents. The projected extra traffic will not be detrimental to Highway Safety. However, to safeguard against the extra traffic and to control existing traffic on all of the approach roads, the developer has proposed some traffic calming features

2 Page 8

which will reinforce the requirement for motorists to drive at appropriate speeds. I note the existing roads are within a 20 mph zone. These improvements can be conditioned via a Section 106 agreement.

With regard to the Construction traffic using the existing roads then we could condition that a Construction Traffic Management Plan is submitted and approved in writing by the LPA before any works commence.

I note that the developer has not come forward with any proposals to provide some new off- road parking within the curtilage of the site for the existing residents. The new access has properties opposite and adjacent that do not currently have such facilities.

As you have confirmed that all matters are reserved including access then I have not provided any highway conditions at this stage.

Ecologist No response received.

Housing Officer As this is an outline application with all matters reserved I would simply comment that there is a proven need for affordable housing in Newtown and that therefore the UDP policies should be applied in terms of numbers with the actual size, mix and tenure to be agreed at detail stage. We require 35% affordable housing to be mainly 1 and 2 bedroom properties.

Contaminated Land Officer First response It is noted that the proposed development is situated on land indicated as being within 120m of a former landfill (identified on historic Ordinance Survey Maps) which has the potential to cause contamination. Based on the proximity to the landfill, sensitivity of the end use and an absence of appropriate supporting information, the application should be refused until such time as the applicant demonstrates that potentially significant liabilities have been assessed and understood. In summary, there are three aspects to this objection. These are that: • We consider the level of risk posed by this proposal to be unacceptable. • The application fails to give adequate assurance that the risks of pollution are understood and that measures for dealing with them have been devised. • Therefore, under Planning Policy for Wales (s.13.7), the application should not be determined until information is provided to the satisfaction of the Local Planning Authority that the risk to human health and controlled waters has been fully understood and can be addressed through appropriate measures.

Second response Thanks for clarifying the previous development site which I can confirm I have had no involvement or knowledge of.

I assume it was developed prior to 2008 when I joined Powys and would be surprised if development was permitted without either protection measures or an assessment having been undertaken. Mapinfo does not show any historic planning boundary on the site identified next to the leisure centre — so I am unclear when it was built? I did deal with

3 Page 9

application no P2008 1467 which is undeveloped land adjoining the area they have highlighted. Gas monitoring did take place on this site and no significant issues were identified.

However, every site is different due to many factors which the developer has responsibility to assess. As previously stated the proposed development site is <120m from the former landfill and no supporting information has been provided. My recommendations to refuse the application are reasonable on the basis of the presence of a known potential source of contamination, the sensitivity of the proposed development and absence of appropriate supporting information.

Is the applicant aware that producing a phase 1 desk study and preliminary risk assessment may be sufficient to either get conditions or to avoid conditions altogether? Obviously, it is also possible that intrusive investigation may be required but no decision can be made on that until the desk study/PRA is produced.

Third response It is noted that the proposed development is situated on land that is approximately 120m from a former landfill site (as shown on historic Ordinance Survey Maps) which are potential contaminative use. A desk study has been submitted and this has been reviewed. Whilst I concur with the general conclusions of the report, significantly more detail and a fully justified gas monitoring programme is required.

However, I am satisfied that that the development can be conditioned so as to ensure that any potential contamination issues are adequately dealt with. I would recommend that the following condition and note to applicant be applied to any future consent that may be granted.

Condition A Condition 1. Site Characterisation An investigation and risk assessment, in addition to any assessment provided with the planning application, must be completed in accordance with a scheme to assess the nature and extent of any contamination on the site, whether or not it originates on the site. The contents of the scheme are subject to the approval in writing of the Local Planning Authority. The investigation and risk assessment must be undertaken by competent persons (a contaminated land specialist with proven experience within the contaminated land industry) and a written report of the findings must be produced. The written report is subject to the approval in writing of the Local Planning Authority. The report of the findings must include: (i) a survey of the extent, scale and nature of contamination; (ii) an assessment of the potential risks to: • human health, • property (existing or proposed) including buildings, crops, livestock, pets, woodland and service lines and pipes, • adjoining land, • groundwaters and surface waters, • ecological systems, • archeological sites and ancient monuments; (iii) an appraisal of remedial options, and proposal of the preferred option(s).

4 Page 10

This must be conducted in accordance with DEFRA and the Environment Agency’s ‘Model Procedures for the Management of Land Contamination, CLR 11’ and the WLGA document ‘Development of land affected by contamination: a guide for developers’ 2072. Item (iii) above should not be submitted until written approval has been obtained from the Local Planning Authority for items (I) & (II).

Condition 2. Submission of Remediation Scheme A detailed remediation scheme to bring the site to a condition suitable for the intended use by removing unacceptable risks to human health, buildings and other property and the natural and historical environment must be prepared, and is subject to the approval in writing of the Local Planning Authority. The scheme must include all works to be undertaken, proposed remediation objectives and remediation criteria, timetable of works and site management procedures. The scheme must ensure that the site will not qualify as contaminated land under Part 2A of the Environmental Protection Act 1990, The Contaminated Land (Wales) Regulations 2001 in relation to the intended use of the land after remediation. The detailed remediation scheme should not be submitted until written approval for Condition 1 has been received from the Local Planning Authority.

Condition 3. Implementation of Approved Remediation Scheme The approved remediation scheme must be carried out in accordance with its terms prior to the commencement of development other than that required to carry out remediation, unless otherwise agreed in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The Local Planning Authority must be given two weeks written notification of commencement of the remediation scheme works. Following completion of measures identified in the approved remediation scheme, a verification report (referred to in PPS23 as a validation report) that demonstrates the effectiveness of the remediation carried out must be produced, and is subject to the approval in writing of the Local Planning Authority. The verification report contents must be agreed with the Local Planning Authority before commencement of the remediation scheme.

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

Condition 5. Long Term Monitoring and Maintenance A monitoring and maintenance scheme to include monitoring the long-term effectiveness of the proposed remediation over a period of duration to be agreed in writing with the Local Planning Authority and the provision of reports on the same must be prepared, both of which are subject to the approval in writing of the Local Planning Authority. Within six months following the completion of the measures identified in that scheme and the achievement of the remediation objectives, reports that demonstrate the effectiveness of the monitoring and maintenance carried out must be produced, and submitted to the Local Planning Authority. This must be conducted in accordance with DEFRA and the Environment

5 Page 11

Agency’s ‘Model Procedures for the Management of Land Contamination, CLR 11’.

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

Land Drainage Officer First response Back in May (2011) I met Graham Ottaway, Chris Turnbull and Phil Lawrence (Roger Casey Drainage Consultants) regarding this site. A couple of trial holes were dug to do a porosity test. Both holes looked very promising for installation of a soakaway. Phil Lawrence was going to pull this all together and send a copy of the results, etc to either me or you as I recall. I’ve not received anything and I assume you haven’t either?

Other than soakaways it would be difficult to dispose surface water elsewhere. The location of the test holes were to the lower part of the site i.e. along the boundary to Garthowen and where the road is proposed. The proposal would need to allow for adequate room to fit in a highway soakaway. I recall that the ground was not suitable for soakaways higher up the slope particularly where the houses are being proposed and it would be important to know what is happening with domestic surface water and how this is being catered for.

Second response I have not received any test results or calculations. However, my comments are still relevant in respect to any drainage design.

Severn Trent I can confirm that Severn Trent Water have no objections to the proposals subject to the inclusion of the following condition.

Condition The development hereby permitted should not commence until drainage plans for the disposal of foul and surface water flows have been submitted to and approved by the Local Planning Authority. The scheme shall be implemented in accordance with the approved details before the development is first brought into use.

Reason To ensure that the development is provided with a satisfactory means of drainage as well as to reduce the risk to creating or exacerbating a flooding problem and to minimise the risk of pollution.

Natural Resources Wales First response Thank you for your consultation received on 9th May 2014 referring to the above proposal. Natural Resources Wales objects pending further information on dormice and otters in support of this application, whereupon we will review our position. European Protected Species

6 Page 12

As you are aware otters and dormice all species of bats are European Protected Species, protected by The Conservation of Habitats and Species Regulations 2010. These requirements are translated into planning policy through Planning Policy Wales (PPW) 2014, sections 5.5.11 and 5.5.12, and Technical Advice Note (TAN) 5, Nature Conservation and Planning September 2009. The planning authority should take them into account when considering development proposals where a European Protected Species is present. Natural Resources Wales recommends that the guidelines given in ‘British Standard 42020:20 13 Biodiversity. Code of practice for planning and development’ (1SBN9780580779176) are followed in all cases where European Protected Species may be affected.

Otter As a result of surveys undertaken on behalf of the Welsh Government for the proposed Newtown Bypass, NRW is aware that otters use the stream to the south of the proposed development site. This means that they could be using the woodland immediately adjacent to the development site and may be adversely affected during the construction stage and possibly during the operational stage by disturbance. An otter survey should be undertaken to ensure that the development will not impact on them. Depending on the outcome of the survey, a mitigation plan may also be required.

Dormouse As a result of surveys undertaken on behalf of the Welsh Government for the proposed Newtown Bypass, NRW is aware that dormice have been found within 300m of the proposed development site. NRW accepts that although it is unlikely to provide suitable habitat the development site does extend to the woodland fringe which may support dormouse. The woodland fringe should be assessed to determine its suitability for dormouse habitat and the potential for the development to affect this habitat. If necessary the assessment should be followed by a dormouse survey and mitigation plan. Designated Nature Conservation Sites The site of the proposed development is not likely to significantly affect any designated sites for nature conservation.

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

In summary, Natural Resources Wales objects to the planning application pending further information regarding otters and dormice.

Second response

7 Page 13

Thank you for your correspondence received on 10th July 2014 and subsequent telephone conversations referring to the above proposal. Natural Resources Wales does not object to the proposal subject to: 1.The applicant entering into a section 106 agreement to secure the retention of the agreed buffer zone along the edge of the application site and the adjacent woodland, as indicated on the attached plan; 2. Suitably worded conditions requiring the submission of: (I) A fencing scheme between the application site and the buffer zone that precludes any access from the application site into the buffer zone to be agreed and implemented prior to the commencement of the development; (ii) Details to avoid disturbance to otter prior to the commencement of any site clearance works and development, and the implementation of the agreed measures; being attached to any planning permission your authority is minded to grant.

Immediately adjacent to the application site there is woodland that potentially supports dormice and in our response of 9th June 2014 NRW requested a dormouse survey. Following subsequent discussions with the agent he has offered to provide a 10 metre buffer zone between the edge of the development and the woodland. The location of the proposed buffer zone is within the redline boundary of the application and is shown in a map attached to an email from the applicant dated 25th July 2014 and attached to this letter.

The buffer zone will need to be appropriately protected by fencing to allow it to naturally revert to scrub and gradually grade into the woodland. There should not be any garden gates along the boundary with the buffer zone or other access from the housing development into the buffer zone.

If your authority is minded to grant planning permission for the proposal, to ensure that the that the development would not result in detriment to the favourable conservation status of dormouse (a European Protected Species) the mitigation outlined above should be secured through a section 106 agreement and a suitably worded planning condition.

As previously mentioned in our correspondence dated 9th June 2014, Welsh Government surveys for the proposed Newtown Bypass have shown that otters use the stream to the south of the woodland. During the construction phase, suitable mitigation measures should be included to avoid disturbance to otters. This should include measures such as limiting lighting spill in the buffer and woodland areas. A planning condition requiring the submission of details to avoid disturbance to otter prior to the commencement of any site clearance works and development, and the implementation of the agreed measures, should therefore be attached to any permission you are minded to grant.

Natural Resources Wales does not object to the proposal subject to: 1. The applicant entering into a section 106 agreement to secure the retention of the agreed buffer zone along the edge of the application site and the adjacent woodland, as indicated on the attached plan; 2. Suitably worded conditions requiring the submission of: (i) A fencing scheme between the application site and the buffer zone that precludes any access from the application site into the buffer zone to be agreed and implemented prior to the commencement of the development;

8 Page 14

(ii) Details to avoid disturbance to otter prior to the commencement of any site clearance works and development, and the implementation of the agreed being attached to any planning permission your authority is minded to grant. measures

Third response Thank you for consulting NRW on the additional information regarding this proposal. We have no comments with regard to the transport study submitted. The person who was dealing with this case for NRW is currently on special leave and I am unsure what further discussions there have been regarding the 10m buffer zone around the edge of the woodland. I am aware that a query was raised as to whether the l0m buffer zone could also function as open space.

Fourth response While public open space and species mitigation are usually mutually exclusive, in this particular case the proposal will be satisfactory subject to our confirmation when we have view of the plans.

Environmental Health First Response As a substantial development in close proximity to existing residential properties I would recommend the following condition for the protection of amenity from noise disturbance: All works and ancillary operations which are audible at the site boundary shall be carried out only between the following hours: Monday – Friday 0800-1800 hours, Saturdays 0800 – 1300 hours, Sundays and Bank Holidays: At no time. Deliveries and removals from the site must also only take place within the permitted hours above.

Second Response I have no objection to this application and I note that the site will be connected to the main sewer.

CPAT I can confirm that there are no recorded archaeological sites within the proposed development area. The site which Mr Gwilt refers to is PRN 4001 Ire Owen Well, which lies some 860 metres to the north east and will not be affected. We believe Mr Gwilt has mistaken the location of the Ire Owen Well and transposed it to this site. Here is the description of the Tre Owen Well site from the HER: The well was said to be 400m due south of St David’s church in Newtown. A salvage excavation was carried out in 1976 by J Connell who recorded it as 1m in diameter and 4m deep and cut into shale. Finds included 2nd-century Roman samian pottery and several animal heads, but there appears to be no published report, other than of a small decorated disc of mudstone, now lost. Even its precise position has not been identified. The earliest Ordnance Survey map shows a spring at SJ 10969114 and another at SJ11119119, but the archive notes of the discovery make no mention of this being a known water feature, so it is unlikely to have been either of these. All the land here has been lost beneath a housing estate, presumably the reason for the salvage work. This is a Roman well and there is no reason to class it as a holy well (Silvester, R J et al 2011).

Schools Services First response

9 Page 15

I refer to the planning application in respect of the 28 properties at Garth Owen, Newtown, and submit the following information in respect of the case for education provision against si 06. The site is in the catchment area of Maesyrhandir CP School for primary education and Newtown High School for secondary education. In respect of secondary education a development of this size is projected to increase the number on roll by between 5 and 10 pupils and as the school, on the latest Welsh Government return, has a surplus capacity in excess of 100 the Local Authority does not wish to make a claim against S106 in respect of this development. In respect of primary education, the LA is seeing an increase in pupil numbers in the Foundation Phase (4-7 year olds) in Newtown. Although the development of 28 houses would only increase the pupil roll by approximately 10 pupils, it is projected that this development, together with any other developments in the Newtown town area, would place significant pressure on the primary school accommodation in the town. The LA has, in the past year, held admission appeals in Penygloddfa, Treowen, St. Mary’s and Dafydd Llwyd primary schools. At the current outline stage of the planning application, the LA would wish to submit a s106 claim for £45,000. This figure is based on the attached policy and excludes any contribution to the secondary sector and assumes a level of inflationary increase in cost. The £45,000 would be used in conjunction with other s106 monies to review the overall provision of English-medium primary school places in the Newtown town area. A more detailed proposal will be provided once the Schools Service has a fuller understanding of all development proposals in the Newtown town area.

Second response As a Service we would be interested in entering into such an agreement but it would need to be applied to all applications above 5 houses in the curtilage of Newtown and any other similar settlement. Having reviewed our proposal if the applicant would consider it we would wish to consider a figure of £1,500 per dwelling which, for a development of 26 houses, would result in a s.106 obligation of £39,000. This figure is in line with our original submission.

Third response In response to your e-mail, following confirmation that each planning application must be considered on its own merits and no consideration can be taken of the ‘roll up’ effect of a development and any future applications that may come forward in the area, we have reviewed our request for a S106 contribution in respect of the developments referred to in your e-mail.

The review indicated that the projected pupil numbers from each development can be accommodated within the current capacity of the catchment school and the Service therefore wishes to withdraw its S106 bid in each case.

Representations 29 individual letters of objection have been received along with 35 pre-printed letters signed by individuals and a petition of 116 names.

The grounds of objection refer to the following matters:

Highway safety

10 Page 16

The most noted concern relates to the impact of the development on highway safety. The estate already suffers from congestion and parking issues and the development will exacerbate this. Construction vehicles will not be able to access the site without damaging private vehicles that park on the unrestricted access roads to the site. The increase in traffic is considered to be a nuisance and a danger to pedestrians and children in the area. Existing residents have already notices changes in traffic with the recent construction of the Welsh Medium Primary School.

Impact upon amenity The development will lead to overlooking as well as loss of light and privacy for existing residents. Furthermore, there are concerns over the construction phase generating pollution that could affect residential amenity. Some residents have commented that the development will be for social housing that will generate anti-social behaviour on the estate which has not suffered from such inconveniences previously. All the above will have a negative impact on property prices in the area.

Environmental concerns The development will lead to a loss of greenspace. The land to be developed is a historic site that accommodates rare flora and fauna. Garth Owen was built as a garden village and the development will ruin this. One resident is also concerned that the sale of land from Welsh Government and Powys County Council has not involved consultation with residents.

Planning History None on site.

Principal Planning Policies National Policy Planning Policy Wales (Edition 9, 2016) Technical Advice Note (TAN) 1: Joint Housing Land Availability Studies (2015) Technical Advice Note (TAN) 2: Planning and Affordable Housing (2006) Technical Advice Note (TAN) 5: Nature Conservation and Planning (2009) Technical Advice Note (TAN) 12: Design (2014) Technical Advice Note (TAN) 18: Transport (2007) Technical Advice Note 23: Economic Development (2014) Welsh Government Practice Guidance: Planning for Sustainable Buildings (2014)

Local Planning Policies and Guidance Powys Unitary Development Plan Written Statement (2010): UDP GP1 - Development Control UDP GP2 – Planning Obligations UDP GP3 – Design and Energy Conservation UDP GP4 - Highway and Parking Requirements UDP HP3 – Housing Land Availability UDP HP4 – Settlement Development Boundaries and Capacities UDP HP5 – Residential Developments UDP HP7 – Affordable Housing within Settlements UDP HP10 – Affordability Criteria UDP HP14 – Sustainable Housing UDP HP15 – Lifetime and Mobility Homes UDP DC10 – Mains Sewage Treatment

11 Page 17

UDP DC13 – Surface Water Drainage UDP DC15 – Development on Unstable or Contaminated Land UDP ENV3 – Safeguarding Biodiversity and Natural Habitats UDP ENV7 – Protected Species UDP ENV17 – Ancient Mounuments and Archaeological Sites UDP ENV18 – Development Proposals affecting Archaeological Sites UDP SP1 – Social, Community and Cultural Sustainability UDP SP3 – Natural, Historic and Built Heritage UDP SP5 – Housing Developments

Powys Residential Design Guide (2004) Affordable Housing for Local Needs Supplementary Planning Guidance (SPG) (2011) Powys Joint Housing Land Availability Study (2016)

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

Officer Appraisal

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

Principle of development The site subject to this application is located within the settlement development limits of Newtown as defined by the Powys Unitary Development Plan (inset map M180) and is allocated (M180 HA10) for the provision of 25 residential units. In light of this, there is a presumption in favour of appropriate residential development on this site in accordance with policy HP5. Newtown is classified as an Area Centre within the UDP, and, being the largest settlement in Powys, contains a range of community services and facilities. It is strategically located with good transport links and provides a major focus for both housing and employment allocations within the development plan.

Provision of affordable housing Policy HP7 requires that on sites within settlement development limits for more than 5 dwellings, that a proportion of affordable housing will be sought based on the extent and type of need identified by the Council’s Housing need survey (2002) or other reliable and robust data sources.

The Affordable Housing for Local Needs Supplementary Planning Guidance (SPG) states that our starting point for affordable housing provision on schemes of more than 5 dwellings should be 30-35%. However, the Viability Assessment forming part of the evidence base for the Local Development Plan identifies a guideline of 20% affordable provision in this area of Powys. It is contended that the CIL Viability Assessment provides a more up to date and robust basis for determining the affordable housing contribution than the now historic “guideline” figure contained within the UDP.

12 Page 18

Notwithstanding the above, the application is accompanied by a viability assessment to take account of site specific constrains. This has been subject to review by the District Valuer who has confirmed that the provision of affordable housing would not be viable on this site.

The affordable housing SPG states that where it can be demonstrated that the developer paid a realistic price for the land taking into account existing planning polices but either market change or changes in development costs have rendered the scheme economically unviable, then the council will take a pragmatic approach on the overall proportion of affordable housing provision sought (and any other qualifying planning obligations), which will enable the scheme to come forward. In light of this policy approach and the comments received by the District Valuer, Officers are satisfied that the development should proceed without the provision of affordable housing especially considering the type, scale and location of the development proposed.

Siting, Design and External Appearance Guidance contained within UDP policy HP5 indicates that residential development will be permitted where the development is of an appropriate scale, form and design and general character, to reflect the overall character and appearance of the settlement and surrounding area. It is noted that matters relating to scale and appearance and landscaping have been reserved for future consideration and therefore no details accompany the current outline application.

A layout plan does, however, accompany the application which is considered to demonstrate that the application site is capable of accommodating 25 dwellings together with associated highway and amenity provision whilst safeguarding the amenities enjoyed by occupants of neighbouring properties.

It is acknowledged that concern has been expressed within representations received regarding proximity to adjoining properties and potential for overlooking. It is also appreciated that the site is elevated above the existing dwellings on Garth Owen which can exacerbate privacy concerns. However, it is considered that the development is capable of accommodating sufficient separation distances between the existing and proposed developments such that the development could be acceptable. This will need to be considered in more detail at the reserved matters stage and in order to assist in the decision making process, it is considered prudent to attach a condition ensuring that cross sections and site levels are agreed at the same time as the submission of the reserved matters application.

Impact on highway network and parking arrangements

UDP policy GP4 requires adequate highway provision in terms of a safe access, visibility, turning and parking. Access is indicative at this stage but is shown to be provided off the U4208, known as Glwyndwr, and off street parking is detailed within the application site to serve the proposed individual dwellings.

It is noted that the existing dwellings on the Garth Owen estate were not designed with the provision of off street parking and whilst some dwellings have sacrificed their front gardens to provide private parking, a number of residents utilise both sides of the unrestricted access roads of Glyndwr, Cedewain and Hafren to park their private vehicles which can restrict

13 Page 19

access along these routes for larger vehicles. Whilst this is noted, the development is unlikely to exacerbate parking issues in the area as private parking is proposed within the application site and with regards to the concern over access of construction vehicles, it is not considered that the practicality of construction vehicles getting to the site is sufficient to justify the refusal of the planning application but would need to be managed by a traffic management plan.

It is also noted that the Garth Owen estate is subject to a 20mph speed restriction and the routes of Glyndwr, Cedewain and Hafren are straight in nature and do not benefit from any traffic calming measures. The Local Highway Authority has received a number of complaints about traffic speeds in the area and it is considered that the provision of 25 additional dwellings off Glyndwr will exacerbate highway safety concerns if measures are not put in place to control traffic speeds. Concerns over access and highway safety have also been raised by objectors to the planning application.

In light of the above, the agent has proposed the provision of speed cushions along the access routes to the site and this has been subject of consultation with the public and the Local Highway Authority.

Subject to the provision of the speed cushions, the Local Highway Authority do not object to the scheme on highway safety grounds. The provision of the traffic calming measures will need to be controlled within a section 106 agreement or appropriately worded condition.

With regards to the application site, access is a reserved matter and full details of the scheme will be considered at the later stage, however, it is considered that an appropriate access could be provided off Glyndwr to serve the development site.

Surface and foul water disposal

The application details that the site will be served by mains systems in respect of the disposal of foul waters and that surface water will be dealt with by soakaways within the site. Details of these are not included within the application.

The proposed use of mains sewerage disposal is complaint with UDP policy DC10 and although full details of the soakaways have not been provided within the application in relation to surface water drainage, the site is considered to be of a sufficient scale to accommodate soakaways to serve the development in accordance with UDP policy DC13. A condition requiring details to be provided could be attached to any consent granted in line with the request from Severn Trent Water should planning permission be granted for the scheme.

Impact on Ecology

The Council acknowledges the need to protect biodiversity from adverse development through careful monitoring, maintenance and the protection of habitats and species worthy of conservation. Therefore the nature conservation polices in the UDP seek to safeguard and enhance biodiversity, and these objectives are also echoed in national policy (TAN5 and Planning Policy Wales).

The application has been accompanied by a preliminary ecological report, however, consultation with Natural Resources Wales has identified that the woodland located to the

14 Page 20

south of the site has the potential to accommodate dormouse, which is a European Protected Species. Natural Resources Wales have confirmed that in lieu of a dormouse survey, that a 10 metre buffer zone is acceptable. An additional plan has been submitted detailing this provision. The provision and long term maintenance of this area will be dealt with within the section 106 agreement and a condition controlling the fencing off of this area has been included at the end of this report.

Other development in close proximity to the application site has also highlighted the presence of Otter in nearby watercourses. Subject to a condition for the submission of reasonable avoidance measures during the construction phase of development, NRW have no objection to the scheme.

Contaminated Land

The application site is noted to have been situated on land that is approximately 120 metres from a former landfill site which is a potential contaminative use. Preliminary reports have be submitted and reviewed but the Contaminated Land Officer has suggested that more detail is required along with a fully justified gas monitoring programme. In light of the information received to date, the Contaminated Land Officer is satisfied that that the development can be conditioned so as to ensure that any potential contamination issues are adequately dealt with.

Other matters

Public representations have referred to the loss of views, the effect the development would have on the value of existing properties. Members are advised that the loss of views (except where amenity is impacted upon) and the impact upon property values are not material planning considerations.

Comments have also been made regarding the sale of the application and that this has not been appropriately consulted upon. Again, Members are advised that this matter is not material to the consideration of this planning application.

Planning obligations

Planning Authorities are permitted to seek planning obligations from developers of land in accordance with Circular 13/97. Development Management has consulted the Education Department and the Recreation Officer to see whether any planning obligations are necessary to serve the development.

In respect of recreation provision, it is noted that the plans detail an open space area to serve the development. In accordance with the 6 acre standard, it is suggested that this area is equipped and the proposed section 106 agreement will ensure the provision and long term maintenance of this. There has also been comment that the ecological buffer double up as recreation space and NRW have not objected to this. Again, this matter will be controlled via the Section 106 agreement.

In respect of education, it is noted that the School Services are no longer requesting a contribution from this development.

15 Page 21

Recommendation

The development relates to the proposal for 25 dwellings on an allocated site within the Unitary Development Plan.

It is recommended that the application be approved subject to the conditions set out below and subject to the applicant entering into a Section 106 agreement to secure the following:

 Management (implementation, maintenance and retention) of the buffer zone detailed on plan 11/003/TC1 B.  A management agreement for on-site open space/play area (to secure provision, retention and maintenance).

Conditions:

1. Details of the layout, appearance, landscaping and scale, (hereinafter called ""the reserved matters"") shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the local planning authority before any development begins and the development shall be carried out as approved. 2. Any application for approval of the reserved matters shall be made to the local planning authority not later than 36 months from the date of this permission. 3. The development shall begin either before the expiration of five years from the date of this permission or before the expiration of 24 months from the date of approval of the last of the reserved matters to be approved, whichever is the later. 4. The development hereby permitted must be served by the public foul sewerage system (mains) prior to the occupation of any of the units. 5. No development shall commence until a scheme for the surface water and land drainage of the site has been submitted to and approved in writing by the local planning authority. The approved scheme shall be completed before any dwellings are occupied. 6. No development shall commence until an investigation and risk assessment, in addition to any assessment provided with the planning application, is submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The investigation and risk assessment must be undertaken by competent persons (a contaminated land specialist with proven experience within the contaminated land industry). The report of the findings must include: (i) a survey of the extent, scale and nature of contamination; (ii) an assessment of the potential risks to: o human health, o property (existing or proposed) including buildings, crops, livestock, pets, woodland and service lines and pipes, o adjoining land, o groundwaters and surface waters, o ecological systems, o archaeological sites and ancient monuments; (iii) an appraisal of remedial options, and proposal of the preferred option(s).

16 Page 22

This must be conducted in accordance with Welsh Local Government Association document 'Development of land affected by contamination: a guide for developers' 2012 . Item (iii) above should not be submitted until written approval has been obtained from the Local Planning Authority for items (i) & (ii). 7. No development shall commence until a detailed remediation scheme to bring the site to a condition suitable for the intended use by removing unacceptable risks to human health, buildings and other property and the natural and historical environment is submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The scheme must include all works to be undertaken, proposed remediation objectives and remediation criteria, timetable of works and site management procedures. The scheme must ensure that the site will not qualify as contaminated land under Part 2A of the Environmental Protection Act 1990, The Contaminated Land (Wales) Regulations 2001 in relation to the intended use of the land after remediation. The detailed remediation scheme should not be submitted until written approval for Condition 6 has been received from the Local Planning Authority. 8. The approved remediation scheme must be carried out in accordance with its terms prior to the commencement of development other than that required to carry out remediation, unless otherwise agreed in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The Local Planning Authority must be given two weeks written notification of commencement of the remediation scheme works. Following completion of measures identified in the approved remediation scheme, a verification report (referred to in PPS23 as a validation report) that demonstrates the effectiveness of the remediation carried out must be produced, and is subject to the approval in writing of the Local Planning Authority. The verification report contents must be agreed with the Local Planning Authority before commencement of the remediation scheme. 9. In the event that contamination is found at any time when carrying out the approved development that was not previously identified it must be reported in writing immediately to the Local Planning Authority. An investigation and risk assessment must be undertaken in accordance with the requirements of condition 6, and where remediation is necessary a remediation scheme must be prepared in accordance with the requirements of condition 7, which is subject to the approval in writing of the Local Planning Authority. Following completion of measures identified in the approved remediation scheme a verification report must be prepared, which is subject to the approval in writing of the Local Planning Authority in accordance with condition 8. 10. A monitoring and maintenance scheme to include monitoring the long-term effectiveness of the proposed remediation over a period of duration to be agreed in writing with the Local Planning Authority and the provision of reports on the same must be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. Within six months following the completion of the measures identified in that scheme and the achievement of the remediation objectives, reports that demonstrate the effectiveness of the monitoring and maintenance carried out must be produced, and submitted to the Local Planning Authority. 11. Upon the submission of the reserved matters referred to in conditions 1 and 2 above, a fencing scheme must be submitted to the Local Planning Authority. The scheme must detail the proposals for a scheme between the application site and the buffer zone referred to in 11/003/TC1 B and the scheme must be implemented as approved prior to the construction of any part of the dwellings.

17 Page 23

12. Upon the submission of the reserved matters referred to in conditions 1 and 2 above, a scheme detailing reasonable avoidance measures for otter during construction must be submitted to the Local Planning Authority. The scheme must be implemented as approved. 13. Any works or deliveries relating to the construction of the development shall not take place outside the following hours: Mon-Fri 0800-1800 and Saturdays 0800-1300 with no working on Sundays or bank holidays. 14. The development hereby permitted shall include no more than 25 residential units. 15. Upon the submission of the reserved matters referred to in conditions 1 and 2 above, plans detailing cross sections of the application site and finish floor levels of all the dwellings provided must be submitted to the Local Planning Authority. The scheme must be implemented as approved.

Reasons 1. To enable the Local Planning Authority to exercise proper control over the development in accordance with Section 92 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990. 2. Required to be imposed by Section 91 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 and in accordance with the Affordable Housing for Local Needs Supplementary Planning Guidance (SPG) (2011). 3. Required to be imposed by Section 91 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 and in accordance with the Affordable Housing for Local Needs Supplementary Planning Guidance (SPG) (2011). 4. To ensure that development is served by the public system in accordance with policy DC10 of the Powys Unitary Development Plan. 5. To ensure that the proposed surface water drainage system for the site are fully compliant with regulations and are of robust design in accordance with policy DC13 of the Powys Unitary Development Plan. 6 to 10. To ensure that risks from land contamination to the future users of the land and neighbouring land are minimised, together with those to controlled waters, property and ecological systems, and to ensure that the development can be carried out safely without unacceptable risks to workers, neighbours and other offsite receptors in accordance with policyDC15 of the Powys Unitary Development Plan. 11&12. To comply with Powys County Council’s UDP Policies SP3, ENV3 and ENV7 in relation to The Natural Environment and to meet the requirements of Planning Policy Wales (Edition 9, 2016), TAN 5: Nature Conservation and Planning and the Environment (Wales) Act 2016 13.To safeguard residential amenity in accordance with policy GP1 of the Powys Unitary Development Plan. 14. To limit the development to that proposed and justified on highway safety grounds in accordance with Unitary Development Plan Policy GP4 (2010). 15. To safeguard residential amenity in accordance with policy GP1 of the Powys Unitary Development Plan.

______Case Officer: Louise Evans- Principal Planning Officer Tel: 01938 551127 E-mail:[email protected]

18 Page 24 Page 25 This page is intentionally left blank PTLRW4 - 20173

Planning, Taxi Licensing and Rights of Way Committee Report

Application No: P/2016/0721 Grid Ref: 327536.18 293922.46

Community Churchstoke Valid Date: Officer: Council: 26/07/2016 Louise Evans

Applicant: Powys County Council, Spa Road East, Engineering Design, Powys County Hall, Llandrindod Wells, Powys, LD1 5LG

Location: Plot adjacent to Fir House, Churchstoke, Montgomery, Powys, SY15 6AH

Proposal: Outline (some matters reserved) Development of up to 45 dwellings and associated works to include demolition of existing building

Application Application for Outline Planning Permission Type:

The reason for Committee determination The application site is owned by Powys County Council.

Site Location and Description The site is approximately 1.7Ha in size and is located between the main body of Churchstoke to the west and the more recent development consisting of a large supermarket and other facilities together with more housing to the east.

Surrounding land use is residential and agricultural. Part of the application site incorporates a modern agricultural building but the remainder of the site is an agricultural field that has a slight rise from east to west. To the north of the application site is the A489 highway, beyond which is a parcel of land that was recently granted planning consent for 40 dwellings.

The application is in outline form for the development of up to 45 new dwellings with a range of dwelling types. The development would also include new adoptable roads providing access, as well as surface water and foul drainage provision. The applicant proposes that 20% of the new dwellings will be affordable and a pedestrian link is proposed from Wilber House to the industrial access at Harry Tuffins.

Consultee Response Churchstoke Town Council First Response CCC supports the application with additional comment as follows: a) It has reservations in that the number of dwellings on the drawing (30) does not match the number declared on the application (45), and that clarity is sought from the applicant so that permission, if granted, is based on accurate proposals b) It asks that access onto the highway A489 is co-ordinated design with access for the permission for 40 dwellings opposite on land adj Buttercup Cottage (P/2015/0340)

1 Page 27 c) It welcomes a commitment to make ‘community gain’ contribution.

Second Response CCC supports the application with additional comment as follows: a) It has reservations in that the number of dwellings on the drawing (30) does not match the number declared on the application (45), and that clarity is sought from the applicant so that permission, if granted, is based on accurate proposals b) It asks that access onto the highway A489 is co-ordinated design with access for the permission for 40 dwellings opposite on land adj Buttercup Cottage (P/2015/0340) c) It welcomes a commitment to make ‘community gain’ contribution d) It welcomes the inclusion in the amended proposals of a new footway on the south side of A489.

PCC - Highways First Response I have no objection in principle due to the excellent vehicular links to the site. However, there needs to be a footpath created within the highway verge to terminate by the access to the Industrial access. Please request amended plans.

Do you want comments on the internal access road or is this schematic only.

Second Response Thanks for the revised plans which now show a footpath link up to the Industrial Estate junction this is most welcomed and will contribute to the Active Travel Plan aspirations within the Village.

In view that the internal layout is indicative only please apply the following conditions:-

HC2 The gradient of the access shall be constructed so as not to exceed 1 in 30 for the first 9 metres measured from edge of the adjoining carriageway along the centre line of the access and shall be retained at this gradient for as long as the development remains in existence.

HC3 The centre line of the first 15 metres of the access road measured from the edge of the adjoining carriageway shall be constructed at right angles to that edge of the said carriageway and be retained at that angle for as long as the development remains in existence.

HC4 Within 5 days from the commencement of the development the access shall be constructed so that there is clear visibility from a point 1.05 metres above ground level at the centre of the access and 2.4 metres distant from the edge of the adjoining carriageway, to points 0.26 metres above ground level at the edge of the adjoining carriageway and 43 metres distant in each direction measured from the centre of the access along the edge of the adjoining carriageway and 10 metres distant from the edge of the adjoining carriageway and 10 metres in each direction. Nothing shall be planted, erected or allowed to grow on the areas of land so formed that would obstruct the visibility and the visibility shall be maintained free from obstruction for as long as the development hereby permitted remains in existence.

2 Page 28 HC7 Within 5 days from the commencement of the development the area of the access to be used by vehicles is to be constructed to a minimum of 410mm depth, comprising a minimum of 250mm of sub-base material, 100mm of bituminous macadam base course material and 60mm of bituminous macadam binder course material for a distance of 15 metres from the edge of the adjoining carriageway. Any use of alternative materials is to be agreed in writing by the Local Planning Authority prior to the access being constructed.

HC9 Prior to the occupation of any dwelling, provision shall be made within the curtilage of the site for the parking of not less than 1 cars per bedroom (maximum 3) excluding any garage space provided. The parking areas shall be retained for their designated use in perpetuity.

HC11 Within 5 days from the commencement of the development provision shall be made within the curtilage of the site for the parking of all construction vehicles together with a vehicle turning area. This parking and turning area shall be constructed to a depth of 0.45 metres in crusher run or sub-base and maintained free from obstruction at all times such that all vehicles serving the site shall park within the site and both enter and leave the site in a forward gear for the duration of the construction of the development.

HC13 Prior to the occupation of the development a radius of 10.5 metres shall be provided from the carriageway of the county highway on each side of the access to the development site and shall be maintained for as long as the development remains in existence.

HC14 Any internal side-road junctions shall have a corner radii of 6 metres.

HC15 The centre line radii of all curves on the proposed estate road shall be not less than 20 metres.

HC16 There shall only be a single vehicular and pedestrian access to serve the development hereby permitted.

HC17 Prior to the occupation of the development a 2.0 metre wide footpath shall be provided as detailed on the approved plan and shall be retained at for as long as the development hereby permitted remains in existence.

HC19 No building shall be occupied before the estate road carriageway and one footway shall be constructed to and including binder course level to an adoptable standard including the provision of any salt bins, surface water drainage and street lighting in front of that building and to the junction with the county highway.

HC20 The estate road carriageway and all footways shall be fully completed, in accordance with the details to be agreed in writing by the Local Planning Authority, upon the issuing of the Building Regulations Completion Certificate for the last house or within two years from the commencement of the development, whichever is the sooner. The agreed standard of completion shall be maintained for as long as the development remains in existence.

HC21 Prior to the occupation of any dwelling the area of the access to be used by vehicles is to be finished in a 40mm bituminous surface course for a distance of 15 metres from the edge of the adjoining carriageway. This area will be maintained to this standard for as long as the development remains in existence,

3 Page 29

HC22 Within 5 days from the commencement of the development any existing means of access shall be stopped up, in materials to be agreed in writing by the Local Planning Authority and this shall be retained for as long as the development is in existence.

HC30 Upon formation of the visibility splays as detailed in HC4 above the centreline of any new or relocated hedge should be positioned not less than 1.0 metre to the rear of the visibility splay and retained in this position as long as the development remains in existence.

HC31 The area of each private drive and any turning area is to be metalled and surfaced in bituminous macadam, concrete or block paviours, prior to the occupation of that dwelling and retained for as long as the development remains in existence.

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

REASONS FOR RECOMMENDATIONS OR REFUSAL

RR1 In the interests of highway safety.

RR2 To ensure that adequate provision is made for highway access onto the County Class A489 road to serve the approved development in accordance with policies GP1 and GP4 of the Powys Unitary Development Plan.

PCC - Building Control Please be aware that the propsoed scheme will require Building Regulations approval.

Wales and West Utilities No response received.

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

I can confirm that we have no objections to the proposals subject to the inclusion of the following condition:  The development hereby permitted should not commence until drainage plans for the disposal of foul and surface water flows have been submitted to and approved by the Local Planning Authority, and  The scheme shall be implemented in accordance with the approved details before the development is first brought into use. This is to ensure that the development is provided with a satisfactory means of drainage as well as to reduce or exacerbate a flooding problem and to minimise the risk of pollution

Additional Waste Water Comments

Severn Trent Water advise that there is a public 150mm foul sewer located within this site. Public sewers have statutory protection and may not be built close to, directly over or be diverted without consent. You are advised to contact Severn Trent Water to discuss the

4 Page 30 proposals. Severn Trent will seek to assist in obtaining a solution which protects both the public sewer and the building. Please note, when submitting a Building Regulations application, the building control officer is required to check the sewer maps supplied by Severn Trent and advise them of any proposals located over or within 3 meters of a public sewer. Under the provisions of Building Regulations 2000 Part H4, Severn Trent can direct the building control officer to refuse building regulations approval.

PCC - Affordable Housing No response received.

PCC – Ecologist First response EIA Screening Requirement No

Protected Species & Habitats European Species The Extended Phase 1 Habitat Survey by Rachel Price dated July 2016 found that the agricultural building was unsuitable for roosting bats.

UK Species The Extended Phase 1 Habitat Survey by Rachel Price dated July 2016 found that Birds were likely to be nesting in the hedgerows on site. Mitigation strategies will be required for any impacts upon protected species and loss of habitat (see Recommended Conditions below).

Section 6 Species & Habitat See Protected Species above. The applicant should be mindful that in accordance with Powys County Council’s duty under Section 6 of the Environment (Wales) Act 2016, TAN 5, UDP policies and biodiversity SPG, as part of the planning process Powys should ensure that there is no net loss of biodiversity or unacceptable damage to a biodiversity feature.

LBAP Species & Habitat See Protected Species above. Protected Sites International Sites (within 2km) None present within search area. National Sites (within 500m) None present within search area. Local Sites (within 500m) None present within search area. Invasive Non-Native Species None identified in the Phase 1 habitat survey report.

Summary of recommendations / further assessment or work

Recommended Conditions Should you be minded to approve this application, I recommend the inclusion of the following conditions:

5 Page 31 The recommendations (page 28 &29 of the extended phase 1 habitat survey report) regarding Hedgerows (paragraphs 11.1 and 11.2) Birds (11.4), lights (11.3), Pollution prevention plan (11.5) and Ecological enhancement (11.6) of the Ecological Report by Rachel Price dated 04/07/16 shall be adhered to and implemented in full unless otherwise agreed in writing by the LPA.

Reason: To comply with Powys County Council’s UDP Policies SP3, ENV2 and ENV7 in relation to The Natural Environment and to meet the requirements of Planning Policy Wales (Edition 7, July 2014), TAN 5: Nature Conservation and Planning and the Environment (Wales) Act 2016.

The mitigation regarding Reptiles on page 27 (paragraph 10.3) of the Extended Phase 1 habitat survey report by Rachel Price dated July 2016 shall be adhered to and implemented in full unless otherwise agreed in writing with the LPA.

Reason: To comply with Powys County Council’s UDP Policies SP3, ENV2 and ENV7 in relation to The Natural Environment and to meet the requirements of Planning Policy Wales (Edition 7, July 2014), TAN 5: Nature Conservation and Planning and the Environment (Wales) Act 2016.

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

Reason: To comply with Powys County Council’s UDP Policies SP3 and ENV3 in relation to The Natural Environment and to meet the requirements of Planning Policy Wales (Edition 7, July 2014), TAN 5: Nature Conservation and Planning and the Environment (Wales) Act 2016.

Relevant UDP Policies SP3 Natural, Historic and Built Heritage ENV 2: Safeguard the Landscape ENV 3: Safeguard Biodiversity and Natural Habitats ENV 7: Protected Species

Second response (Additional comments following the inclusion of the footway link)

Proteceted species – european species

In addition there was no likelihood of protected species in the grass verge and the hedgerow was found to have low ecological value See Addendum Ecological Statement footway link to industrial Access produce for Powys County Council 15/08/16.

Invasive species

No Invasive species were identified in the Addendum Ecological Statement footway link to industrial Access produce for Powys County Council 15/08/16.

6 Page 32 Recommended conditions

The recommendations regarding Hedgerows and birds in Paragraph 8.4 of the ‘Addendum Ecological Statement footway link to industrial access’ produced for Powys County Council on 15/08/16 by Rachel Price shall be adhered to and implemented in full unless otherwise agreed in writing by the LPA.

Reason: To comply with Powys County Council’s UDP Policies SP3, ENV2 and ENV7 in relation to The Natural Environment and to meet the requirements of Planning Policy Wales (Edition 7, July 2014), TAN 5: Nature Conservation and Planning and the Environment (Wales) Act 2016.

PCC - Land Drainage First Response Flood Risk Management Having reviewed the submitted details, I note that the amended plans/details do not reflect or take into account the flood risk issues highlighted under Item 7 of the Flood Consequence Assessment (FCA) report prepared by WSP/Parsons Brinckerhoff dated 4th July 2016. If the various recommendations are not adopted then not only does there remain a risk of flooding to the proposed development site but also a greater flood risk nuisance to existing property, particularly with the introduction of the proposed pedestrian access footpath in the North-west corner. The proposals therefore need to incorporate the FCA report findings.

I would add that there is also a need to allow a suitable buffer zone adjacent the length of watercourse channel located along the western boundary. This buffer or sterile zone is required to not only provide a suitable access for future maintenance of the watercourse channel but also to safeguard the ground profile alterations recommended in the FCA to mitigate flooding. The minimum requirement for this site would be to allow for a 4 metre maintenance strip adjacent to the watercourse which would also allow for any overland flows.

This buffer or sterile zone would also provide the benefits that are being recommended in Item 11.5 of the submitted Powys County Council Extended Phase 1 Habitat Survey dated July 2016.

Recommendation: No development shall commence until full engineering details and drawings to reflect the flood risk mitigation works recommended in the WSP/Parsons Brinckerhoff FCA report dated 4th July 2016 and, the incorporation of a 4 metre wide maintenance strip alongside the watercourse have been submitted and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. Those details shall include a 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 flood risk mitigation works throughout its lifetime. These flood risk mitigation works shall be operational prior to first occupation of any dwelling.

Reason: To ensure that the proposed development does not compromise the function of the existing waterbody and that any proposed alterations are fully compliant with regulations and are of robust design.

7 Page 33 Surface Water Drainage

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

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

If soakaways are not feasible, drainage calculations to limit the discharge rate from the site no greater than the Greenfield run-off rate shall be applied. The attenuation drainage system should be designed so that storm events of up to 1 in 100 year + 30% for climate change and will not cause flooding either on site or elsewhere in the vicinity. There must be no discharge to a surface water body that results from the first 5mm of any rainfall event.

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

Recommendation: No development shall commence until a scheme for the surface water drainage of the site has been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The approved scheme shall be completed before any dwellings are occupied. The scheme to be submitted shall show foul drainage being connected to the public sewerage system.

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

Environment Protection

Informative: Foul drainage from the proposed development should be conveyed to the main foul sewer, subject to the agreement by Severn Trent Water Ltd. There must be adequate capacity at the receiving sewage treatment works to treat the additional flows. Consent is required from the service provider to connect into the foul main sewer.

Second response Thanks for consulting the Lead Local Flood Authority (LLFA) in respect to these amended proposals.

It is noted that revised drawing (ref: P6947-3/P01/002/rev B) takes into account the flood risk mitigation works mentioned in the FCA and maintenance requirements of the existing watercourse along the western boundary and, therefore, demonstrates these requirements can be achieved. These revisions are deemed acceptable but a detail design for the flood protection assets and surface water drainage will need to be approved prior to commencement. I would therefore recommend you include the following:-

Recommendation: No development shall commence until full engineering details and drawings for the planned flood risk mitigation works and watercourse maintenance strip have been submitted and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. These details shall include a management and maintenance plan for the lifetime of the development which shall

8 Page 34 include the arrangements for adoption by any public authority or statutory undertaker and any other arrangements to secure the operation of the flood risk mitigation works throughout its lifetime. These flood risk mitigation works shall be operational prior to first occupation of any dwelling.

Reason: To ensure that the proposed development does not compromise the function of the existing waterbody and that any proposed alterations are fully compliant with regulations and are of robust design.

Recommendation: No development shall commence until a scheme for the surface water drainage of the site has been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The approved scheme shall be completed before any dwellings are occupied. The scheme to be submitted shall show foul drainage being connected to the public sewerage system.

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

PCC - School Services In response to your e-mail, following confirmation that each planning application must be considered on its own merits and no consideration can be taken of the ‘roll up’ effect of a development and any future applications that may come forward in the area, we have reviewed our request for a S106 contribution in respect of the developments referred to in your e-mail.

The review indicated that the projected pupil numbers from each development can be accommodated within the current capacity of the catchment school and the Service therefore wishes to withdraw its S106 bid in each case.

Cadw Our statutory role in the planning process is to provide the local planning authority with an assessment concerned with the likely impact that the proposal will have on scheduled monuments, registered historic parks and gardens, registered historic landscapes where an Environmental Impact Assessment is required and development likely to have an impact on the outstanding universal value of a World Heritage Site. It is a matter for the local planning authority to then weigh our assessment against all the other material considerations in determining whether to approve planning permission, including any issues concerned with listed buildings and conservation areas.

The application area is located inside the Registered Vale of Montgomery Landscape of Outstanding historic Interest and more specifically the Bro Trefldwyn Historic Landscape Character Area. The key characteristics of this area are:- early medieval and medieval nucleated church settlement and expanding modern village, on boundary between valley and hill edge, medieval and early post-medieval encroachment by small farms and cottages onto hill land to north. The proposed development therefore is in accordance with these characteristics and given its size it is unlikely to have more than a local impact on the registered historic landscape.

9 Page 35

Welsh Historic Gardens Trust No response received.

Natural Resources Wales First response Thank you for referring the above consultation received by us on 28th July 2016. We note the location is allocated for residential development (M117 HA4) under the current Unitary Development Plan and is currently owned by Powys County Council Farm Estates.

If any of the details submitted with this outline planning application are amended (e.g. the proposed drainage arrangements) at the reserved matters stage the Local Planning Authority may be required to re-consult NRW.

We recommend that you should only grant planning permission if you attach the following conditions. These conditions would address significant concerns that we have identified and we would not object provided you attach them to the planning permission. Summary of Conditions Condition 1 - Recommendations made in section11 of Extended Phase 1 Habitat Survey (July 2016) prepared by Rachel Price should be implemented and included in the detailed design

Condition 2 - A condition requiring submission and implementation of a Pollution Prevention Plan

European Protected Species – Bats

We have considered the Extended Phase 1 Habitat Survey (July 2016) prepared by Rachel Price. We agree with the recommendation made in section11 of the report and advise that they should be appropriately conditioned by the LPA.

Condition 1 - Recommendations made in section11 of Extended Phase 1 Habitat Survey (July 2016) prepared by Rachel Price should be implemented and included in the detailed design

Reasons: Recommendations 11.1, 11.2, 11.3 and 11.6 to protect bats, a European protected species, protect connectivity of habitats for foraging bats, to create ecological enhancements, to protect bats from light disturbance

Regarding recommendation 11.4 we observe that the modern barn is likely to provide nesting opportunities for birds as well as the occasional resting place for bats and therefore it would be advisable for it to be dismantled / demolished outside the bird nesting season.

Pollution Prevention

Regarding recommendation 11.5 in Price, R (July 2016) Extended Phase 1 Habitat Survey we agree that a pollution prevention plan will be required during the construction phase, as two edges of the proposal site, along the south west and north east are bordering a stream. The pollution prevention guidelines have been withdrawn from the English Environment Agency website although they are still applicable in Wales and can be found on the netregs

10 Page 36 website at the following link http://www.netregs.org.uk/pdf/PPG%205%20- %20Oct%202007%20-%20replaces%20PPG%2023.pdf

Condition 2: A condition requiring submission and implementation of a Pollution Prevention Plan

Reason: To protect the water environment from potential pollution during the construction phase.

No material should be deposited within 10m of any watercourse without discussion with Natural Resources Wales.

Any facilities for the storage of oils, fuels or chemicals shall be sited on impervious bases and surrounded be impervious bund walls. The volume of bunded compound should be 110% of the capacity of the tank, all filling points, gauges, vents and sight glasses must be located within the bund. Associated pipework should be located above ground and protected from accidental damage. All filling points and tank overflow pipe outlets should be detailed to discharge downwards into the bund. Refuelling should be supervised at all times – and preferably done on an impermeable surface.

The activity of importing waste onto the site for use as, for example hardcore, must be registered by the Natural Resources Wales as an exempt activity under the Environmental Permitting Regulations 2010. The developer should contact Natural Resources Wales to discuss the necessity for an exemption permit for any material imported to and exported from site.

Should any contaminated water or materials enter or pollute the watercourse or groundwater, Natural Resources Wales must be notified on 0800 80 70 60. Landscape - Vale of Montgomery Landscape of Outstanding Historic Interest.

The proposal is located within the Vale of Montgomery Landscape of Outstanding Historic Interest. The effect of land use change from fields to residential development strategically represents a minor change to the Landscape of Outstanding Historic Interest. We therefore do not object to the proposal, but strongly recommend particular thought be given to the character and appearance of the development along key frontages to ensure that it makes a positive contribution to the rural character of the historic landscape and avoid eroding local landscape/ townscape character and sense of place. This is to ensure that the development’s response to Character fully accords with TAN12 Design.

The proposed outline development layout is conventional in the way they set out a regular pattern of houses to maximise the number of plots within the site, adjusted in places where trees/hedgerows need to be retained. Along site frontages this approach will result in uniformity of built form and this will be most apparent where frontages are long, facing open countryside and public highways. From the A489 the site will form a noticeable infill to the settlement of Churchstoke.

There is therefore a need for some attention and sensitivity to the built form, spaces between, retention of existing hedgerows and trees and inclusion of new strategic planting to ensure these developments connect to and make a positive contribution to their

11 Page 37 landscape/townscape context. The implications of not addressing this is that the character and sense of place of Churchstoke and the adjacent rural landscapes may become eroded.

The Design and Access Statement does not fully address the character and context issues of the site and we recommend that you consider undertaking a landscape and townscape strategy. Based upon analysis of key views, existing characteristics and features, how development would sit and be experienced within its landscape/ townscape context to help demonstrate that measures have been included to achieve good integration, place making, and positive contribution to the locality. The approach taken addresses the landscape features of the site (trees and hedgerows) but fails to consider the wider visual context of the development.

We attach landscape design guidance in Appendix A which we recommend Powys County Council consider in its review of its residential site allocations.

Foul Drainage

We note that foul water disposal will be to mains sewer as stated in section2.1.6.2 of the Design and Access Statement. When connecting to the public sewerage system, Severn Trent Water should be consulted on the proposals and be requested to confirm that the sewerage and sewage disposal system serving the development has sufficient capacity to accommodate the additional flows generated as a result of the development. This is to ensure that the development does not cause pollution of the water environment or potential deterioration in the Water Framework Directive classification.

Wherever practicable, Sustainable Urban Drainage Systems (SUDS) should be incorporated into the design with the reserved matters application.

Flood Risk

The site is not located within a flood plain or near a main river. The site is within a zone A flood risk area, and at risk of surface water flooding as acknowledged in the Flood Consequence Assessment, section 5.2 and the Design and Access Statement, section 2.1.5.1.

The proposal should be subject to further consideration by the LLFA and the applicant’s consultant to establish that if any surface water drainage from this site is to be discharged to a watercourse, ditch or culvert (excluding statutory main rivers) then that such discharge will not cause or exacerbate any flooding in this catchment.

Scope of NRW Comments

Our comments above only relate specifically to matters that are included on our checklist “Natural Resources Wales and Planning Consultations” (March 2015) which is published on our website: (https://naturalresources.wales/planning-and-development/planning-and- development/?lang=en).

We have not considered potential effects on other matters and do not rule out the potential for the proposed development to affect other interests, including environmental interests of

12 Page 38 local importance. The applicant should be advised that, in addition to planning permission, it is their responsibility to ensure that they secure all other permits/consents relevant to their development.

Second response With regards to the above planning application, I can confirm that following review of the Addendum Phase 1 Habitat Survey of the areas of verge affected by the proposed footway link that NRW has no comments to make on this submission.

I confirm that our consultation response letter dated 23rd August 2016 remain valid.

Disibility Powys No response received.

Outdoor Leisure and Recreation Outdoor Recreation Services would ask for a Section 106 contribution. Powys County Council unfortunately does not have a play area with fixed play equipment near to the proposed development, if the developer decided not to provide adequate play space on their land, then Outdoor Recreation would recommend that a monetary package to be offered to the local community council to upgrade an existing playground.

As part of the 106 planning gain, Outdoor Recreation Service’s usually apply the following terms –

All social housing, size or number of bedrooms is not a factor is £ 800.00 per property. All private housing up to three bedrooms is £ 1000.00 per property. All private housing over three bedrooms is £ 1200.00 per property.

Environmental Health Due to the proximity of residential housing to the application site, I would recommend the following conditions for the protection of amenity during the demolition and construction phases of development:

Noise control

This department would recommend that the demolition/construction-period working hours and delivery times be restricted as follows:

“All works and ancillary operations which are audible at the site boundary shall be carried out only between the following hours:

 0800-1800 hrs Monday to Friday  0800-1300 hrs Saturday  At no time on Sundays and Bank Holidays

Deliveries to and removal of plant, equipment, machinery and waste from the site must also only take place within the permitted hours detailed above.”

Dust control

13 Page 39 “Prior to the commencement of development a dust management plan shall be submitted to, and approved in writing by, the local planning authority.”

Contaminated Land Officer Ordnance survey (OS) maps identify that the application address is located within 250 metres of a closed landfill site; a potential source of landfill gas. Paragraph 13.5.1, of Chapter 13 ‘Minimising and Managing Environmental Risks and Pollution’, of the Welsh Government ‘Planning Policy Wales’ (2014) advises: “responsibility for determining the extent and effects of instability or other risks remains that of the developer. It is for the developer to ensure that the land is suitable for the development proposed, as a planning authority does not have a duty of care to landowners”. In consideration of the application proposal (“Development of up to 45 dwellings”), the land- use history of the surrounding area and current planning guidance it is advised that the following Condition and Note to the applicant should be included on any permission granted for Planning Application P/2016/0721: Condition A Condition 1. Site Characterisation An investigation and risk assessment, in addition to any assessment provided with the planning application, must be completed in accordance with a scheme to assess the nature and extent of any contamination on the site, whether or not it originates on the site. The contents of the scheme are subject to the approval in writing of the Local Planning Authority. The investigation and risk assessment must be undertaken by competent persons (a contaminated land specialist with proven experience within the contaminated land industry) and a written report of the findings must be produced. The written report is subject to the approval in writing of the Local Planning Authority. The report of the findings must include: (i) a survey of the extent, scale and nature of contamination; (ii) an assessment of the potential risks to: • human health, • property (existing or proposed) including buildings, crops, livestock, pets, woodland and service lines and pipes, • adjoining land, • groundwaters and surface waters, • ecological systems, • archaeological sites and ancient monuments;

(iii) an appraisal of remedial options, and proposal of the preferred option(s). This must be conducted in accordance with DEFRA and the Environment Agency’s ‘Model Procedures for the Management of Land Contamination, CLR 11’ and the WLGA document ‘Development of land affected by contamination: a guide for developers’ 2012 . Item (iii) above should not be submitted until written approval has been obtained from the Local Planning Authority for items (i) & (ii). Condition 2. Submission of Remediation Scheme A detailed remediation scheme to bring the site to a condition suitable for the intended use by removing unacceptable risks to human health, buildings and other property and the natural and historical environment must be prepared, and is subject to the approval in writing of the Local Planning Authority. The scheme must include all works to be undertaken, proposed remediation objectives and remediation criteria, timetable of works and site management procedures. The scheme must ensure that the site will not qualify as contaminated land under Part 2A of the Environmental Protection Act 1990, The Contaminated Land (Wales)

14 Page 40 Regulations 2001 in relation to the intended use of the land after remediation. The detailed remediation scheme should not be submitted until written approval for Condition 1 has been received from the Local Planning Authority. Condition 3. Implementation of Approved Remediation Scheme The approved remediation scheme must be carried out in accordance with its terms prior to the commencement of development other than that required to carry out remediation, unless otherwise agreed in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The Local Planning Authority must be given two weeks written notification of commencement of the remediation scheme works. Following completion of measures identified in the approved remediation scheme, a verification report (referred to in PPS23 as a validation report) that demonstrates the effectiveness of the remediation carried out must be produced, and is subject to the approval in writing of the Local Planning Authority. The verification report contents must be agreed with the Local Planning Authority before commencement of the remediation scheme. Condition 4. Reporting of Unexpected Contamination In the event that contamination is found at any time when carrying out the approved development that was not previously identified it must be reported in writing immediately to the Local Planning Authority. An investigation and risk assessment must be undertaken in accordance with the requirements of condition 1, and where remediation is necessary a remediation scheme must be prepared in accordance with the requirements of condition 2, which is subject to the approval in writing of the Local Planning Authority. Following completion of measures identified in the approved remediation scheme a verification report must be prepared, which is subject to the approval in writing of the Local Planning Authority in accordance with condition 3. Condition 5. Long Term Monitoring and Maintenance A monitoring and maintenance scheme to include monitoring the long-term effectiveness of the proposed remediation over a period of duration to be agreed in writing with the Local Planning Authority and the provision of reports on the same must be prepared, both of which are subject to the approval in writing of the Local Planning Authority. Within six months following the completion of the measures identified in that scheme and the achievement of the remediation objectives, reports that demonstrate the effectiveness of the monitoring and maintenance carried out must be produced, and submitted to the Local Planning Authority. This must be conducted in accordance with DEFRA and the Environment Agency's 'Model Procedures for the Management of Land Contamination, CLR 11'. Reason (common to all): To ensure that risks from land contamination to the future users of the land and neighbouring land are minimised, together with those to controlled waters, property and ecological systems, and to ensure that the development can be carried out safely without unacceptable risks to workers, neighbours and other offsite receptors [in accordance with policy ____ of the adopted Local Plan (date)]. Note to Applicant Potential Contamination The Council’s guidance leaflet on the development of sites with potential land contamination is attached. Further advice on compliance with this condition may be obtained by contacting the Environmental Health Service on 0870 1923757.

Representations No representations received.

Planning History

15 Page 41 M12351 – General Purpose agricultural building Consent 1984 M26075 – Erection of a 11kv Overhead electricity line. Consent 1996 8469 - Sewerage and Sewage Disposal Scheme Consent 1967

Principal Planning Constraints A489 Historic Landscapes Register

Principal Planning Policies National Planning Policy Planning Policy Wales (9th Edition, 2016) Technical Advice Note 1 - Joint Housing Land Availability Study (2015) Technical Advice Note 2 - Planning and Affordable Housing (2006) Technical Advice Note 5 - Nature Conservation and Planning (2009) Technical Advice Note 12 - Design (2016) Technical Advice Note 15 - Development in Flood Risk Areas (2004) Technical Advice Note 18 – Transport (2007) Technical Advice Note 23 - Economic Development (2014)

Local Planning Policy - Unitary Development Plan for Powys (March 2010) UDP SP2 - Strategic Settlement Hierarchy UDP SP3 - Natural, Historic and Built Environment UDP SP4 - Economic Development and UDP SP5 - Housing Development UDP SP6 - Development and Transport UDP SP14 - Development in Flood Risk Areas UDP GP1 - Development Control UDP GP3 - Design and Energy Conservation UDP GP4 - Highway and Parking Requirements UDP ENV1 - Agricultural Land UDP ENV2 - Safeguarding the Landscape UDP ENV3 - Safeguarding Biodiversity and Natural Habitats UDP HP3 - Housing Land Availability UDP HP4 - Settlement Development Boundaries and Capacities UDP HP5 - Residential Development UDP HP7 - Affordable Housing within Settlements UDP HP8 - Affordable Housing Adjoining Settlements with Development Boundaries UDP T2 - Traffic Management UDP TR2 - Tourist Attractions and Development Areas UDP RL6 - Public Rights of Way and Access to the Countryside UDP DC10 - Mains Sewerage Treatment UDP DC13 - Surface Water Drainage

Affordable Housing for Local Needs Supplementary Planning Guidance (SPG) (July 2011) Powys Residential Design Guide

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

16 Page 42 Officer Appraisal

The application is for outline consent with all matters reserved except access. Should permission be granted, reserved matters (appearance, landscaping, layout and scale) will form separate applications for consideration at a later date. The plans to be considered in relation to this application are:

 Location and Boundary PlanP6947-3/P01/001 Rev A  Access and Indicative layout P6947-3/P01/002 Rev B  Proposed Footway Link P6947-3/P01/003 Rev A

Members are advised to consider this application in accordance with Section 38 (6) of the Planning and Compulsory Purchase Act 2004, which requires that, if regard is to be had to the development plan for the purpose of any determination to be made under the Planning Acts, the determination must be made in accordance with the plan unless material considerations indicate otherwise. For the avoidance of doubt, the development plan in this instance is the Powys Unitary Development Plan 2001-2016.

Principle of development The site subject to this application is located within the settlement development limits of Churchstoke as defined by the Powys Unitary Development Plan (inset map M117) and the majority of the site (1.34ha of 1.7ha) is allocated (M117 HA4) for the provision of 25 residential units. In light of this, there is a presumption in favour of appropriate residential development on this site in accordance with policy HP5. Churchstoke is classified as a key settlement within the UDP and contains a range of community services and facilities. It is also located at the junction of the A489 and A490 with good transport links and is located approximately 10 miles south of Welshpool and 12 miles east of Newtown.

Provision of affordable housing Policy HP7 requires that on sites within settlement development limits for more than 5 dwellings, that a proportion of affordable housing will be sought based on the extent and type of need identified by the Council’s Housing need survey (2002) or other reliable and robust data sources.

The Affordable Housing for Local Needs Supplementary Planning Guidance (SPG) states that our starting point for affordable housing provision on schemes of more than 5 dwellings should be 30-35%. However, the Viability Assessment forming part of the evidence base for the Local Development Plan identifies a guideline of 20% affordable provision in this area of Powys. It is contended that the CIL Viability Assessment provides a more up to date and robust basis for determining the affordable housing contribution than the now historic “guideline” figure contained within the UDP. In light of this, it is recommended that 20% provision of affordable housing is sought and controlled through a section 106 agreement.

Impact on historic environment

Listed Buildings: The general duty with regards to listed buildings in exercising planning functions is set out within Section 66 of the Planning (Listed Buildings and Conservation Areas) Act 1990. It states that the local planning authority shall have special regards to the desirability of preserving the building or its setting or any features of special architectural or historic interest

17 Page 43 which it possesses when considering whether to grant planning permission for a development. This duty is echoed in UDP policy ENV14.

There are limited heritage assets in the locality but there are a number of listed buildings within Churchstoke itself. However, none are considered to have a setting that would be detrimentally affected by the proposed development.

Conservation area: The general duty with regards to conservation areas in exercising planning functions is set out within Section 16 of the Planning (Listed Buildings and Conservation Areas) Act 1990. It states that the local planning authority shall have special regards to the desirability of preserving or enhancing the character or appearance of the area when considering whether to grant planning permission for a development. This duty is echoed in UDP policy ENV11.

It is noted that the Churchstoke Conservation area is located to the west of the proposed development. However, it is not considered detrimentally affected by the proposed development.

Ancient monuments: The desirability of preserving a scheduled ancient monument and its setting is a material consideration in determining a planning application whether the monument is scheduled or not. This is set out in Planning Policy Wales and Circular 60/96. UDP policies ENV17 and ENV18 also set out this consideration at a local level.

It is not consider there would be any unacceptable impacts on scheduled ancient monuments from the proposed development.

Landscapes of special historic interest: Planning Policy Wales explains that local authorities should protect parks and gardens and their settings included in the first part of the register of Landscapes, Parks and Gardens of Special Historic Interest in Wales. This consideration is also set out in UDP policy ENV16

The application area is located inside the Registered Vale of Montgomery Landscape of Outstanding historic Interest and more specifically the Bro Trefldwyn Historic Landscape Character Area. The key characteristics of this area are:- early medieval and medieval nucleated church settlement and expanding modern village, on boundary between valley and hill edge, medieval and early post-medieval encroachment by small farms and cottages onto hill land to north.

The proposed development is considered to accord with these characteristics and given its size. Cadw have confirmed that it is unlikely to have more than a local impact on the registered historic landscape.

Design and layout

Guidance contained within UDP policy HP5 indicates that residential development will be permitted where the development is of an appropriate scale, form and design and general character, to reflect the overall character and appearance of the settlement and surrounding area.

18 Page 44 Whilst design and layout are reserved and will be dealt with at a later point in time, it is relevant to consider whether the number of dwellings proposed could be appropriately developed on the site.

The indicative layout resembles a modern layout comprising a mix of detached, semi- detached and terraced dwellings all with off street parking and private amenity space. More importantly, it shows that 45 dwellings can be accommodated on the site at a density of approximately 27 dwellings per hectare. Building densities in rural areas are often low but in order to make efficient use of land, densities will need to be increased. 27 dwellings per hectate is the figure that is being promoted by the planning policy team for use in the Local Development Plan for town and large villages and thus is considered to be appropriate in this instance.

Detailed design will follow at a later date, if this application is permitted, and will give the opportunity to ensure the dwellings are designed in an appropriate manner to accord with the character of the settlement.

Impact on residential amenity UDP policy GP1 states that development proposals will only be permitted where the amenities enjoyed by the occupants of nearby or proposed properties will not be unacceptably affected.

Although layout is a reserved matter, consideration has been given to the potential separation distances between properties, as well at their siting, orientation and elevation, and it is not believed that the proposal would unacceptably impact on residential amenity.

The comments from the Environmental Health Department are noted with regards to the potential for amenity to be affected during the construction phase of the development and the suggested condition to control this matter has been set out at the end of this report.

It is considered that the proposal is capable of according with UDP policy GP1 and the guidance set out in the Powys Residential Design Guide so far as it relates to residential amenity.

Landscape and visual impacts UDP Policy ENV2 states that proposals should ‘take account of the high quality of the landscape throughout Powys and be appropriate and sensitive to the character and surrounding landscape’. It goes on to state that proposals which are acceptable in principle should ‘contain appropriate measures to ensure satisfactory Integration into the landscape’.

The existing settlement of Churchstoke is largely contained within the landscape, being situated low in the valley and being generally well screened by vegetation. Although, it is noted that the site slightly rises to the east, it is not considered that the proposal would be unacceptable in landscape or visual terms. The proposed site will link the two clusters of development that form Churchstoke settlement and the proposed development will be lower in the valley than other developments to the east. From existing views of Churchstoke, the development will be read as a logical and unharmful extension that will have a negligible impact.

19 Page 45 It is considered that this policy requirement has been met and further consideration will be given to appropriate landscaping at reserved matters stage.

Impact on highway network and parking arrangements UDP policy GP4 requires adequate highway provision in terms of a safe access, visibility, turning and parking.

The applications documents confirm that a sufficient supply of parking will be provided on-site to serve the development. Access to the site is within an existing 30mph speed limit off the A489 and will meet adoptable standards. Conditions have been suggested by the Local Highway Authority and should be attached in full.

The development is also proposed to be supported by a footway link to serve the development. Conditions are proposed to control the timing of works to ensure the provision of the footway prior to the use of the estate.

It is therefore considered that the proposals in respect of highway safety are acceptable and accord with the provisions of UDP policy GP4.

Surface and foul water disposal The application details that the site will be served by mains systems in respect of the disposal of foul waters and that surface water will be dealt with by soakaways within the site.

The proposed use of mains sewerage disposal is complaint with UDP policy DC10 and although full details of the soakaways have not been provided within the application in relation to surface water drainage, it is considered that the site is capable of accommodating appropriate provision to serve the development in accordance with UDP policy DC13.

Both PCC Land Drainage and Severn Trent Water have confirmed that they do not object to the proposed development subject to conditions relating to the agreement of surface and foul water drainage plans. It is therefore considered that proposals in this regard are acceptable subject to conditions which have been attached at the end of this report.

Impact on Ecology The Council acknowledges the need to protect biodiversity from adverse development through careful monitoring, maintenance and the protection of habitats and species worthy of conservation. Therefore the nature conservation polices in the UDP seek to safeguard and enhance biodiversity, and these objectives are also echoed in national policy (TAN5 and Planning Policy Wales).

The applicant has submitted an Ecological Assessment which is considered to be robust in its findings. In addition NRW and the Ecologist have confirmed that the proposals are acceptable subject to the measures set out in the ecological report being secured by condition. Furthermore, it is recommended that additional information be secured and agreed in the form of an ecological enhancement plan, a lighting scheme and a hedgerow protection plan and that the development be carried out in accordance with the agreed details.

In light of the above, the ecological impacts are likely to be acceptable subject to conditions being imposed securing the measures set out in the Ecological Assessment as well as the

20 Page 46 provision and implementation of enhancement measures. The conditions have been set out at the end of this report.

Development and flood risk The application site is within Zone A of the TAN15 Development Advice Maps. In light of this and no objection from NRW, the proposal is considered to comply with planning policy.

Planning obligations Planning Authorities are permitted to seek planning obligations from developers of land in accordance with Circular 13/97. Development Management has consulted the Education Department and the Recreation Officer to see whether any planning obligations are necessary to serve the development. The circular sets out that planning obligations must be necessary, relevant to planning, directly related to the proposed development, fairly and reasonably related in scale and kind to the proposed development and reasonable in all other respects. Furthermore, it states that acceptable development should never be refused because an applicant is unwilling or unable to offer benefits and likewise unacceptable development should never be permitted because of unnecessary or unrelated benefits offered by the applicant. In order for an obligation to be reasonable and directly related to the development proposed, developers should not be expected to pay for facilities which are needed solely in order to resolve existing deficiencies.

In respect of recreation provision, it is noted that Churchstoke benefits from existing recreation facilities that would serve the development. In light of this, it is suggested that a monetary contribution for the long term maintenance of these facilities would be more appropriate than the provision for onsite facilities in this instance. The section 106 agreement will therefore make provision for such monies to be paid.

In respect of education, it is noted that the School Services have not requested a contribution from the developer to serve the existing school.

Section 106 Agreement The Council, who is the applicant in this instance, is unable to sign a legal agreement which affects land within their ownership. As a Section 106 agreement is considered to be an appropriate means of securing affordable housing provision and money for existing recreational facilities, should Members be minded to grant consent, it is recommended that a suitable condition be attached to any planning permission requiring the applicant to enter into an appropriate legal agreement prior to the commencement of any development on site. Such an approach will ensure that an appropriate legal agreement is signed upon the transfer of ownership from Powys County Council to any future landowner thereby ensuring the provision of planning obligations as required by planning policy.

Recommendation

The development is considered to accord with the policies and aspirations of the Unitary Development Plan. It is therefore recommended that the application be approved subject to the conditions set out below and subject to the legal department drafting an appropriate draft legal agreement for a future landowner to enter into upon the sale of land. The legal agreement will contain provisions for the securing of 20% affordable housing and the transfer of money for the long term maintenance of existing recreational facilities within the village.

21 Page 47

1. Details of the layout, appearance, landscaping and scale, (hereinafter called ""the reserved matters"") shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the local planning authority before any development begins and the development shall be carried out as approved.

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

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

4. No development shall commence until full engineering details and drawings for the planned flood risk mitigation works and watercourse maintenance strip have been submitted and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. These details shall include a 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 flood risk mitigation works throughout its lifetime. These flood risk mitigation works shall be operational prior to first occupation of any dwelling.

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

6. The gradient of the access shall be constructed so as not to exceed 1 in 30 for the first 9 metres measured from edge of the adjoining carriageway along the centre line of the access and shall be retained at this gradient for as long as the development remains in existence.

7. The centre line of the first 15 metres of the access road measured from the edge of the adjoining carriageway shall be constructed at right angles to that edge of the said carriageway and be retained at that angle for as long as the development remains in existence.

8. Within 5 days from the commencement of the development the access shall be constructed so that there is clear visibility from a point 1.05 metres above ground level at the centre of the access and 2.4 metres distant from the edge of the adjoining carriageway, to points 0.26 metres above ground level at the edge of the adjoining carriageway and 43 metres distant in each direction measured from the centre of the access along the edge of the adjoining carriageway and 10 metres distant from the edge of the adjoining carriageway and 10 metres in each direction. Nothing shall be planted, erected or allowed to grow on the areas of land so formed that would obstruct the visibility and the visibility shall be maintained free from obstruction for as long as the development hereby permitted remains in existence.

22 Page 48 9. Within 5 days from the commencement of the development the area of the access to be used by vehicles is to be constructed to a minimum of 410mm depth, comprising a minimum of 250mm of sub-base material, 100mm of bituminous macadam base course material and 60mm of bituminous macadam binder course material for a distance of 15 metres from the edge of the adjoining carriageway. Any use of alternative materials is to be agreed in writing by the Local Planning Authority prior to the access being constructed.

10. Prior to the occupation of any dwelling, provision shall be made within the curtilage of the site for the parking of not less than 1 cars per bedroom (maximum 3) excluding any garage space provided. The parking areas shall be retained for their designated use in perpetuity.

11. Within 5 days from the commencement of the development provision shall be made within the curtilage of the site for the parking of all construction vehicles together with a vehicle turning area. This parking and turning area shall be constructed to a depth of 0.45 metres in crusher run or sub-base and maintained free from obstruction at all times such that all vehicles serving the site shall park within the site and both enter and leave the site in a forward gear for the duration of the construction of the development.

12. Prior to the occupation of the development a radius of 10.5 metres shall be provided from the carriageway of the county highway on each side of the access to the development site and shall be maintained for as long as the development remains in existence.

13. Any internal side-road junctions shall have a corner radii of 6 metres.

14. The centre line radii of all curves on the proposed estate road shall be not less than 20 metres.

15. There shall only be a single vehicular and pedestrian access to serve the development hereby permitted.

16. Prior to the occupation of the development a 2.0 metre wide footpath shall be provided as detailed on the approved plan and shall be retained at for as long as the development hereby permitted remains in existence.

17. No building shall be occupied before the estate road carriageway and one footway shall be constructed to and including binder course level to an adoptable standard including the provision of any salt bins, surface water drainage and street lighting in front of that building and to the junction with the county highway.

18. The estate road carriageway and all footways shall be fully completed, in accordance with the details to be agreed in writing by the Local Planning Authority, upon the issuing of the Building Regulations Completion Certificate for the last house or within two years from the commencement of the development, whichever is the sooner. The agreed standard of completion shall be maintained for as long as the development remains in existence.

19. Prior to the occupation of any dwelling the area of the access to be used by vehicles is to be finished in a 40mm bituminous surface course for a distance of 15 metres from the edge of the adjoining carriageway. This area will be maintained to this standard for as long as the development remains in existence,

23 Page 49

20. Within 5 days from the commencement of the development any existing means of access shall be stopped up, in materials to be agreed in writing by the Local Planning Authority and this shall be retained for as long as the development is in existence.

21. Upon formation of the visibility splays as detailed in condition 8 above the centreline of any new or relocated hedge should be positioned not less than 1.0 metre to the rear of the visibility splay and retained in this position as long as the development remains in existence.

22. The area of each private drive and any turning area is to be metalled and surfaced in bituminous macadam, concrete or block paviours, prior to the occupation of that dwelling and retained for as long as the development remains in existence.

23. No storm water drainage from the site shall be allowed to discharge onto the county highway.

24. The recommendations (page 28 &29 of the extended phase 1 habitat survey report) regarding Hedgerows (paragraphs 11.1 and 11.2) Birds (11.4), lights (11.3), Pollution prevention plan (11.5) and Ecological enhancement (11.6) of the Ecological Report by Rachel Price dated 04/07/16 shall be adhered to and implemented in full.

25. The mitigation regarding Reptiles on page 27 (paragraph 10.3) of the Extended Phase 1 habitat survey report by Rachel Price dated July 2016 shall be adhered to and implemented in full.

26. Prior to commencement of development, a detailed Ecological Enhancement Plan, Lighting Plan and Hedgerow Protection Plan shall be submitted to the Local Planning Authority and implemented as approved and maintained thereafter.

27. The recommendations regarding Hedgerows and birds in Paragraph 8.4 of the ‘Addendum Ecological Statement footway link to industrial access’ produced for Powys County Council on 15/08/16 by Rachel Price shall be adhered to and implemented in full.

28. Prior to the commencement of development, a Pollution Prevention Plan shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The agreed measures shall be implemented in full.

29. Any works relating to the construction of the development shall not take place outside the following hours: Mon-Fri 0800-2000 and Saturdays 0800-1300 with no working on Sundays or bank holidays.

30. Prior to the commencement of development a dust management plan shall be submitted to, and approved in writing by, the local planning authority. The agreed measures shall be implemented in full.

31. An investigation and risk assessment, in addition to any assessment provided with the planning application, must be completed in accordance with a scheme to assess the nature and extent of any contamination on the site, whether or not it originates on the site. The contents of the scheme are subject to the approval in writing of the Local Planning

24 Page 50 Authority. The investigation and risk assessment must be undertaken by competent persons (a contaminated land specialist with proven experience within the contaminated land industry) and a written report of the findings must be produced. The written report is subject to the approval in writing of the Local Planning Authority. The report of the findings must include: (i) a survey of the extent, scale and nature of contamination; (ii) an assessment of the potential risks to: • human health, • property (existing or proposed) including buildings, crops, livestock, pets, woodland and service lines and pipes, • adjoining land, • groundwaters and surface waters, • ecological systems, • archaeological sites and ancient monuments;

(iii) an appraisal of remedial options, and proposal of the preferred option(s). This must be conducted in accordance with DEFRA and the Environment Agency’s ‘Model Procedures for the Management of Land Contamination, CLR 11’ and the WLGA document ‘Development of land affected by contamination: a guide for developers’ 2012 . Item (iii) above should not be submitted until written approval has been obtained from the Local Planning Authority for items (i) & (ii).

32. A detailed remediation scheme to bring the site to a condition suitable for the intended use by removing unacceptable risks to human health, buildings and other property and the natural and historical environment must be prepared, and is subject to the approval in writing of the Local Planning Authority. The scheme must include all works to be undertaken, proposed remediation objectives and remediation criteria, timetable of works and site management procedures. The scheme must ensure that the site will not qualify as contaminated land under Part 2A of the Environmental Protection Act 1990, The Contaminated Land (Wales) Regulations 2001 in relation to the intended use of the land after remediation. The detailed remediation scheme should not be submitted until written approval for Condition 9 has been received from the Local Planning Authority.

33. The approved remediation scheme must be carried out in accordance with its terms prior to the commencement of development other than that required to carry out remediation, unless otherwise agreed in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The Local Planning Authority must be given two weeks written notification of commencement of the remediation scheme works. Following completion of measures identified in the approved remediation scheme, a verification report (referred to in PPS23 as a validation report) that demonstrates the effectiveness of the remediation carried out must be produced, and is subject to the approval in writing of the Local Planning Authority. The verification report contents must be agreed with the Local Planning Authority before commencement of the remediation scheme.

34. In the event that contamination is found at any time when carrying out the approved development that was not previously identified it must be reported in writing immediately to the Local Planning Authority. An investigation and risk assessment must be undertaken in accordance with the requirements of condition 31, and where remediation is necessary a remediation scheme must be prepared in accordance with the requirements of condition 32, which is subject to the approval in writing of the Local Planning Authority.

25 Page 51 Following completion of measures identified in the approved remediation scheme a verification report must be prepared, which is subject to the approval in writing of the Local Planning Authority in accordance with condition 33.

35. A monitoring and maintenance scheme to include monitoring the long-term effectiveness of the proposed remediation over a period of duration to be agreed in writing with the Local Planning Authority and the provision of reports on the same must be prepared, both of which are subject to the approval in writing of the Local Planning Authority. Within six months following the completion of the measures identified in that scheme and the achievement of the remediation objectives, reports that demonstrate the effectiveness of the monitoring and maintenance carried out must be produced, and submitted to the Local Planning Authority. This must be conducted in accordance with DEFRA and the Environment Agency's 'Model Procedures for the Management of Land Contamination, CLR 11'.

36. No development shall commence until an appropriate legal agreement securing the provision of the affordable housing units and the transfer of money for the long term maintenance of existing recreational facilities within the village has been entered into with Powys County Council.

Reasons 1. To enable the Local Planning Authority to exercise proper control over the development in accordance with Section 92 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990. 2. Required to be imposed by Section 92 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990. 3. Required to be imposed by Section 92 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990. 4. To ensure that the proposed development does not compromise the function of the existing waterbody and that any proposed alterations are fully compliant with regulations and are of robust design in accordance with policy DC13 of the Powys Unitary Development Plan. 5. To ensure that the proposed drainage systems for the site are fully compliant with regulations and are of robust design in accordance with policy DC13 of the Powys Unitary Development Plan. 6 to 15 In the interests of highway safety in accordance with policies GP1 and GP4 of the Powys Unitary Development Plan. 16 & 17 To ensure that adequate provision is made for pedestrian access to serve the approved development in accordance with policies GP1 and GP4 of the Powys Unitary Development Plan. 18 to 23 In the interests of highway safety in accordance with policies GP1 and GP4 of the Powys Unitary Development Plan. 24. To comply with Powys County Council’s UDP Policies SP3, ENV2 and ENV7 in relation to The Natural Environment and to meet the requirements of Planning Policy Wales (Edition 9, 2016), TAN 5: Nature Conservation and Planning and the Environment (Wales) Act 2016. 25. To comply with Powys County Council’s UDP Policies SP3, ENV2 and ENV7 in relation to The Natural Environment and to meet the requirements of Planning Policy Wales (Edition 9, 2016), TAN 5: Nature Conservation and Planning and the Environment (Wales) Act 2016. 26. To comply with Powys County Council’s UDP Policies SP3 and ENV3 in relation to The Natural Environment and to meet the requirements of Planning Policy Wales (Edition 9, 2016) TAN 5: Nature Conservation and Planning and the Environment (Wales) Act 2016.

26 Page 52 27. To comply with Powys County Council’s UDP Policies SP3, ENV2 and ENV7 in relation to The Natural Environment and to meet the requirements of Planning Policy Wales (Edition 9, 2016), TAN 5: Nature Conservation and Planning and the Environment (Wales) Act 2016. 28. To protect the water environment from potential pollution during the construction phase and to comply with Powys County Council’s UDP Policies SP3 and ENV3 in relation to The Natural Environment and to meet the requirements of Planning Policy Wales (Edition 9 2016), TAN 5: Nature Conservation and Planning and the Environment (Wales) Act 2016. 29 & 30.To safeguard residential amenity in accordance with policy GP1 of the Powys Unitary Development Plan. 31 to 35. To ensure that risks from land contamination to the future users of the land and neighbouring land are minimised, together with those to controlled waters, property and ecological systems, and to ensure that the development can be carried out safely without unacceptable risks to workers, neighbours and other offsite receptors in accordance with policyDC15 of the Powys Unitary Development Plan. 36. In order to ensure the provision of planning obligations in accordance with policy GP2 of the Powys Unitary Development Plan (2010), and Planning Policy Wales (2016).

______Case Officer: Louise Evans- Planning Officer Tel: 01938 551127 E-mail:[email protected]

27 Page 53 Page 54 PTLRW4 - 20174

Planning, Taxi Licensing and Rights of Way Committee Report

Application No: P/2016/0326 Grid Ref: 325940.13 320757.75

Community Carreghofa Valid Date: Officer: Council: 08/04/2016 Kate Bowen

Applicant: Mr David Wyatt, Ty Coch Cottage, Llynclys, Oswestry, SY10 8LJ

Location: Land off Gwelfyn, Gwelfyn, Carreghofa, Llanymynech, Powys, SY22 6LA

Proposal: Erection of up to 3 dwellings and construction of vehicular access (outline)

Application Application for Outline Planning Permission Type:

Reason for Committee determination

The proposal is a departure from the development plan and is recommended for approval.

Site Location and Description

The site is located to the west of the residential housing estate known as Gwelfryn in the area of Carreghofa, Llanymynech. The application has been submitted in outline with access to be considered at the outline stage for the construction of up to three dwellings together with a vehicular access. The submission details that the three dwellings would all be four bedroomed with the indicative scale ranging from 141m² (10m x 12.5m to 189m² (11.5m x 13.5m) with eaves heights approximately 4.8m and ridge heights of up to 9m. The detached/integral garages would be up to 35m² (6m x 6m) with eaves height of 2.2m and ridge heights of approximately 5.35m.

The indicative layout demonstrates that access would be gained off the private estate road of Gwelfryn with a new private drive leading to access, turning and parking facilities for the proposed dwellings. The application site has an area of 0.44 hectares.

Consultee Response

Carreghofa Community Council

At its meeting held on Tuesday 26th April 2016 Carreghofa Community Council considered the above planning application and submits the following comments:-

1. Carreghofa Community Council notes that this application lies outside the Powys Local Development Plan (LDP) Development Boundary and that it has not been taken forward as an allocation in the latest iteration of the draft LDP. It has been rejected twice before, most recently in 2003.

1 Page 55 2. The Pre-Planning Application Enquiry (PPAE) expressed concern about the character of the proposed build, which has been strongly echoed in current residents’ responses (8 submitted in writing to date and 1 from the floor at a recent Council meeting). Gwelfryn currently consists of 9 bungalows. The proposal envisages up to 3 x 4 bedroom houses reaching 4.8m at the eaves. Carreghofa Community Council believes that would adversely affect the privacy of existing properties (acoustically the site forms a natural amphitheatre) and not be in keeping with the character of the area. 3. The applicants have responded to ecological and contamination concerns raised in the PPAE by proposing a 15m margin of unbuilt-on land. This has the effect of forcing the proposed houses towards the centre of the plot, which is the lowest and consequently the wettest part of the site. Residents have pointed out that the area includes a small but ecologically unusual peat bog which they have been developing with the advice of Montgomeryshire Wildlife Trust over the past eight years. Any building on this site will inevitably alter the flood dynamics with risk of loss of habitat (badgers, bats and newts have been seen using the area) and increased danger of flooding on existing properties. Before any building on the site can be approved, Carreghofa Community Council would wish to see more detailed plans to deal with drainage and sewage and responding to the technical issues raised in their response by Severn Trent Water, whose existing pumping station appears to be already operating at capacity. 4. The only current vehicular access to the site, is by an unadopted, narrow road, with a right angled bend that the applicants themselves state makes it unsuitable for farm traffic, and what the Highways Agency describes as an already inadequate exit onto the public highway. Residents, as well as the Highways Agency, are concerned at additional traffic on this road during building operations and afterwards. Further detail is also required as to how the site would be connected to existing foot and cycle paths (which predominantly lie on the far side of the Canal), which is claimed as a potential benefit by the applicants.

In conclusion, Carreghofa Community Council wishes to lodge an objection to the development as currently framed.

PCC Building Control

Please note Building Regulations required on this proposal.

PCC Highway Authority

First response:

Having visited the site the visibility when egressing the existing housing estate Gwelfryn onto the C2099 is sub-standard in a westerly direction and any increased use of this sub-standard access cannot be supported.

Furthermore, the site as many of these applications are has no footways connecting back into the village of Llanymynech and therefore is not considered to be sustainable as identified within the Active Travel Bill.

In view of the above the HA is unable to support the application and recommend refusal in the interests of highway safety.

2 Page 56 Second response:

Whilst I recognise the enthusiasm of the submission a simple drive of the highway does not give us sufficient evidence as to the 85 percentile of speeds. In order to consider this further a full 7 day ATC should be undertaken.

Once that information is received we can than offer our formal observations.

Third response:

We have now received the ATC speed survey as requested and the 85th percentile speed in the westerly direction is 23.7mph thus requiring 31 meters of visibility in that direction which can be obtained on site. In view of this evidence being provided the Highway Authority wish to withdraw their objection.

Please apply the following conditions:-

HC1 Prior to the occupation of any dwelling any entrance gates shall be set back at least 5.5 metres distant from the edge of the adjoining carriageway and shall be constructed so as to be incapable of opening towards the highway and shall be retained in this position and form of construction for as long as the dwelling/development hereby permitted remains in existence.

HC2 The gradient of the access shall be constructed so as not to exceed 1 in 15 for the first 5.5 metres measured from edge of the adjoining carriageway along the centre line of the access and shall be retained at this gradient for as long as the development remains in existence.

HC4 Within 5 days from the commencement of the development the access shall be constructed so that there is clear visibility from a point 1.05 metres above ground level at the centre of the access and 2.4 metres distant from the edge of the adjoining carriageway, to points 0.26 metres above ground level at the edge of the adjoining carriageway and 25 metres distant in each direction measured from the centre of the access along the edge of the adjoining carriageway and 5.5 metres distant from the edge of the adjoining carriageway and 6.0 metres in each direction. Nothing shall be planted, erected or allowed to grow on the areas of land so formed that would obstruct the visibility and the visibility shall be maintained free from obstruction for as long as the development hereby permitted remains in existence.

HC7 Within 5 days from the commencement of the development the area of the access to be used by vehicles is to be constructed to a minimum of 410mm depth, comprising a minimum of 250mm of sub-base material, 100mm of bituminous macadam base course material and 60mm of bituminous macadam binder course material for a distance of 5.5 metres from the edge of the adjoining carriageway. Any use of alternative materials is to be agreed in writing by the Local Planning Authority prior to the access being constructed.

HC8 Prior to the occupation of any dwelling, provision shall be made within the curtilage of the site for the parking of not less than 1 car per bedroom (maximum 3) excluding any garage space provided together with a turning space such that all vehicles serving the site may both enter and leave the site in a forward gear. The parking and turning areas shall be

3 Page 57 retained for their designated use for as long as the development hereby permitted remains in existence.

HC11 Within 5 days from the commencement of the development provision shall be made within the curtilage of the site for the parking of all construction vehicles together with a vehicle turning area. This parking and turning area shall be constructed to a depth of 0.45 metres in crusher run or sub-base and maintained free from obstruction at all times such that all vehicles serving the site shall park within the site and both enter and leave the site in a forward gear for the duration of the construction of the development.

HC21 Prior to the occupation of any dwelling the area of the access to be used by vehicles is to be finished in a 40mm bituminous surface course for a distance of 5.5 metres from the edge of the adjoining carriageway. This area will be maintained to this standard for as long as the development remains in existence,

HC22 Within 5 days from the commencement of the development any existing means of access shall be stopped up, in materials to be agreed in writing by the Local Planning Authority and this shall be retained for as long as the development is in existence.

HC30 Upon formation of the visibility splays as detailed in HC4 above the centreline of any new or relocated hedge should be positioned not less than 1.0 metre to the rear of the visibility splay and retained in this position as long as the development remains in existence.

Wales & West Utilities

According to our mains records Wales & West Utilities has no apparatus in the area of your enquiry. However Gas pipes owned by other GT's and also privately owned may be present in this area. Information with regard to such pipes should be obtained from the owners. Safe digging practices, in accordance with HS(G)47, must be used to verify and establish the actual position of mains, pipes, services and other apparatus on site before any mechanical plant is used. It is your responsibility to ensure that this information is provided to all persons (either direct labour or contractors) working for you on or near gas apparatus. Please note that the plans are only valid for 28 days from the date of issue and updated plans must be requested before any work commences on site if this period has expired.

Severn Trent Water

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

Waste Water Comments:

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

I can confirm that we have no objections to the proposals subject to the inclusion of the following condition: · The development hereby permitted should not commence until drainage plans for the disposal of foul and surface water flows have been submitted to and approved by the Local Planning Authority, and

4 Page 58 · The scheme shall be implemented in accordance with the approved details before the development is first brought into use. This is to ensure that the development is provided with a satisfactory means of drainage as well as to reduce or exacerbate a flooding problem and to minimise the risk of pollution

Additional Waste Water Comments:

There is a pumping station close to the site and any new development must not restrict our access to the Sewage Pumping Station (SPS). We will require free access to the SPS at all times in order to complete any programmed routine maintenance tasks and also for any emergency reactive visits in case of failure. Please note that due to the close proximity of the proposed new development the occupant may experience noise and/or smell pollution. In order to minimise disruption to any future occupant(s), we would advise that all habitable buildings are constructed a minimum of 15metres from the curtilage of the SPS compound.

PCC Built Heritage

No response received.

PCC Contaminated Land

The following document has been submitted in support of Planning Application P/2016/0326:

 Brownfield Solutions Ltd ‘Land off Gwelfryn, Carreghofa, Llanymynech: Desk Study Assessment Report’ (ref: DMG/C3126/5869) February 2016.

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

Advice Consultations 1. Paragraph 3.6.1 of the ‘Desk Study Assessment Report’ states: “Llanymynech is in an area requiring Basic Radon precautions in foundations in accordance with BRE Report 211 ‘Radon – Guidance on protective measures for new dwellings’ 2007 Edition”. Development Control should consult with Building Control to confirm the requirements for Radon protection measures in the proposed dwellings. It is requested that any advice from Building Control is also provided to this Section.

2. Concerning controlled waters it has been concluded in section 4.5 ‘Preliminary Conceptual Site Model’ of the ‘Desk Study Assessment Report’ that: “No leachable contaminants are expected to arise from the made ground present on the south of the site. We therefore consider the risk to the Secondary A aquifer underlying the site to be low”.

Development Control should consult with Natural Resources Wales (NRW) to confirm the conclusions of the preliminary risk assessment in respect of the risks to controlled waters. It is requested that any advice from NRW is also provided to this Section.

Preliminary Investigation 3. The preliminary investigation has not included any reconnaissance of the site, neighbouring land or local area. As detailed in subsection 6.2.2 ‘Site Reconnaissance’ of

5 Page 59 BS10175:2011+A1:2013 ‘Investigation of Potentially Contaminated Sites – Code of Practice’ a site reconnaissance visit should be undertaken to: “verify information on the site collated during the desk study”.

In respect of human health paragraph 4.5.4 of the ‘Desk Study Assessment Report’ states: “The railway lands which are shown abutting the western boundary of the site potentially have many associated contaminants. However the railway was also situated in a cutting placing it beneath the site. Most contaminants would be confined to this area of cutting”.

The topography of the application site dips from East to West and as a consequence part of the site’s Western boundary meets the level of the former railway line. This could have been identified if a site reconnaissance visit had been undertaken. Furthermore, this information could have been used to more accurately inform the preliminary risk assessment and should be considered in the design of any intrusive site investigation.

4. The preliminary conceptual site model for human health, presented in section 4.5 ‘Preliminary Conceptual Site Model’ of the ‘Desk Study Assessment Report’, identifies ‘Railway Lands’ as a potential source of land contamination. Furthermore, paragraph 4.5.4 of the report identifies, in respect of the railway lands, that: “there is a risk that mobile contaminants such as TPH could pass beneath the site”.

As the Western boundary of the application site adjoins the former railway line it is advised that perched/shallow groundwater should be included in the conceptual site model as a potential source and pathway for mobile contaminants from this off-site source. Furthermore, an appropriate investigation and assessment of the potential risks to human health from contaminants in perched/shallow groundwater should be undertaken.

5. Subsection 6.3 ‘Further Work’ of the ‘Desk Study Assessment Report’ recommends that the following works are undertaken:

 Site investigation including the installation of ground gas monitoring standpipes  Testing to confirm the chemistry of the made ground  Ground gas monitoring  Foundation design

A detailed proposal for the further works, completed by an experienced and qualified environmental consultant, should be submitted for review and approval prior to being undertaken.

Furthermore, the intrusive site investigation works should be designed, justified and completed in accordance with current guidance and best practice, such as; BS10175:2011+A1:2013 ‘Investigation of Potentially Contaminated Sites – Code of Practice’ and BS8576:2013 ‘Guidance on Investigations for Ground Gases – Permanent Gases and Volatile Organic Compounds (VOCs)’ and in consideration of the advice provided above.

Summary The preliminary investigation has identified potential risks to the proposed development, associated with potential contaminant sources (made ground, railway land, and landfill sites) located on and off site, and provided recommendations for investigation.

6 Page 60

Therefore, it is advised that the following Condition and Note to the applicant should be included on any permission granted for Planning Application P/2016/0326:

Condition A Condition 1. Site Characterisation An investigation and risk assessment, in addition to any assessment provided with the planning application, must be completed in accordance with a scheme to assess the nature and extent of any contamination on the site, whether or not it originates on the site. The contents of the scheme are subject to the approval in writing of the Local Planning Authority. The investigation and risk assessment must be undertaken by competent persons (a contaminated land specialist with proven experience within the contaminated land industry) and a written report of the findings must be produced. The written report is subject to the approval in writing of the Local Planning Authority. The report of the findings must include: (i) a survey of the extent, scale and nature of contamination; (ii) an assessment of the potential risks to: • human health, • property (existing or proposed) including buildings, crops, livestock, pets, woodland and service lines and pipes, • adjoining land, • groundwaters and surface waters, • ecological systems, • archaeological sites and ancient monuments; (iii) an appraisal of remedial options, and proposal of the preferred option(s). This must be conducted in accordance with DEFRA and the Environment Agency’s ‘Model Procedures for the Management of Land Contamination, CLR 11’ and the WLGA document ‘Development of land affected by contamination: a guide for developers’ 2012 . Item (iii) above should not be submitted until written approval has been obtained from the Local Planning Authority for items (i) & (ii).

Condition 2. Submission of Remediation Scheme A detailed remediation scheme to bring the site to a condition suitable for the intended use by removing unacceptable risks to human health, buildings and other property and the natural and historical environment must be prepared, and is subject to the approval in writing of the Local Planning Authority. The scheme must include all works to be undertaken, proposed remediation objectives and remediation criteria, timetable of works and site management procedures. The scheme must ensure that the site will not qualify as contaminated land under Part 2A of the Environmental Protection Act 1990, The Contaminated Land (Wales) Regulations 2001 in relation to the intended use of the land after remediation. The detailed remediation scheme should not be submitted until written approval for Condition 1 has been received from the Local Planning Authority.

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

7 Page 61 Following completion of measures identified in the approved remediation scheme, a verification report (referred to in PPS23 as a validation report) that demonstrates the effectiveness of the remediation carried out must be produced, and is subject to the approval in writing of the Local Planning Authority. The verification report contents must be agreed with the Local Planning Authority before commencement of the remediation scheme.

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

Condition 5. Long Term Monitoring and Maintenance A monitoring and maintenance scheme to include monitoring the long-term effectiveness of the proposed remediation over a period of duration to be agreed in writing with the Local Planning Authority and the provision of reports on the same must be prepared, both of which are subject to the approval in writing of the Local Planning Authority. Within six months following the completion of the measures identified in that scheme and the achievment of the remediation objectives, reports that demonstrate the effectiveness of the monitoring and maintenance carried out must be produced, and submitted to the Local Planning Authority.

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

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

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

PCC Ecologist

No response received.

PCC Land Drainage

No response received.

8 Page 62 Natural Resources Wales (NRW)

Thank you for referring the above application which NRW received by letter on the 11th of April 2016. This advice applies to the proposal as submitted.

We have significant concerns with the proposed development as submitted. We recommend that planning permission should only be given if the following requirements can be met. We consider it likely that the concerns can be addressed and would not object provided the proposal meets the requirements we have identified.

Summary of Requirements:

Requirement 1 - Follow mitigation as described in section 4.42 of the ecological report

Requirement 2 - That construction activities including storage of material remains with the boundary of the application as identified by the red lines on planSA21552/02 Date Jan2016

Requirement 3 - Measures to deal with any findings of Unsuspected Contamination

Requirement 4 - Reasonable Avoidance Measures EPS Bats, Otters, Great Crested Newts, & Badgers

Requirement 5 - Lighting Plan

Montgomery Canal SAC / SSSI

NRW note that the proposed development lies approximately 17m to the east of the Montgomery Canal SAC / SSSI. The LPA would be the competent authority to undertake a screening assessment as prescribed under the Conservation of Habitats and Species Regulations 2010 (as amended). NRW consider that provided the mitigations/ recommendations made in the Ecology report (under Mitigation Section 4.4.2) are incorporated within a method statement for the application we consider that there would be no likely significant effect on the Montgomery Canal SAC.

Requirement 1 - Follow mitigation as described in section 4.42 of the ecological report

Requirement 2 - That construction activities including storage of material remains with the boundary of the application as identified by the red lines on planSA21552/02 Date Jan2016

Historic Landfill

NRW consider that planning permission should only be granted to the proposed development as submitted if the following planning condition is imposed as set out below. Without this condition, the proposed development on this site poses an unacceptable risk to the environment and we would wish to object to the application.

Requirement 3 - NLQ C 04 Unsuspected contamination

If, during development, contamination not previously identified is found to be present at the site then no further development (unless otherwise agreed in writing with the Local Planning

9 Page 63 Authority) shall be carried out until the developer has submitted, and obtained written approval from the Local Planning Authority for, an amendment to or production of a remediation strategy detailing how this unsuspected contamination shall be dealt with.

Reasons The site is within close proximity to a historic landfill that received household, special and liquid sludge waste and directly adjacent to former railway land. The historic landfill is dated pre 1990’s and therefore unlikely to have incorporated pollution prevention and control measures. In addition to this, boundaries of historic landfills are often poorly recorded and unclear.

Superficial deposits beneath the site are classified as Secondary A Aquifer. These are permeable layers capable of supporting water supplies at a local rather than strategic scale, and in some cases forming an important source of base flow to rivers. There are 3 groundwater abstraction wells within 1km of the site boundary suggesting that the secondary aquifer is being used at a local scale.

The Montgomery Canal borders the site to the south which is a designated SAC and SSSI. Based on the above, it is considered possible that there may be unidentified areas of contamination at the site that could pose a risk to controlled waters if they are not remediated.

European Protected Species (EPS) – Bats, Otters, Great and Great Crested Newts

NRW note that the ecological report submitted in support of the above application (Preliminary Ecological Assessment by Turnstone Ecology dated February 2016) has identified no presence of GB fully and European Protected Species (EPS) at the application site. However, whilst no evidence was found during the inspection of the proposal site, no full surveys were carried out and potential for presence/use by bats, GCN, otters was identified. Bats, otters, GCN and their breeding and resting places are protected under the Conservation of Habitats and Species Regulations 2010 (as amended). Any development that would contravene the protection afforded to these species under the Regulations would require a derogation licence from Natural Resources Wales. A licence may only be authorised if: 1. There is no satisfactory alternative and 2. The action authorised will not be detrimental to the maintenance of the population of the species concerned at a favourable conservation status in its natural range. In addition, 3. The development works to be authorised must be for the purposes of preserving public health or safety, or for other imperative reasons of overriding public interest, including those of a social or economic nature and beneficial consequences of primary importance for the environment.

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

Although there are habitats on and adjacent to the site that are suitable for use by protected species such as otter, GCN, bats and dormouse, in this case, the ecological report concludes

10 Page 64 that the proposed development is not likely to impact adversely on the EPS, provided avoidance measures as described in the report are implemented.

UK Fully Protected Species - Badgers

Badgers and their setts are protected under the Protection of Badgers Act 1992, under which it is an offence to intentionally or recklessly damage, destroy, obstruct access to a sett as well as disturbing a badger when in the sett.

Provided a distance of 30m is kept from the area identified in the report as being likely to host a badger setts (railway embankment) then the likelihood of disturbing badgers and or/damaging their setts will be minimal. If this distance cannot be kept, then a badger survey would be required prior to commencement of works and a license to disturb badgers obtained if required. Reasonable Avoidance Measures (RAMs) to prevent trapping will also be needed.

Requirement 4 – Reasonable Avoidance Measures for EPS Bats, Otters, Great Crested Newts, & Badgers

The development represents a lower risk to EPS in this case, therefore we do not consider that the development is likely to be detrimental to the maintenance of the population of the species concerned at a favourable conservation status in their natural range and we do not object to the proposal, subject to the following requirements:

No development shall take place (including ground works, site clearance) until great crested newt / otter / bat Reasonable Avoidance Measures on the site have been submitted to and approved in writing by the local Planning authority. RAMS shall include:

I. Measures to protect badgers/otters from being trapped in open excavations and / or pipe and culverts are submitted to and approved in writing by the local planning authority. The measures may include a. creation of sloping ramps to allow badgers to exit excavations; b. open pipework greater than 150mm outside diameter, being blocked off at the end of each working day. II. Measures to minimise likelihood of affecting amphibians, including great crested newts (and reptiles) in line with the recommendations made in section 4.5.8 of the Preliminary Ecological Assessment report dated February 2016 by Turnstone Ecology. III. Timing of RAM implementation and construction works. IV. Measure to minimise disturbing badgers and otter movements. Measures may include the creation of a 20m fenced off buffer area separating the South west hedgerow from the development site. No machinery or works to be carried out within the buffer zone. V. Root Protection Zone measures.

Requirement 5 – Lighting Plan

The implementation of a site lighting plan. Security lighting must be installed in a way that minimise/avoid light spill in areas that could potentially be used by foraging and commuting bats (all tree lines and hedgerows surrounding the site) and otters (river corridor). Low level and low wattage, as well as low pressure sodium or high pressure sodium lamps, should be preferred to mercury or metal halide lamps.

11 Page 65 This advice applies to the proposal in its present form. If the plans are changed in ways that may affect any protected species on or near the site, you would need a revised ecological report that took account of such changes. Please consult us again if a revised report concluded that this is no longer a lower risk case. Please also note that any changes to plans between planning consent and the licence application may affect the outcome of a licence application.

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

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

Canal and River Trust

Thank you for your consultation dated 11 April 2016 in respect of the above.

The Canal & River Trust is a statutory consultee under the Town and Country Planning (Development Management Procedure) (England) Order 2015.

The Canal & River Trust is a company limited by guarantee and registered as a charity. It is separate from government but still the recipient of a significant amount of government funding.

The Trust has a range of charitable objects including:

• To hold in trust or own and to operate and manage inland waterways for public benefit, use and enjoyment; • To protect and conserve objects and buildings of heritage interest; • To further the conservation, protection and improvement of the natural environment of inland waterways; and • To promote sustainable development in the vicinity of any inland waterways for the benefit of the public.

After due consideration of the application details, the Canal & River Trust has no objections to the proposed development, subject to the imposition of a suitably worded condition to secure ecological mitigation.

In line with the National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF) the Trust has an obligation to conserve, protect and improve the natural environment of inland waterways. The Montgomery Canal adjacent to the south eastern boundary of the site is a designated Site of Special Scientific Interest (SSSI) and Special Area of Conservation (SAC) which under policy ENV4 of the Powys Unitary Development Plan, the Council seeks to protect. Furthermore the Authority must pay due regard to the Habitats Regulations 2010. Therefore both the Trust

12 Page 66 and the Council must be confident that the proposed development would not impact the designated sites.

The SSSI supports internationally rare and threatened Floating Water Plantain (Luronium natans) and other rare plants including Scarce Grass-wrack Pondweed (Potamogeton compressus). It is critical that these statutory sites are safeguarded and to ensure the protection of the water quality of the canal.

Although no detailed ecological mitigation is provided at this stage, the mitigation recommendations within the Preliminary Ecological Assessment produced by Turnstone Ecology to address potential impacts on the SSSI/SAC habitats and species would in principle provide sufficient safeguards. Therefore if the Council is minded to approve the application the Trust would request the following condition:

Prior to the commencement of development a detailed Ecological Mitigation Strategy based on the mitigation recommendations as set out at paragraph 4.4.2 of the Preliminary Ecological Assessment produced by Turnstone Ecology, dated 24 February 2016, reference R01-Ecological Assessment Rev01 shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The development shall be carried out in accordance with the agreed Ecological Mitigation Strategy.

Reason: In the interests of safeguarding the nationally and internationally designated sites within the vicinity of the site and to comply with policies ENV3, ENV4 and ENV5 of the Powys Unitary Development Plan and paragraph 118 of the NPPF. The condition is required to be satisfied prior to commencement of development to ensure the mitigation measures and safeguards are in place before works start.

If the Council is minded to grant planning permission, it is requested that the following informative is attached to the decision notice:

“The applicant/developer is advised to contact The Third Party Works Team ((01782 779909)) in order to ensure that any necessary consents are obtained and that the works comply with the Canal & River Trust “Code of Practice for Works affecting the Canal & River Trust”.

In addition, in order for the Canal & River Trust to effectively monitor our role as a statutory consultee, please send me a copy of the decision notice and the requirements of any planning obligation.

Clwyd Powys Archaeological Trust (CPAT)

Thank you for the consultation on this application.

Having checked the application area against information held within the Historic Environment Record I can confirm that there are no archaeological implications for the proposed development here.

Minerals Officer

13 Page 67 I have had a look to see if there is any minerals safeguarding policy applicable to this site in the UDP/proposals and inset maps, but nothing is shown. However, on the draft LDP the site appears to be shown as being within a Sand & Gravel Category 1 Resource Safeguarding Area DM1, copied below. The wash colours are confusing and I cannot make out if there is another Resource Safeguarding Area overlapping here as there is a brownish stippling showing through as well on Inset Map P40. Anyway, the location is within the alluvial flood plain of the River Severn, and Category 1 deposits reflect the mineral resources of primary importance as shown on the national safeguarding map for Wales. These are deposits which have a greater certainty of being present and are of a good quality, however the national mapping does not provide detail at site specific levels, which is why the proposed policy DM7 (revised Focused Changes Oct 2016 Examination version) requires an assessment to demonstrate that the mineral can be subject to prior extraction or can be discounted by means of not being present, poor quality, too deep, or is fundamentally already constrained and in practice is already sterilised or could never ever be worked. I agree with you that there are alternative locations for housing development. Unfortunately the LDP is not yet adopted so carried limited weight, however you can refer to the National Minerals Resource Maps and the National Safeguarding Maps for Wales Map for Wales (Mid Wales North) which identifies this site as sand & gravel falling within Category 1 Aggregates Safeguarding Areas. Having said this, if an assessment was completed and concludes the mineral was of low value (quantity, quality, inaccessible) then the “policy” could be overcome. Also, given the proximity of the canal, roads and existing housing, any future mineral working would need to maintain a buffer zone, usually 100 metres for Sand & Gravel, and provide lateral support to the highway and canal (which I think is an aqueduct) to avoid collapse, so realistically much of this land would be impractical to work the mineral away, as it would leave a hole that is likely to flood and then need to be backfilled if it was ever to be re-developed for something else. I would just rely on the fact that the site is identified as being within a Category 1 Aggregates Safeguarding Area and that no assessment has been done to demonstrate whether or not the mineral is unreasonably sterilised at this stage.

Policy DM7 Minerals Safeguarding. Mineral Safeguarding Areas have been designated for aggregates and surface coal and these are shown on the Proposals Map. Non-mineral development proposals within Mineral Safeguarding Areas will only be permitted where it can be demonstrated by the developer that: 1. The mineral resource is not of potential future value; or 2. The development is of a temporary nature and can be completed and the site restored to a condition that would allow for future extraction; or 3. The mineral can be extracted satisfactorily prior to the incompatible development taking place; or 4. Extraction would not meet the tests of environmental acceptability or community benefit as set out in National Policy; or 5. There is an over-riding need in the public interest for the development; or 6. The development is householder development and / or of a very minor nature such as extensions to existing dwellings, fences, walls or bus shelters.

Representations

Following display of a site notice and publicity in the local press eleven public representations of objection have been received and are summarised as follows:

14 Page 68 Background of site

 Planning permission has been refused at least twice before on this same plot (the latest being October 2003)  Site has not been taking forward as a Candidate Site for the draft Local Development Plan (LDP)

Outside of settlement boundary

 Site is located outside of settlement boundary

Impact upon local facilities

 Carreghofa school is oversubscribed already and taking children to other schools causes additional traffic movements

Highway access and traffic movements

 Gwelfryn is an unadopted road which is narrow and has a 90 degrees bend  There is restricted visibility when exiting from Gwelfryn onto Carreghofa Lane which is of concern when there will be increased traffic flow  Carreghofa Lane is narrow with few passing places  Carreghofa Lane is also used by a caravan park along the road past the access to Gwelfyn  There has already been a number of accidents along Carreghofa Lane  The junction of Carreghofa Lane and Gwelfryn is quite dangerous being ‘blind’ on one side and development would cause additional traffic  A traffic survey should be delayed until Easter given that traffic movements are greater between April and September because of caravan park and agricultural movements during these months

Need for development

 No need for more properties  Does not follow established building line and deviation from this principle is not justified given the ample potential building land that does meet this criteria  There has already been a number of housing developments in Llanymynech over the last few years

Impact upon character and appearance of area

 Houses would not be in keeping with existing bungalows in Gwelfryn  Several large Oak trees would need to be removed

Ecology

 Bats, newts, badgers, owls, frogs and buzzards and other birds and wildlife in the area  Natural environment would be disturbed  Ecologically sensitive area adjacent to the canal

15 Page 69  Land to the west is a peat bog and development would affect drainage characteristics  Trees and hedges to the west are carefully managed to maintain the peat levels (in contradiction to that stated within the ecological report). Trees felled previously on site when previous applications submitted

Conservation area

 Site is in a conservation area with wildlife

Surface water drainage

 There is standing water on part of the field  Storm drains cross the field

Foul drainage

 Existing sewage pumping station is up to capacity  If the developer plans to install septic tanks, it should be noted that surface water is regularly above ground level and soakaways would be difficult

Flood risk

 Land is liable to flooding with it being at full capacity already

Impact upon amenities

 Additional noise  Overlooking of neighbouring properties  Reduction in daylight upon neighbouring properties  Gwelfryn is a quiet small (9) development of bungalows with mainly older retired people  The site is a bowl which creates a natural amphitheatre effect and therefore concerns over noise from construction of dwellings as well as during occupation

Pollution

 Additional pollution  On rare occasions when temporary deeper flooding occurs, iron based rust residue is forced to the surface creating a hazard

Other matters

 Building houses would spoil views  Affect value of neighbouring property  No notices have been displayed at the site  Only access to the site is over a private road  Steeply sloping nature of the site would make building both difficult and expensive

Planning History

16 Page 70

M/2003/1179 – Erection of a dwelling and construction of a new vehicular access. Refused 02/12/2003 M22876 – Filling of land. Conditional consent 31/08/1986 M20226 – 1 Dwelling. Refused 06/11/1990 M19089 – 1 Bungalow. Refused 03/04/1990 M19088 – 7 bungalows (details of M16282). Granted 03/04/1990 M19077 – 2 bungalows (details of M15951). Granted 03/04/1990 M17548 – 17 dwellings. Withdrawn 04/1989 M16396 – Filling of pond. Granted 05/08/1988 M16282 – 7 bungalows outline. Granted 18/05/1988 M15189 - 8 holiday log cabins. Refused 03/07/1987 (appeal dismissed) M15951 – 3 bungalows (outline). Granted 15/03/1980

Principal Planning Constraints  Private driveway (Gwelfryn);  Class three highway C2099 (Carreghofa Lane);  Listed building structures along Montgomery Canal;  Adjacent to settlement development boundary;  Montgomery Canal SSSI and SAC located to south of application site;  Historic landfill site in close proximity; and  Dismantled railway located to south of application site.

Principal Planning Policies

Planning Policy Wales (Edition 9, November 2016)

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

Welsh Office Circular 11/99 – Drainage Welsh Office Circular 22/87 – Development of Contaminated Land Welsh Office Circular 61/96 – Planning and the Historic Environment: Historic Buildings and Conservation Areas Welsh Office Circular 61/96 – Planning and the Historic Environment: Archaeology Welsh Government Circular 016/2014: The Use of Planning Conditions for Development Management

Local Planning Policy

Powys Unitary Development Plan (2010)

UDP SP1 – Social, Community and Cultural Sustainaibility

17 Page 71 UDP SP2 – Strategic Settlement Hierarchy UDP SP5 – Housing Developments

UDP GP1 – Development Control UDP GP3 – Design and Energy Conservation UDP GP4 – Highway and Parking Requirements UDP ENV1 – Agricultural Land UDP ENV2 – Safeguarding the Landscape UDP ENV3 – Safeguarding Biodiversity and Natural Habitats UDP ENV4 – Internationally Important Sites UDP ENV5 – Nationally Important Sites UDP ENV7 – Protected Species UDP ENV14 – Listed Buildings UDP ENV17 – Ancient Mounuments and Archaeological Sites UDP ENV18 – Development Proposals affecting Archaeological Sites UDP HP4 - Settlement Development Boundaries and Capacities UDP HP6 – Dwellings in the Open Countryside UDP HP7 – Affordable Housing within Settlements UDP HP8 – Affordable Housing Adjoining Settlements with Development Boundaries UDP HP10 – Affordability Criteria UDP HP3 – Housing Land Availability UDP TR2 – Tourist Attractions and Development Areas UDP DC9 – Protection of Water Resources UDP DC10 – Mains Sewage Treatment UDP DC13 – Surface Water Drainage UDP DC15 – Development on Unstable or Contaminated Land

Powys Residential Design Guide (2004) Powys Joint Housing Land Availability Study (2016)

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

Officer Appraisal

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

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

Habitats Regulations Assessment

Under the Conservation of Habitats and Species Regulations 2010 (as amended) any competent authority, before deciding to undertake, or give consent, permission or other authorization for a plan or project which is likely to have a significant effect on a European Site (either alone or in combination with other plans or projects) and is not directly connected

18 Page 72 or necessary to the management of the site, must make an appropriate assessment of the implications of the proposed development in relation to the site’s conservation objectives.

Natural Resources Wales have advised that a Habitats Regulations Assessment (HRA) Screening is required to be undertaken for the Montgomery Canal SAC. The Council’s Ecologist has been asked to undertake the HRA Screening Assessment and a summary will be provided to Member as an update prior to the Committee meeting.

Procedure

Public representations have referred to site notices not being displayed. This correspondence was received prior to the Case Officer displaying the site notice at the site. In addition, the application was publicised in the local press. Development Management confirms that the application has been publicised in accordance with the relevant legislation (The Town and Country Planning (Development Management Procedure) (Wales) Order 2012).

Background

Public representations have referred to planning permission having been refused twice previously and that the site was not taking forward as a candidate site for the draft Local Development Plan (LDP).

Members will note that planning application M/2003/1179 for erection of a dwelling and construction of a new vehicular access in part of the current application site was refused in 2003. The reasons were that the site was outside of a defined settlement boundary and that the site is unsuitable for development because it was prominent and would detract from the character and appearance of the area.

In terms of the emerging LDP, the application site was submitted as part of a larger candidate site (ref: 870) for the LDP. The Site Status Report comments as follows:

‘Site is an undulating area of pasture land that lies adjoining existing residential development and the current UDP settlement development boundary. It may be considered a logical extension of residential development in this area. However, there are significant constraints to the site's development, including Highways, Heritage, Ecological, Land Contamination and Minerals issues. The site is therefore not considered appropriate for allocation. Consideration has been given to inclusion of the site within the development boundary but it is considered that this site is too constrained and furthermore not required as housing commitments and more appropriate site allocations identified elsewhere will meet the housing requirement of the settlement over the Plan period’.

Principle of development

The proposed development lies wholly outside the development boundary of Llanymynech as detailed on inset map M170 and would result in three open market dwellings being constructed outside the settlement boundary.

Outside of settlement boundaries, UDP Policy HP4 applies and states that ‘outside settlement boundaries, proposals for new residential development will only be approved where they comply with UDP Policies HP6, HP8 or HP9’. Policy HP6 relates to rural

19 Page 73 enterprise dwellings, policy HP8 relates to affordable dwellings adjoining a settlement boundary and Policy HP9 relates to affordable dwellings within rural settlements. It is considered that the proposed development does not comply with UDP Policy HP6, HP8 or HP9. The proposed development is therefore not in accordance with the UDP and should be considered a departure.

Housing land supply

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

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

The Powys Joint Housing Land Availability Study (JHLAS) 2016 states that there was 2.2 years supply of housing land in the Powys Local Planning Authority (LPA) area. Failure to have a 5-year housing land supply is an important material consideration that should be taken into account when determining this scheme. Technical Advice Note 1: Joint Housing Land Availability Studies (2015) states as follows:

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

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

Public representations and the Community Council have referred to a lack of need for additional properties with a number of housing developments having been completed in Llanymynech in recent years. Members are advised that the lack of housing land supply should be primarily considered on a county-wide basis. Llanymynech is classified as a large village within the Powys Unitary Development Plan. One site was allocated for housing development within the Unitary Development Plan (UDP); M170 HA1 (0.97 ha at Carreghofa Lane for 25 dwellings). The authority’s records indicate that the allocated housing site has been completed.

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

20 Page 74 Sustainable location and impact upon facilities

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

Llanymynech is classified as a large village in the UDP and it is noted that the village is served by a range of community services and facilities including primary school, recreation ground, take away, store/post office, public houses etc and is located on a public bus route.

The site is considered to be within a sustainable location due to the services provided locally and therefore, it is considered that additional residential development in this location would accord with the provisions of Planning Policy Wales in so far as it is a sustainable location.

Public representations have raised concern over the capacity of the school. Given that the proposal is for three dwellings, local planning policy does not require any contribution towards education provision. Given that the proposal is for three dwellings, it is not considered that this matter warrants refusal of the application.

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

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

The site is an edge of settlement location which adjoins open countryside and therefore the locality is considered to be sensitive to visual change. In terms of the LANDMAP Visual Sensory Area (VSA), the site sits within the River Severn Flood plain VSA (MNTGMVS650) which has a moderate evaluation. The site is an undulating area of pasture land located adjacent a modern housing development and north of the canal. As noted within the Community Council’s response, the submitted layout indicates that the dwellings would be sited within the centre of the application site where there is a natural depression.

The indicative layout and scale indicates three, two storey dwellings, two with detached garages and the third with an integral garage. The layout demonstrates that the site can accommodate three dwellings and detailed design would follow at reserved matters stage, if this outline application receives consent which would provide the opportunity to ensure that the dwellings have an acceptable appearance and design. Concerns have been expressed by the Community Council and within public representations over the character of the proposal. The proposal envisages up to three, four bedroom two storey houses in contrast to the nine bungalows at Gwelfryn.

Whilst the residential housing estate of Gwelfryn accommodates single storey detached dwellings, the indicative layout demonstrates that the dwellings would sit at a lower level than the existing bungalows. In addition, there are two storey dwellings located to the north west

21 Page 75 of the application site. Taking these factors into account, it is not considered that the proposal would be out of character in the locality.

In terms of landscaping, public representations have referred to the loss of existing trees and hedges on the site. The layout indicates the general location of existing trees and does not indicate that trees and hedges will be required to be removed. Landscaping is a reserved matter and therefore detailed proposals for native tree and hedgerow planting along with retention of existing vegetation would be considered at a later date.

Whilst the site would be visible from public vantage points including the public highway and public rights of way and that the proposal would result in a visual change in comparison to the current use, taking into account the location adjacent to Gwelfryn and the character of existing development in the locality and that landscaping measures would reduce the visual impact, it is considered that a satisfactory detailed design could come forward to reflect the overall character and appearance of the settlement and surrounding area.

Impact upon tourist attractions

The Montgomery canal which is a recreational facility is located approximately 25 metres to the south of the application site below a cluster of vegetation including mature trees. Given this distance and the intervening features, it is not considered that the proposal would have an unacceptable adverse effect upon the environmental setting of the canal as a tourist attraction in accordance with UDP Policy TR2.

In addition, there are public rights of way in the locality, the closest being located at a distance of approximately 75 metres (canal towpath). Given the distances involved and that the proposal would introduce residential development which is not uncommon in the locality, it is not considered that the proposal would have an unacceptable adverse effect upon the environmental setting of established tourist attractions in accordance with UDP Policy TR2.

Impact upon heritage assets

Setting of Listed Building

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

The closest listed buildings/structures are the aqueduct and the road bridge to the south of the site which are both grade II listed at distances of approximately 30 metres and 50 metres respectively. Whilst the proposal would result in visual changes in the area, subject to appropriate design to be considered at the reserved matters stage and additional landscaping measures, taking into account the distance, it is not considered that the proposed development would unacceptably adversely affect the setting of the identified listed buildings in accordance with UDP Policy ENV14.

22 Page 76 Conservation area

Public representations have referred to the site being located within a conservation area. Development Management confirms that the site is not located within a conservation area.

Archaeology

On the basis of the advice received from Clwyd Powys Archaeological Trust, it is concluded that there are no archaeological implications for the proposed development.

Impact upon amenities enjoyed by existing and proposed occupiers of properties

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

Public representations and the Community Council have raised concern over the impact of the proposal upon the amenities of the neighbouring dwellings. In particular, it is stated that the topography of the land is such that noise will be amplified. In addition, concern is raised over overlooking and reduction in daylight (overshadowing).

In terms of overshadowing, the Council’s Residential Design Guide advises that new development should be set below a line of 25 degrees taken from the nearest habitable room of adjoining existing property at a height of 2 metres. However, this guidance only applies where new development is less than 40 metres from the nearest habitable room and where the main front (not flank) elevations of existing development is affected. Given that the layout indicates that side of elevation of the garage attached to plot 3 would be approximately 24 metres from the side elevation of 6 Gwelfryn and that the front elevation of plot 1 would be approximately 36 metres from the side elevation of 5 Gwelfryn and not the front or rear elevations, it is considered that the proposal would not cause unnecessary overshadowing of 5 or 6 Gwelfryn.

In terms of overlooking and privacy, the Residential Design Guide advises that there should normally be a minimum separation distance of 20 metres between directly facing habitable room windows on rear elevations. In addition, there should be a minimum of 10 metres between habitable rooms on the main rear elevation and the rear boundary or flack wall of adjoining development. The layout indicates that these distances could be achieved.

In terms of noise, it is recognised that the topography of the land is such that there is a natural dip. However, the proposal is for residential dwellings, a use which is not generally excessive noisy. In addition, the dwellings would be sited adjacent to existing dwellings and as such would not be out of character in the locality.

Overall, it is considered that the indicative layout demonstrates that residential development can be provided at this location without unacceptably adversely affecting the amenities enjoyed by occupants of existing residential properties and that of the proposed dwellings in accordance with UDP Policy GP1 and the Council’s Residential Design Guide. In addition, this planning consideration can be considered further at the reserved matters stage.

23 Page 77 Highway access and parking requirements

UDP Policy GP4 requires adequate highway provision in terms of a safe access, visibility, turning and parking. Access to the site would be gained off a private road (Gwelfryn) from Carreghofa Lane (C2099) which is a class three highway and the indicative layout provides for parking and turning facilities within the site. The junction is situated within a 30mph zone. Public representations and the Community Council have raised concerns over additional traffic movements via a narrow, unadopted road which has restricted visibility onto Carreghofa Lane.

Firstly, Members are advised that the private, unadopted nature of the estate road through Gwelfryn is not a material planning consideration and is a private, civil matter to be resolved between the relevant parties.

In terms of highway safety, the Highway Authority initially objected to the application because visibility is sub-standard at the Carreghofa Lane junction in a westerly direction. In addition, concern was expressed that the site has no footways connecting back into the village of Llanymynech and therefore is not considered to be sustainable as identified within the Active Travel Bill. The Community Council also raised concern over how the site would be connected to existing foot and cycle paths (which predominantly lie on the far side of the Canal).

During the processing of the application, an Automatic Traffic Count (ATC) speed survey was carried out which evidences that the 85th percentile speed in the westerly direction is 23.7mph thus requiring 31 metres of visibility in that direction. This speed survey has been accepted by the Highway Authority and given that the required visibility for the slower speeds can be achieved, the Highway Authority has withdrawn their objection.

In terms of the connections to existing footways and cycle paths, Gwelfryn is served by a pedestrian footway, although no such provision exists along Carreghofa Lane. Given the residential dwellings that already have access onto Carreghofa Lane and that the proposal is for three dwellings only, it is not considered that the lack of a footpath link warrants the refusal of the application.

Overall, subject to the use of conditions recommended by the Highway Authority, it is considered that the proposal makes adequate provision for highway access and parking in accordance with UDP Policy GP4.

Development and flood risk and surface water disposal

Public representations and the Community Council have raised concern over the land being liable to flooding with it being at full capacity already with standing water on part of the field and storm drains crossing the field. The application site is within Zone A of the TAN15 Development Advice Maps and as such is not known to be at risk of flooding. Natural Resources Wales have not raised concern over this aspect of the proposal and the Council’s Land Drainage Engineer has not provided comments.

Whilst the submission indicates that surface water would be disposed to soakaway(s), no surface water drainage details/drawing(s) or an indication to how the impermeable areas within the proposed application site are being drained/disposed have been submitted.

24 Page 78 Generally, the Council’s Land Drainage Engineer advises that the use of soakaways and or other infiltration techniques should be investigated in the first instance for surface water disposal. Porosity tests and the sizing of the soakaways should be designed in accordance with BRE Digest 365 to cater for a 1 in 100 year return storm event plus an allowance for climate change. If soakaways are not feasible, drainage calculations to limit the discharge rate from the site no greater than the Greenfield run-off rate shall be applied. The attenuation drainage system should be designed so that storm events of up to 1 in 100 year plus an allowance for climate change and will not cause flooding either on site or elsewhere in the vicinity. There must be no discharge to a surface water body that results from the first 5mm of any rainfall event.

Therefore, given that no drainage details have been submitted and taking into account the concerns contained within the public representations and the general advice normally received from the Land Drainage Engineer, it is recommended that a condition should be attached to any consent granted to require the submission and approval of a surface water drainage scheme to ensure that adequate provision is made for surface water drainage.

Impact upon nature conservation

Public representations and the Community Council have raised concern that the locality (environmentally sensitive adjacent to the canal) accommodates numerous species and that the natural environment would be disturbed. In addition, public representations have stated that land to the west is a peat bog and raised concerns over the existence of trees and hedges on the site.

In terms of protected sites, the application site is located approximately 17m to the east of the Montgomery Canal SAC/ SSSI. The SSSI supports internationally rare and threatened Floating Water Plantain (Luronium natans) and other rare plants including Scarce Grass- wrack Pondweed (Potamogeton compressus). An ecological report accompanies the application which include mitigation recommendations to address potential impacts on the SSSI/SAC habitats and species. Subject to the use of a condition, the Canal and River Trust do not object to the proposal.

In terms of protected species, the ecological report informs that found no evidence of GB or European protected species. However, whilst no evidence was found during the inspection of the proposal site, no full surveys were carried out. NRW has advised that although there are habitats on and adjacent to the site that are suitable for use by protected species such as otter, great crested newts, bats and dormouse, in this case, the ecological report concludes that the proposed development is not likely to impact adversely on the protected species, provided avoidance measures as described in the report are implemented. In terms of badgers, NRW has advised that provided a distance of 30m is kept from the area identified in the report as being likely to host a badger setts (railway embankment) then the likelihood of disturbing badgers and or/damaging their setts will be minimal. Subsequently, NRW has advised that the proposal represents a lower risk to protected species in this case and does not consider that the development is likely to be detrimental to the maintenance of the population of the species concerned at a favourable conservation status in their natural range and therefore subject to the use of conditions NRW do not object to the proposal.

Whilst the contents of the public representations are noted, on the basis of the advice received from Natural Resources Wales and the Canal and River Trust, subject to the use of

25 Page 79 conditions, it is considered that the proposal complies with the relevant national and local planning policies relating to nature conservation.

Foul sewage disposal

It is proposed to connect to the public sewerage system which is the preferred method of disposal. Public representations and the Community Council have raised concern over the capacity of the public system. Severn Trent Water has advised that they have no objection to the development and therefore Severn Trent Water has not advised that the sewage disposal system does not has sufficient capacity to accommodate the additional flows generated as a result of the development. Severn Trent Water has advised that a condition should be attached to any consent granted to require the details of the foul drainage and as such it is recommended that such a condition should be attached to any consent granted to ensure a satisfactory means of drainage in accordance with UDP Policy DC10.

Contaminated land

The submission is supported by a Contaminated Land Desk Study Assessment Report and as identified by the Council’s Contaminated Land Officer and Natural Resources Wales (NRW) the site is within close proximity to a historic landfill that received household, special and liquid sludge waste and is directly adjacent to former railway land. The Report has identified potential risks to the proposed development, associated with potential contaminant sources (made ground, railway land, and landfill sites) located on and off site, and has provided recommendations for investigation.

Taking into account the advice from NRW and the Contaminated Land Officer, it is considered that the recommended conditions are attached to any consent granted in order to ensure that risks from land contamination to the future users of the land and neighbouring land are minimised, together with those to controlled waters, property and ecological systems and the environment, and to ensure that the development can be carried out safely without unacceptable risks to workers, neighbours and other offsite receptors in accordance with the relevant national and local planning policy.

It is also noted that the Contaminated Land Officer has advised that Llanymynech is in an area requiring Basic Radon precautions in foundations. Members are advised that radon measures would be dealt with at the Building Regulations stage.

Minerals

The UDP does not contain any minerals safeguarding policy applicable to the site. However, within the draft LDP the site appears to be shown as being within a Sand & Gravel Category 1 Resource Safeguarding Area. Given the status of the emerging LDP, the designation within the LDP carries limited or no weight.

In terms of national mineral safeguarding, the Minerals Officer has advised that the site is within the alluvial flood plain of the River Severn, Category 1 deposits which reflect the mineral resources of primary importance as shown on the national safeguarding map for Wales. These are deposits which have a greater certainty of being present and are of a good quality, however the national mapping does not provide detail at site specific levels. An assessment of minerals has not been completed therefore Development Management is not

26 Page 80 aware of the quantity, quality of accessibility of the minerals. However, given the proximity of the canal, roads and neighbouring housing, and that any future mineral working would need to maintain a buffer zone (usually 100 metres for Sand & Gravel), and provide lateral support to the highway and canal to avoid collapse, it is considered that in reality the working of the site for minerals would not be welcomed and may not even be pratical. Therfeore, on the basis of the size and location of the site and the advice received from the Minerals Officer, it is concluded that the minerals designation does not warrant refusal of the application.

Loss of agricultural land

UDP Policy ENV1 provides safeguarding for the best and most versatile land. The land is not known to fall within grades 1, 2 and 3a and therefore is not considered to be of the best and most versatile agricultural land or of particular value to agriculture within the locality in accordance with the advice provided within UDP Policy ENV1 and Technical Advice Note 6.

Other matters

Public representations have referred to the loss of views, the effect on the value of existing properties and that the steeply sloping nature of the site would make building both difficult and expensive.

Members are advised that the loss of views (except where amenity is impacted upon) and the impact upon property values are not material planning considerations.

Whilst viability of a site in terms of the build costs can be taken into consideration, Development Management does not consider that the physical characteristics of the site are such that it is not possible to develop it.

RECOMMENDATION

Subject to future consideration of the design and the implementation of landscaping measures, it is considered that the proposal would not result in an unacceptable adverse impact upon the surrounding landscape, public vantage points, tourist attractions including public rights of way or the identified listed buildings. In addition, subject to the use of conditions, the proposal would make adequate provision for surface water flood risk and drainage, highway access and parking, contaminated land requirements and ecology.

Whilst the proposal is a departure from the development plan, the Council’s current lack of housing land supply carries significant weight in favour of this development and given that the proposal would otherwise comply with development plan and national planning policies, the recommendation is one of conditional consent.

Conditions:

1. Details of the appearance, landscaping, layout and scale, (hereinafter called ""the reserved matters"") shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the local planning authority before any development begins and the development shall be carried out as approved. 2. Any application for approval of the reserved matters shall be made to the local planning authority not later than three years from the date of this permission.

27 Page 81 3. The development shall begin either before the expiration of five years from the date of this permission or before the expiration of two years from the date of approval of the last of the reserved matters to be approved, whichever is the later. 4. No development shall commence until details of a scheme for the disposal of foul and surface water has been submitted to and agreed in writing by the local planning authority. The scheme shall be implemented in accordance with the approved details prior to the first occupation of the dwellings hereby permitted and retained in perpetuity. 5. No development shall commence until an investigation and risk assessment, in addition to any assessment provided with the planning application, is submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The investigation and risk assessment must be undertaken by competent persons (a contaminated land specialist with proven experience within the contaminated land industry). The report of the findings must include: (i) a survey of the extent, scale and nature of contamination; (ii) an assessment of the potential risks to: o human health, o property (existing or proposed) including buildings, crops, livestock, pets, woodland and service lines and pipes, o adjoining land, o groundwaters and surface waters, o ecological systems, o archaeological sites and ancient monuments; (iii) an appraisal of remedial options, and proposal of the preferred option(s). This must be conducted in accordance with Welsh Local Government Association document 'Development of land affected by contamination: a guide for developers' 2012 . Item (iii) above should not be submitted until written approval has been obtained from the Local Planning Authority for items (i) & (ii). 6. No development shall commence until a detailed remediation scheme to bring the site to a condition suitable for the intended use by removing unacceptable risks to human health, buildings and other property and the natural and historical environment is submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The scheme must include all works to be undertaken, proposed remediation objectives and remediation criteria, timetable of works and site management procedures. The scheme must ensure that the site will not qualify as contaminated land under Part 2A of the Environmental Protection Act 1990, The Contaminated Land (Wales) Regulations 2001 in relation to the intended use of the land after remediation. The detailed remediation scheme should not be submitted until written approval for Condition 5 has been received from the Local Planning Authority. 7. The approved remediation scheme must be carried out in accordance with its terms prior to the commencement of development other than that required to carry out remediation, unless otherwise agreed in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The Local Planning Authority must be given two weeks written notification of commencement of the remediation scheme works. Following completion of measures identified in the approved remediation scheme, a verification report (referred to in PPS23 as a validation report) that demonstrates the effectiveness of the remediation carried out must be produced, and is subject to the approval in writing of the Local Planning Authority. The verification report contents must be agreed with the Local Planning Authority before commencement of the remediation scheme. 8. In the event that contamination is found at any time when carrying out the approved development that was not previously identified it must be reported in writing immediately to the Local Planning Authority. An investigation and risk assessment must be undertaken in accordance with the requirements of condition 5, and where remediation is necessary a

28 Page 82 remediation scheme must be prepared in accordance with the requirements of condition 2, which is subject to the approval in writing of the Local Planning Authority. Following completion of measures identified in the approved remediation scheme a verification report must be prepared, which is subject to the approval in writing of the Local Planning Authority in accordance with condition 7. 9. A monitoring and maintenance scheme to include monitoring the long-term effectiveness of the proposed remediation over a period of duration to be agreed in writing with the Local Planning Authority and the provision of reports on the same must be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. Within six months following the completion of the measures identified in that scheme and the achievement of the remediation objectives, reports that demonstrate the effectiveness of the monitoring and maintenance carried out must be produced, and submitted to the Local Planning Authority. 10. No development shall take place (including ground works, site clearance) until great crested newt / otter / bat Reasonable Avoidance Measures on the site have been submitted to and approved in writing by the local Planning authority. RAMS shall include:

I. Measures to protect badgers/otters from being trapped in open excavations and / or pipe and culverts are submitted to and approved in writing by the local planning authority. The measures may include a. creation of sloping ramps to allow badgers to exit excavations; b. open pipework greater than 150mm outside diameter, being blocked off at the end of each working day. II. Measures to minimise likelihood of affecting amphibians, including great crested newts (and reptiles) in line with the recommendations made in section 4.5.8 of the Preliminary Ecological Assessment report dated February 2016 by Turnstone Ecology. III. Timing of RAM implementation and construction works. IV. Measure to minimise disturbing badgers and otter movements. Measures may include the creation of a 20m fenced off buffer area separating the South west hedgerow from the development site. No machinery or works to be carried out within the buffer zone. V. Root Protection Zone measures. The agreed Reasonable Avoidance Measures shall be implemented. 11. No development shall take place until a lighting scheme has been submitted to an approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The development shall be carried out in accordance with the approved scheme. 12. Prior to the commencement of development a detailed Ecological Mitigation Strategy based on the mitigation recommendations as set out at paragraph 4.4.2 of the Preliminary Ecological Assessment produced by Turnstone Ecology, dated 24 February 2016, reference R01-Ecological Assessment Rev01 shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The development shall be carried out in accordance with the agreed Ecological Mitigation Strategy. 13. Construction works and activities including storage of material must remain with the boundary of the application site as identified by the red line on Drawing Number SA21552/01 Date Oct2015. 14. All hard and soft landscape works shall be carried out in accordance with the approved details. The works shall be carried out prior to the occupation of any part of the development or in accordance with the programme agreed with the Local Planning Authority. 15. Prior to the occupation of any dwelling any entrance gates shall be set back at least 5.5 metres distant from the edge of the adjoining carriageway and shall be constructed so as to be incapable of opening towards the highway and shall be retained in this position and

29 Page 83 form of construction for as long as the dwelling/development hereby permitted remains in existence. 16. The gradient of the access shall be constructed so as not to exceed 1 in 15 for the first 5.5 metres measured from edge of the adjoining carriageway along the centre line of the access and shall be retained at this gradient for as long as the development remains in existence. 17. Within 5 days from the commencement of the development the access shall be constructed so that there is clear visibility from a point 1.05 metres above ground level at the centre of the access and 2.4 metres distant from the edge of the adjoining carriageway, to points 0.26 metres above ground level at the edge of the adjoining carriageway and 25 metres distant in each direction measured from the centre of the access along the edge of the adjoining carriageway and 5.5 metres distant from the edge of the adjoining carriageway and 6.0 metres in each direction. Nothing shall be planted, erected or allowed to grow on the areas of land so formed that would obstruct the visibility and the visibility shall be maintained free from obstruction for as long as the development hereby permitted remains in existence. 18. Within 5 days from the commencement of the development the area of the access to be used by vehicles is to be constructed to a minimum of 410mm depth, comprising a minimum of 250mm of sub-base material, 100mm of bituminous macadam base course material and 60mm of bituminous macadam binder course material for a distance of 5.5 metres from the edge of the adjoining carriageway. Any use of alternative materials is to be agreed in writing by the Local Planning Authority prior to the access being constructed. 19. Prior to the occupation of any dwelling, provision shall be made within the curtilage of the site for the parking of not less than 1 car per bedroom (maximum 3) excluding any garage space provided together with a turning space such that all vehicles serving the site may both enter and leave the site in a forward gear. The parking and turning areas shall be retained for their designated use for as long as the development hereby permitted remains in existence. 20. Within 5 days from the commencement of the development provision shall be made within the curtilage of the site for the parking of all construction vehicles together with a vehicle turning area. This parking and turning area shall be constructed to a depth of 0.45 metres in crusher run or sub-base and maintained free from obstruction at all times such that all vehicles serving the site shall park within the site and both enter and leave the site in a forward gear for the duration of the construction of the development. 21. Prior to the occupation of any dwelling the area of the access to be used by vehicles is to be finished in a 40mm bituminous surface course for a distance of 5.5 metres from the edge of the adjoining carriageway. This area will be maintained to this standard for as long as the development remains in existence. 22. Within 5 days from the commencement of the development any existing means of access shall be stopped up, in materials to be agreed in writing by the Local Planning Authority and this shall be retained for as long as the development is in existence. 23. Upon formation of the visibility splays as detailed in HC4 above the centreline of any new or relocated hedge should be positioned not less than 1.0 metre to the rear of the visibility splay and retained in this position as long as the development remains in existence.

Reasons 1. To enable the Local Planning Authority to exercise proper control over the development in accordance with Section 92 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990. 2. Required to be imposed by Section 92 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990. 3. Required to be imposed by Section 92 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990. 4. To ensure that the development is provided with a satisfactory means of drainage

30 Page 84 as well as to reduce the risk of creating or exacerbating a flooding problem and to minimise the risk of pollution in accordance with Policies GP1, DC10 and DC13 of the Powys Unitary Development Plan (2010). 5. To ensure that risks from land contamination to the future users of the land and neighbouring land are minimised, together with those to controlled waters, property and ecological systems, and to ensure that the development can be carried out safely without unacceptable risks to workers, neighbours and other offsite receptors in accordance with Planning Policy Wales (Edition 9, 2016) and Policies DC9 and DC15 of the Powys Unitary Development Plan (2010). 6. To ensure that risks from land contamination to the future users of the land and neighbouring land are minimised, together with those to controlled waters, property and ecological systems, and to ensure that the development can be carried out safely without unacceptable risks to workers, neighbours and other offsite receptors in accordance with Planning Policy Wales (Edition 9, 2016) and Policies DC9 and DC15 of the Powys Unitary Development Plan (2010). 7. To ensure that risks from land contamination to the future users of the land and neighbouring land are minimised, together with those to controlled waters, property and ecological systems, and to ensure that the development can be carried out safely without unacceptable risks to workers, neighbours and other offsite receptors in accordance with Planning Policy Wales (2010) and Policies DC9 and DC15 of the Powys Unitary Development Plan (2010). 8. To ensure that risks from land contamination to the future users of the land and neighbouring land are minimised, together with those to controlled waters, property and ecological systems, and to ensure that the development can be carried out safely without unacceptable risks to workers, neighbours and other offsite receptors [in accordance with Planning Policy Wales (Edition 9, 2016) and Policies DC9 and DC15 of the Powys Unitary Development Plan (2010). 9. To ensure that risks from land contamination to the future users of the land and neighbouring land are minimised, together with those to controlled waters, property and ecological systems, and to ensure that the development can be carried out safely without unacceptable risks to workers, neighbours and other offsite receptors in accordance with Planning Policy Wales (Edition 9, 2016) and Policies DC9 and DC15 of the Powys Unitary Development Plan (2010). 10. To ensure that the development makes adequate provision for great crested newts, otters and bats in accordance with Planning Policy Wales (Edition 9, 2016), Technical Advice Note 5: Nature Conservation and Planning (2009) and Policy ENV7 of the Powys Unitary Development Plan (2010). 11. To ensure that the development minimises/avoids light spill in areas that could potentially be used by foraging and commuting bats (all tree lines and hedgerows surrounding the site) and otters (river corridor) in accordance with Planning Policy Wales (Edition 9, 2016), Technical Advice Note 5: Nature Conservation and Planning (2009) and Policies DC3 and ENV7 of the Powys Unitary Development Plan (2010). 12. In the interests of safeguarding the nationally and internationally designated sites within the vicinity of the site and to comply with Planning Policy Wales (Edition 9, 2016), Technical Advice Note 5: Nature Conservation and Planning (2009) and Policies ENV3, ENV4 and ENV5 of the Powys Unitary Development Plan (2010). 13. To ensure that the impact upon protected sites and species is prevented/minimised in accordance with Planning Policy Wales (Edition 9, 2016), Technical Advice Note 5: Nature Conservation and Planning (2009) and Policies ENV4, ENV5 and ENV7 of the Powys Unitary Development Plan (2010).

31 Page 85 14. To ensure a satisfactory and well planned development and to preserve and enhance the quality of the environment, visual amenity and privacy in accordance with policies GP1 and ENV2 of the Powys Unitary Development Plan. 16. In the interests of highway safety and in accordance with the provisions of Powys UDP Policy GP1 and GP4. 18. In the interests of highway safety and in accordance with the provisions of Powys UDP Policy GP1 and GP4. 19. In the interests of highway safety and in accordance with the provisions of Powys UDP Policy GP1 and GP4. 20. In the interests of highway safety and in accordance with the provisions of Powys UDP Policy GP1 and GP4. 21. In the interests of highway safety and in accordance with the provisions of Powys UDP Policy GP1 and GP4. 22. In the interests of highway safety and in accordance with the provisions of Powys UDP Policy GP1 and GP4. 23. In the interests of highway safety and in accordance with the provisions of Powys UDP Policy GP1 and GP4.

Informative Notes

Additional Waste Water Comments from Severn Trent Water:

There is a pumping station close to the site and any new development must not restrict our access to the Sewage Pumping Station (SPS). We will require free access to the SPS at all times in order to complete any programmed routine maintenance tasks and also for any emergency reactive visits in case of failure. Please note that due to the close proximity of the proposed new development the occupant may experience noise and/or smell pollution. In order to minimise disruption to any future occupant(s), we would advise that all habitable buildings are constructed a minimum of 15metres from the curtilage of the SPS compound.

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

Informative from Canal & River Trust: The applicant/developer is advised to contact The Third Party Works Team (01782 779909) in order to ensure that any necessary consents are obtained and that the works comply with the Canal & River Trust "Code of Practice for Works affecting the Canal & River Trust".

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

32 Page 86 Page 87 This page is intentionally left blank PTLRW5 - 2017

Delegated List

07/12/2016 09 04/01/2017 09 For the purpose of the Local Government (Access to Information) Act 1985, the background papers relating to each individual planning application constitute all the correspondence on the file as numbered in the left hand column.

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

Application Valid Decision Decision notice Proposal Location No. Date sentdate

Land at Swan Bank P/2015/0107 03/02/2015 00 CONSENT08/12/2016 Full: Demolition of Pool Quay FULL existing garage belonging to (no. 1 Swan Bank) and Welshpool removal of existing sheds on site. Erection SY 21 9 JT of 2 dwellings with detached garages and access

land adj Aberannell Bungalow P/2016/0994 29/09/2016 00 CONSENT08/12/2016 Erection of 2 Llanwrtyd Wells FULL dwellinghouses, formation of 2 vehicular Beulah accesses and all Powys associated works

Page 89

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

P/2016/1019 13/10/2016 00 CONSENT08/12/2016 Development of 1 FULL affordable dwelling and ancillary works Plot adjacent to 352 Heol y Coleg Newtown

SY 16 1 RA

Land adjacent to 288 Heol-y-Coleg P/2016/1022 14/10/2016 00 CONSENT08/12/2016 Development of two FULL affordable apartments, access and associated works Newtown

SY 16 1 RA

P/2016/1044 24/10/2016 00 CONSENT08/12/2016 Demolition of utility Lower Cwmtwrch HOUS room and erection of single storey side and 72 Heol Gleien rear extension Swansea

SA 9 2 TZ

Land at Dyffryn P/2016/1054 13/10/2016 00 CONSENT08/12/2016 Formation of an Berriew FULL equestrian manege and all associated works Dyffryn Lane Welshpool

SY 21 8 AE

Penlanwen P/2016/1209 25/11/2016 00 LAWFUL USE08/12/2016 Section 192: Certificate Tirabad CLA 2 of proposed use to replace existing tower with new Llangammarch Wells

LD 4 4 DU

Page 90

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

Land at Honddu Isaf P/2016/0933 08/09/2016 00 CONSENT09/12/2016 Erection of FULL timberframed barn and trackway Nr Pontgwilym Brecon

LD 3 9 LN

P/2016/1038 06/10/2016 00 REFUSE09/12/2016 Change of use of FULL ground floor from office (B1) and residential 20 Market Street floor space (C3) to a Builth Wells micro pub (A3) LD 2 3 EA

adj Hill Cottage P/2016/1063 25/10/2016 00 CONSENT09/12/2016 Reserved matters Middletown RES application in respect of outline planning approval P/2015/0741 Welshpool for the erection of an affordable dwelling and SY 21 8 DJ all associated works

Penarlas Fach P/2016/0999 29/09/2016 00 CONSENT12/12/2016 Erection of a two storey HOUS annexe extension Llanfyllin

SY 22 5 ND

The Workhouse P/2016/1027 17/10/2016 00 CONSENT12/12/2016 Erection of a building to FULL serve as a workshop, studio and store (B2 & Presteigne Industrial Estate B8) Presteigne

LD 8 2 UF

Page 91

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

Cefn Golau P/2016/1033 18/10/2016 00 CONSENT12/12/2016 Extension to dwelling Pont Robert HOUS Meifod

SY 22 6 DN

Owens Coaches P/2016/1072 17/10/2016 00 CONSENT12/12/2016 Installation of a 20.1m Four Crosses FULL monopole and all associated works Business Park Four Crosses

SY 22 6 LP

P/2016/1082 27/10/2016 00 CONSENT12/12/2016 Hous: Erection of an Garden Suburb HOUS extension 26 Hirfron Llanidloes

SY 18 6 EU

Berwyn View P/2016/1109 26/10/2016 00 CONSENT12/12/2016 Alterations to roof and HOUS erection of porch and first floor extension The Street

SY 22 6 RB

Powis Castle Estate P/2016/0922 07/09/2016 00 CONSENT13/12/2016 Listed Building Consent LBC for addition of a handrail to steps Red Lane Welshpool

SY 21 8 RG

Page 92

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

Cloddiau P/2016/1061 31/10/2016 00 CONSENT13/12/2016 Erection of extensions Aberbechan HOUS Newtown

SY 16 3 AS

Plot Adjacent The Laurels P/2016/1070 18/10/2016 00 REFUSE 13/12/2016 Erection of dwelling and FULL associated works Green End Presteigne

LD 8 2 DR

The Old School P/2016/0977 19/10/2016 00 REFUSE14/12/2016 Change of use from Glascwm FULL hostel to residential use Llandrindod Wells

LD 1 5 SE

Westholme P/2016/1042 24/10/2016 00 CONSENT14/12/2016 Division of 1 dwelling to FULL 2 separate residential units and creation of Knighton Road separate access Presteigne

LD 8 2 BW

Co-Operative Food P/2016/1060 14/10/2016 00 CONSENT14/12/2016 Section 73 application Tudor Lane REM to remove condition 22 of planning permission R1891/D (restriction on Llandrindod Wells type of retail goods which can be sold ) LD 1 5 YG

Page 93

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

Pavement opposite Smithfield Market P/2016/1088 20/10/2016 00 CONSENT14/12/2016 Replacement and FULL upgrade of existing public telephone kiosk North Street combining public Rhayader telephone service & ATM service LD 6 5 BT (retrospective)

Crosslikey Supermarket P/2016/1136 02/11/2016 00 CONSENT14/12/2016 Installation of new shop Churchstoke FULL front

SY 15 6 AR

Ffaldalau Lane P/2016/0685 05/07/2016 00 CONSENT15/12/2016 Erection of two holiday Llandegley FULL log cabins, installation of a package treatment plant, upgrades to Llandrindod Wells parking area and alterations to access LD 1 5 UE including a passing bay

Land at Rock House P/2016/0921 30/08/2016 00 CONSENT15/12/2016 Erection of a dwelling Llanllwchaiarn OUT (outline) Newtown

SY 16 3 BH

Abergwenlas P/2016/0978 22/09/2016 00 CONSENT15/12/2016 Erection of a rear two Llanbadarn Fynydd HOUS storey extension together with alterations Llandrindod Wells

LD 1 6 YA

Page 94

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

Land at Stud Farm P/2016/1001 30/09/2016 00 CONSENT15/12/2016 Installation of a 20m Bleddfa FULL lattice tower supporting 4 antennas, 2 dishes, 1 North of Hirvon satellite dish, 1 x 2.1m Knighton unistrut, 1 generator, 3 equipment cabinets and LD 7 1 NY a meter cabinet within secure compound and all associated works

Glasfryn P/2016/1095 24/10/2016 00 CONSENT15/12/2016 Change of use of FULL residential dwelling to building in connection Heol Penrallt with adjoining museum, Machynlleth internal works and minor alterations to rear SY 20 8 AJ extension.

Land at The Gutters P/2016/1124 28/10/2016 00 CONSENT15/12/2016 Siting of a log cabin for Stanage FULL holiday use, formation of vehicular access Reeves Lane road to serve The Knighton Gutters and log cabin, installation of septic LD 7 1 LY tank and all associated works

Nant yr Angell P/2016/0896 25/08/2016 00 CONSENT16/12/2016 Proposed alterations to Llangynog LBC existing dwelling, construction of conservatory and Oswestry instalation of a septic tank SY 10 0 HJ

Walkmill P/2016/0905 07/09/2016 00 CONSENT16/12/2016 Restoration and Cascob LBC alterations to existing property and construction of a porch Presteigne and single storey garden room LD 8 2 NT

Page 95

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

Land Near Coed-Pryfydau P/2016/0997 24/10/2016 00 REFUSE16/12/2016 Erection of an FULL agricultural building Llanbrynmair

SY 19 7 DN

Midland Bank (Former HSBC P/2016/1009 03/10/2016 00 CONSENT16/12/2016 Change of use of Building) FULL ground floor from Class A2 financial & East Street professional servises to Rhayader Class A1 retail use, change of use of first LD 6 5 DU floor from residential use class C3 to Class A1 retail use together with erection of a rear single storey extension Waen P/2016/1073 26/10/2016 00 CONSENT 16/12/2016 Erection of an extension HOUS to garden office / sun room and installation of Waen Lane a package treatment Llandinam plant SY 17 5 BH

20 (part of former spar store) P/2016/1099 24/10/2016 00 REFUSE19/12/2016 Installation of external FULL wall cladding and timber braise to front Church Street elevations Welshpool

SY 21 7 DQ

Land at Treflys TEL /2016/0005 07/11/2016 00 APPROVE19/12/2016 Application for prior Garth TELE approval notification (Part 24 schedule 2 Llwynbrain GPDO) for upgrade to Llangammarch Wells existing installation to replace existing LD 4 4 AN monopole with a 17.5m high monopole including installation of additional radio equipment cabinet and ancillary works

Page 96

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

P/2016/0567 25/05/2016 00 CONSENT 20/12/2016 Outline planning Land to the rear of OUT S106 permission for the Beechcroft erection of 10 dwellings with all matters Aberhafesp reserved SY 16 3 HL

Grove Farm P/2016/0869 17/08/2016 00 CONSENT20/12/2016 Erection of a free range FULL poultry unit with associated feed bins and infrastructure

LD 7 1 LN

New Life Church P/2016/1055 25/10/2016 00 CONSENT20/12/2016 Demolition of timber FULL frame building to front and erection of Temple Street extensions Llandrindod Wells

LD 1 5 HW

Hafod Yr Allt P/2016/1075 27/10/2016 00 APPROVE20/12/2016 Section 191 application CLA 1 for a lawful development certificate for the occupation of Llanfyllin dwelling without the compliance with SY 22 5 EP conditions 4 & 5 of permission M22582 (occupancy restrictions)

P/2016/1096 02/11/2016 00 REFCADW20/12/2016 LBC - Installation of oil LBC fired heating, boiler and oil storage tank 3 Trelonydd

SY 17 5 BZ

Page 97

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

Three Horse Shoes P/2016/1101 25/10/2016 00 CONSENT 20/12/2016 Erection of single storey Groesfford FULL kitchen extension Brecon

LD 3 7 SN

Wern Villa P/2016/0992 28/10/2016 00 CONSENT21/12/2016 Proposed change of FULL use from shop to residential, with no Wellington Road material changes Llandrindod Wells

LD 1 5 NB

1 Hafod P/2016/1057 07/11/2016 00 CONSENT21/12/2016 Erection of a garage Foel HOUS Maes y Gof Welshpool

SY 21 0 AU

Frongoch P/2016/1103 07/11/2016 00 CONSENT21/12/2016 Demolition of existing Llangynog HOUS conservatory, erection of sunroom, porch and first floor extension

SY 10 0 EZ

Co-operative Garage P/2016/1105 26/10/2016 00 CONSENT21/12/2016 Display of various Llanelwedd ADV illuminated and non-illuminated signs Station Road

LD 2 3 SS

Page 98

10 Application Valid Decision Decision notice Proposal Location No. Date sentdate

Aldi Store P/2016/1117 26/10/2016 00 CONSENT21/12/2016 Proposed display of 7 ADV no. of advertisements (4 illuminated) Mill Lane Welshpool

SY 21 7 BL

Waenllyfnant P/2016/1130 02/11/2016 00 CONSENT21/12/2016 Conversion and FULL extension of outbuilding to form additional living accommodation Newtown attached to existing dwelling SY 16 4 JY

Argoed P/2016/1150 07/11/2016 00 CONSENT21/12/2016 Erection of a detached Cwm HOUS car port Nant-y-Meichiaid Llanfyllin

SY 22 5 NA

Hirrhos Hall P/2016/1192 07/12/2016 00 APPROVE21/12/2016 Section 192 Application Llanerfyl CLA 2 for a Lawful Development Certificate for a proposed use/development: Construction of glass SY 21 0 EZ lean-to conservatory to the rear

Ashbrook House P/2016/0513 12/05/2016 00 CONSENT22/12/2016 HH: External alterations Clyro HOUS to dwelling Hereford

HR 3 5 RZ

Page 99

11 Application Valid Decision Decision notice Proposal Location No. Date sentdate

Treriggon P/2016/0585 25/05/2016 00 CONSENT22/12/2016 Erection of an Dolau FULL agricultural building for egg production Llandrindod Wells

LD 1 5 TW

Tyn y Beili P/2016/0711 04/07/2016 00 CONSENT 22/12/2016 Application for reserved Maesmynis RES matters following the approval of P/2015/0811 for the Builth Wells erection of a rural workers dwelling LD 2 3 HT

Heartsease Farm Barn P/2016/0730 07/07/2016 00 CONSENT22/12/2016 Refurbishment of barn FULL to meeting room facility and associated works Knighton

LD 7 1 LU

Heartsease Barn P/2016/0736 09/09/2016 00 REFCADW22/12/2016 Listed Building Consent : LBC Repairs and refurbishment of barn to Heartsease Farm provide meeting room Knighton facility LD 7 1 LU

Lake Farm P/2016/0785 27/07/2016 00 CONSENT22/12/2016 Erection of an Churchstoke FULL agricultural building to accomodate biomass boilers and woodchip Montgomery storage in association with a poultry complex SY 15 6 TG

Page 100

12 Application Valid Decision Decision notice Proposal Location No. Date sentdate

Bottling Plant and Premises P/2016/0966 29/09/2016 00 CONSENT 22/12/2016 Erection of an extension Heartsease Farm FULL to existing building Knighton

LD 7 1 LU

Heartsease Farm P/2016/0995 07/10/2016 00 CONSENT22/12/2016 Erection of a building to FULL house equipment and two external tanks Knighton

LD 7 1 LU

Neuadd P/2016/1094 09/11/2016 00 CONSENT22/12/2016 Full: Erection of an Disserth FULL agricultural building Builth Wells

LD 2 3 TN

P/2016/1148 07/11/2016 00 CONSENT22/12/2016 Householder: Erection HOUS of an extension 10 Richmond Park Ystradgynlais

SA 9 1 SG

Land between 283 and 285 P/2016/1141 03/11/2016 00 CONSENT26/12/2016 Erection of 2 detached FULL bungalows Brecon Road Ystradgynlais

SA 9 1 QX

Page 101

13 Application Valid Decision Decision notice Proposal Location No. Date sentdate

Ystym Colwyn P/2016/1138 03/11/2016 00 CONSENT29/12/2016 FULL: Erection of an FULL agricultural building to be used as a biomass store and all associated Meifod works (retrospective) SY 22 6 XT

P/2016/1089 31/10/2016 00 CONSENT30/12/2016 Erection of a first floor Clyro HOUS extension 3 Begwyns Bluff Hereford

HR 3 5 SR

Old Bank P/2016/0742 18/08/2016 00 REFCADW 03/01/2017 Installation of Velux roof FULL windows 1 Maengwyn Street Machynlleth

SY 20 8 AB

Old Bank P/2016/0743 18/08/2016 00 REFCADW03/01/2017 Internal alterations and LBC the installation of Velux roof windows 1 Maengwyn Street Machynlleth

SY 20 8 AB

Pentre Mill P/2016/1014 31/10/2016 00 CONSENT03/01/2017 Listed Building: Pentre LBC Replacement of flue Churchstoke

SY 15 6 FU

Page 102

14 Application Valid Decision Decision notice Proposal Location No. Date sentdate

Unit 20 P/2016/1107 08/11/2016 00 CONSENT03/01/2017 Demolition of existing FULL extension and erection of new Dyffryn Industrial Estate Newtown

SY 16 3 BD

Y Garth P/2016/1118 27/10/2016 00 CONSENT03/01/2017 Section 73 application First Steps Nursery REM to vary condition no 3 of planning approval Alexandra Road P/2016/0277 relating to Llandrindod Wells number of children attending nursery LD 1 5 LS

Gloescerddyn P/2016/1133 15/11/2016 00 CONSENT03/01/2017 Retrospective Sarnau HOUS application for works to a boudary wall

LD 3 9 PP

Land at Hill Farm P/2016/0467 16/05/2016 00 CONSENT04/01/2017 Demolition of existing Evenjobb FULL agricultural buildings and erection of a general purpose Presteigne agricultural building and alterations to access LD 8 2 NH

Grangeton P/2016/0639 16/06/2016 00 CONSENT04/01/2017 HH: Renovation and Glasbury HOUS extension including demolition of storage shed Hereford

HR 3 5 LH

Page 103

15 Application Valid Decision Decision notice Proposal Location No. Date sentdate

Grangeton P/2016/0640 16/06/2016 00 CONSENT04/01/2017 LBC: Renovation and Glasbury LBC extension including demolition of storage shed Hereford

HR 3 5 LH

Plas Newydd (The Old Vicarage) P/2016/0718 20/07/2016 00 CONSENT04/01/2017 Listed building consent Pen-y-bont-fawr LBC for internal and external alterations involving refurbishment works Oswestry

SY 10 0 NT

Hafod Y Llan P/2016/0878 26/08/2016 00 CONSENT04/01/2017 Demolition of existing Llan LBC balcony and erection of new sunroom.

SY 19 7 DW

Kilverts School P/2016/1116 09/11/2016 00 CONSENT04/01/2017 Change of use from Clyro FULL residential (C3)to mixed use (B1/A2)

HR 3 5 SB

Y Bwthyn Gwyn P/2016/1125 16/11/2016 00 CONSENT04/01/2017 Erection of garage Llanwrin HOUS Machynlleth

SY 20 8 SS

Page 104

16 Application Valid Decision Decision notice Proposal Location No. Date sentdate

3 Golf Bungalow P/2016/1127 10/11/2016 00 CONSENT04/01/2017 Erection of a single FULL storey outbuilding Llandrindod Wells

LD 1 5 NY

Buck Hotel P/2016/1161 23/11/2016 00 REFUSE04/01/2017 Full: Subdivision of FULL dwelling into two residential units Main Street Caersws

SY 17 5 EL

Ty Newydd P/2016/1162 11/11/2016 00 LAWFUL USE04/01/2017 Section 191 application Cymdu, Llanrhaeadr CLA 1 for a lawful development certificate Ym Mochnant for an existing use in Oswestry relation to an agricultural building SY 10 0 EF

Land at Bryn-y-Groes Farm TEL /2016/0006 11/11/2016 00 NO 04/01/2017 Application for prior TELE OBJECTION approval notification (Part 24 schedule 2 Palleg GPDO) for upgrade to Ystradgynlais existing installation by installation of SA 9 1 LD replacement 17.5m high monopole and ancillary works

Tynshettin P/2016/1187 16/11/2016 00 CONSENT04/01/2017 Formation of horse Llanwddyn FULL arena Oswestry

SY 10 0 NN

Page 105

17 Application Valid Decision Decision notice Proposal Location No. Date sentdate

Llanfechan Farm TEL /2016/0008 18/11/2016 00 APPROVE04/01/2017 Tel: Part 24 of schedule Garth TELE 2: Replacement of monopole and installation of Llangammarch Wells equipment cabinet LD 4 4 BA

Ochr P/2016/1199 24/11/2016 00 APPROVE04/01/2017 Section 192: Proposed Cwm Golau, CLA 2 erection of a conservatory Cyfronydd Welshpool

SY 21 9 EZ

Page 106

18 PTLRW6 - 2017

Penderfyniad ar yr Apêl Appeal Decision Ymweliad â safle a wnaed ar 25/10/16 Site visit made on 25/10/16 gan Clive Nield BSc(Hon), CEng, by Clive Nield BSc(Hon), CEng, MICE, MICE, MCIWEM, C.WEM MCIWEM, C.WEM Arolygydd a benodir gan Weinidogion Cymru an Inspector appointed by the Welsh Ministers Dyddiad: 08.12.2016 Date: 08.12.2016

Appeal A, Ref: APP/T6850/C/16/3147249 Site address: Land at Alltmawr, Erwood, Builth Wells, Powys, LD2 3YR The Welsh Ministers have transferred the authority to decide this appeal to me as the appointed Inspector.  The appeal is made under section 174 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 as amended by the Planning and Compensation Act 1991.  The appeal is made by Mr John Jones against an enforcement notice issued by Powys County Council.  The enforcement notice, numbered E/03/2016, was issued on 2 March 2016.  The breach of planning control as alleged in the notice is, without planning permission, the unauthorised change of use of the Land from forestry use to mixed use comprising storage and distribution use, permanent residential use (in the wooden building at or about location “X” on the Plan), storage and maintenance of plant and equipment use and timber frame fabrication and storage use (in the forestry building at or about the location “Y” on the plan).  The requirements of the notice are: (i) cease using the Land for storage and distribution; (ii) cease the use of the Land for residential purposes; (iii) cease using the Land for storage and maintenance of equipment; (iv) cease using the Land for timber frame fabrication and storage; (v) remove from the Land all machinery, equipment, other component parts, materials and waste resulting from compliance with (i) to (iv) above; and (vi) return the Land to a condition suitable for forestry use.  The period for compliance with the requirements is 9 months for requirement (ii) and 6 months for the other requirements.  The appeal is proceeding on the grounds set out in section 174(2)(b), (c) and (f) of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 as amended. Since the prescribed fees have not been paid within the specified period, the application for planning permission deemed to have been made under section 177(5) of the Act as amended does not fall to be considered.

Appeal B, Ref: APP/T6850/C/16/3147255 Site address: Land at Alltmawr, Erwood, Builth Wells, Powys, LD2 3YR The Welsh Ministers have transferred the authority to decide this appeal to me as the appointed Inspector.  The appeal is made under section 174 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 as amended by the Planning and Compensation Act 1991.  The appeal is made by Mr John Jones against an enforcement notice issued by Powys County Council.  The enforcement notice, numbered E/04/2016, was issued on 2 March 2016.  The breach of planning control as alleged in the notice is, without planning permission: (a) the erection of a timber built, single-storey building and associated works in the approximate

Page 107

Appeal Decision APP/T6850/C/16/3147249 & 3147255

position marked with an “X” on the Plan; (b) the erection of a single-storey outbuilding and associated works in the approximate position marked with a “Y” on the Plan; and (c) the erection of a pole-mounted CCTV system in the approximate position marked with a “Z” on the Plan.  The requirements of the notice are: (i) remove the timber built, single-storey building referred to at 3(a) from the Land; (ii) remove the outbuilding referred to at 3(b) from the Land; (iii) remove from the Land all hardstanding laid down in connection with the buildings referred to at 3(a) and 3(b) and return the Land to a condition suitable for forestry use; and (iv) remove from the Land the pole mounted CCTV system referred to at 3(c) above.  The period for compliance with the requirements is 9 months.  The appeal is proceeding on the grounds set out in section 174(2)(f) of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 as amended. Since the prescribed fees have not been paid within the specified period, the application for planning permission deemed to have been made under section 177(5) of the Act as amended does not fall to be considered.

Decisions

Appeal A: Ref APP/T6850/C/16/3147249

1. The appeal is dismissed and the enforcement notice is upheld.

Appeal B: Ref APP/T6850/C/16/3147255

2. The appeal is dismissed and the enforcement notice is upheld.

Procedural and Background Matters

3. I note that the appeal form for Appeal A was in the name of Mr & Mrs John Jones but that correspondence has since confirmed that the appeal should proceed in the name of Mr John Jones only. Mrs Miriam Jones is included as an “Additional Appellant” on both appeal forms.

4. Appeal B was originally made on grounds (a) and (f). However, as the fee was not paid the appeal on ground (a) has lapsed, and the appeal is proceeding on ground (f) only. I note it has been argued that fees need not be paid as Mr Jones intends to apply for corresponding planning permissions. However, that does not affect the need for fees to be paid for these enforcement appeals if the Appellant wants the planning merits to be considered.

5. The lawful use of the land is for forestry purposes, and planning permission was granted (on appeal) in October 2005 (Ref APP/T6850/A/05/1183623) for the erection of a sectional steel frame building with cladding. Condition 4 of that permission defined the lawful use of the building: “The building hereby permitted shall be used only for forestry contracting purposes in connection with the associated forestry holding and shall not be used for any other commercial or industrial activities”.

6. A third enforcement notice was also served on the Appellant. That notice, dated 5 February 2016 and Ref E/02/2016, was in connection with quarrying activities on the site. The Appellant has not appealed against that notice.

7. When I visited the appeal site I recorded the following operational development and mixed land uses: the large steel frame building with cladding, which is reported to be in use partly for the fabrication of timber roof frames and partly for the storage and maintenance of Mr Jones’ civil engineering plant and equipment (though I was not

Page 1082

Appeal Decision APP/T6850/C/16/3147249 & 3147255

able to gain entry to the building to confirm these uses); a portacabin messroom alongside the large building; 4 secure steel storage units, to which I was also unable to gain entry; 2 pairs of dual caravan units, which appeared to be for use as site offices but are currently stored on the site; 2 residential caravans located at the rear of the large shed, neither of which I was able to gain entry to but one of which appeared to be in residential use; 2 large tracked excavators, a large dumper lorry, a large roller and a considerable number of excavator buckets and smaller pieces of engineering equipment; a substantial quantity of fabricated timber roof frames and timber materials; and a substantial quantity of civil engineering and building materials, including concrete blocks, bricks, plastic pipes, steel reinforcement and steel temporary fencing panels. There was also an outstanding stockpile of quarried rock on the site.

8. In addition, to the west of the site entrance and on a shelf above the level of the rest of the site there was an attractive and substantial wooden chalet, an associated small wooden shed with a wire run used as a kennel (dog there at time of visit), and a CCTV camera on a steel pole. The chalet is the size of a small bungalow and appears to benefit from various services. I was not able to gain access to inspect the inside of the chalet and all of the windows were obscured by blinds. However, there were 2 bicycles at the rear, and the rear porch contained a washing machine and tumble drier and an assortment of men’s, women’s and children’s shoes and boots. 2 cars and a van were parked outside.

Appeal A on Ground (b)

9. This ground of appeal is that the breach of planning control alleged in the notice has not occurred as a matter of fact, and Mr Jones has submitted that it is applicable in respect of both “storage and distribution use” and “storage and maintenance of plant and equipment use”.

10. In regard to the former, in addition to the storage of timber roof frames, the site is being used to store construction and building materials and the 2 pairs of dual unit caravans/offices. Thus this element of the alleged breach is taking place, and the appeal fails on this account. Furthermore, as I was unable to inspect the interior of the many secure storage units on the site and of the large shed I am unable to discount the possibility of further storage activities taking place within those.

11. As for the second element, as I have listed above, the site is being used to store a number of items of construction plant and numerous smaller pieces of equipment, which leads me to the conclusion that this element of the alleged breach is also taking place. It may be argued that this plant and equipment is for use in connection with forestry operations but, as I have seen no other evidence of any forestry use of the site, I find that unconvincing. Rather, my conclusion is that the site is being used as a base for Mr Jones’ wider civil engineering business.

12. The appeal on ground (b) fails.

Appeal A on Ground (c)

13. This ground of appeal is that there has not been a breach of planning control, for example because permission has already been granted or it is “permitted development”. Mr Jones puts forward the same arguments for this as for ground (b) above. However, the change of use amounts to development that requires planning permission. As no such permission exists there has been a breach of planning control, and the appeal on ground (c) fails.

Page 3109

Appeal Decision APP/T6850/C/16/3147249 & 3147255

Appeal A on Ground (f)

14. I turn to consider the appeal on ground (f) for this notice, which is that the steps required to comply with the requirements of the notice are excessive, and lesser steps would overcome the objections. Mr Jones pleads this ground on several matters: the storage of civil engineering plant and equipment, and use of the large shed for its maintenance; the residential use of the wooden chalet; the fabrication and storage of timber roof frames; and the reinstatement of the site solely to use associated with forestry.

15. On the first and fourth of these matters he says he is awaiting some agreements by the Council, though no clear and firm proposals are put forward for my consideration of any lesser steps. Thus the appeal is unsuccessful on these matters.

16. On the second and third matters he says he intends to submit appropriate applications for planning permission within 2 weeks of making the appeal. I do not know whether he has done that or not. However, it has no relevance to my considerations in this appeal. In the absence of any clear proposals to me on this ground of appeal, the appeal also fails on these matters.

17. In conclusion, all of the elements of the appeal on ground (f) lack any substance, and the appeal fails.

Appeal B on Ground (f)

18. Finally, I turn to Appeal B which is appealed solely on ground (f). Again, Mr Jones simply says that he is willing to submit an application for planning permission to the Council to regularise this breach of planning control, and he says the chalet is needed to house a night watchman to provide security for the site.

19. As for Appeal A, I have no evidence whether he has instigated this action or not. However, it has no relevance to my considerations. In the absence of any proposals submitted for my consideration the appeal fails.

Overall Conclusions

20. I have considered the arguments put forward on both appeals as described above, and I have reached the conclusions explained above. Both appeals are entirely unsuccessful on all grounds.

Clive Nield

Inspector

Page 1104

Penderfyniad ar yr Apêl Appeal Decision

Ymweliad â safle a wnaed ar 1/12/16 Site visit made on 1/12/16 gan Declan Beggan BSc (Hons) MSc by Declan Beggan BSc (Hons) MSc DipTP DipTP DipMan MRTPI DipMan MRTPI Arolygydd a benodir gan Weinidogion Cymru an Inspector appointed by the Welsh Ministers

Dyddiad: 04.01.2017 Date: 04.01.2017

Appeal Ref: APP/T6850/A/16/3157566 Site address: Lower Vedwllwyd Dutlas, Knighton The Welsh Ministers have transferred the authority to decide this appeal to me as the appointed Inspector.  The appeal is made under section 78 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 against a refusal to grant planning permission.  The appeal is made by Mrs Julie Bevan against the decision of Powys County Council.  The application Ref P/2015/0067, dated 10 January 2015, was refused by notice dated 3 March 2016.  The development proposed is the ‘installation of 1 no. wind turbine (36.6m to hub and 48.4m to blade tip, with rotor diameter of 23.5m). Erection of equipment cabinet, hardstanding. Construction of temporary access track and all other ancillary works (E:320140, N:277630)’.

Decision

1. The appeal is dismissed.

Procedural Matters

2. I note the description of development on the planning application form refers to ‘Installation of 1 no. Wind Turbine (36.6m to hub) equipment cabinet and ancillary development’. The description as advertised, and stated on the Council refusal notice, and copied into the banner heading above is more accurate; it is on this basis that I have determined the appeal.

3. I also note that the site address given on the planning application form differs to that stated on the Council refusal notice. The site address as stated on the Council’s refusal notice and copied into the banner heading is more concise; it is on this basis that I have determined the appeal.

4. I note that Planning Policy Wales (PPW) Edition 9 was issued on 17/11/2016 and replaces PPW Edition 8; consequently I have dealt with the appeal on the basis of the revised PPW. Both parties were afforded the opportunity to consider the implications this may have had for their cases. No additional comments were made.

Main Issue

5. The main issue is the effect of the proposed development on setting of historic assets with particular reference to scheduled ancient monuments (SAM) and a grade 1 listed building (LB).

Page 111

Appeal Decision APP/T6850/A/16/3157566

Reasons

Site and proposal

6. The proposed turbine would be sited within an agricultural field some 900m west of the B4355 that leads northwards to Newtown and southwards to Knighton. The site lies within an undulating landscape of hills and occupies an elevated position relative to land in the wider landscape. The site is accessed via a farm track that links into the B4355.

7. Some 1 km to the northeast of the site on lower ground is a SAM known as Round Barrows South of Meagrams Corner, Ref. RD088, whilst another SAM is located some 3 km to the west on higher ground and is known as Beacon Hill Round Barrows, Ref. RD111. Approximately 1 km to the north of the appeal site is Bryndraenog Hall a grade 1 listed building.

8. The site and wider area are characterised by agricultural fields enclosed by a mixture of fences and hedges, with scattered shelterbelts and coniferous woodland. Within the broader locality individual buildings and farm complexes are evident. A number of bridleways run in close proximity of the site; in addition the nearby Beacon Hill is an extensive area of open access land.

9. The proposal is to install a three bladed wind turbine with a hub height of 36.6 m, an overall tip height of 48.4 m, with a rotor diameter of 23.5 m. Other ancillary works include the erection of an equipment cabinet, hardstanding, and the construction of a temporary access track. The turbine would have an operational life of 25 years.

Planning Policy

10. National planning policy on renewable energy developments is set out in PPW and the associated Technical Advice Note 8: Planning for Renewable Energy (TAN 8), both of which are committed to delivering renewable energy to combat climate change, with wind energy recognised as offering the greatest potential in the short to medium term for delivering such energy. The site lies outside of any Strategic Search Areas (SSA’s) identified in TAN 8. Paragraph 2.13 of TAN 8 recognises that outside SSA’s there is a balance to be struck between the desirability of renewable energy and landscape protection. Paragraph 8.4 of Appendix D to TAN 8 refers to areas outside of SSA’s, where the implicit objective is to maintain the landscape character i.e. ‘no significant change in landscape character from wind turbine development’. PPW refers to taking into account the impact of renewable energy development on the historic environment.

11. The relevant development plan for the area is the Powys Unitary Development Plan adopted in 2010 (UDP). Policy SP3 refers to proposals protecting, conserving and whenever possible enhancing sites and features of historic importance including those of archaeological, architectural, heritage conservation and historic interest. Policy SP12 states that proposals for energy generation from renewable sources will be approved providing they meet the landscape, environmental, amenity and other requirements of the plan. Policy GP1 is a general development control policy and refers to proposals only being permitted if they take into account, amongst others, features and designated sites of historic, archaeological or built heritage interest. Policy E3 states that wind turbine development will be approved subject to a number of criterion which include, that it does not unacceptably impact upon any buildings or features of conservation or archaeological interest. Policy ENV14 states that development which unacceptably adversely affects a LB or its setting will be refused. Policy ENV17 states that development that would unacceptably affect the site or

Page 112 2

Appeal Decision APP/T6850/A/16/3157566

setting of a SAM will not be permitted. Policy ENV18 seeks to protect archaeological sites.

Scheduled Ancient Monuments

12. The Council’s first reason for refusal refers to insufficient information having been submitted to assess the impact of proposed development on the setting of not only SAM Ref. RD088 but also on SAM Ref. RD111, including the relationship between the two. I shall deal with each aspect in turn.

13. At just over 1km away to the northeast of the appeal site can be found round barrow Ref. RD088, which is a prehistoric funerary monument dating to the Bronze Age and is situated on the banks of the river Teme. I note that Cadw state that the barrow is sited in an unusual topographic position which is also shared by a number of other barrows in the locality and that although the barrow is next to the road its setting is otherwise predominantly rural and agricultural in context.

14. The appellant’s submitted Historic Environment Appraisal1 (HEA) states that whilst the proposed turbine would have a very low indirect visual impact on SAM RD088, nonetheless its setting would not be affected. The appellant further argues that the SAM would be only visible from a limited area and would not include the field where the proposed turbine would be sited.

15. I note that Cadw state the submitted HEA failed to provide any detailed information on how the setting of SAM RD088 is understood, appreciated and experienced and therefore it was impossible to determine the impact of any proposed change; in particular reference is made to a lack of photomontages to properly assess any impact.

16. Whilst there is limited evidence before me in terms of SAM RD088 to deal with the contribution its setting makes to its significance, however what is known is that it dates from the Bronze Age and sits on the valley floor. The appellant argues that the fact that it sits on valley floor suggests that it is the river corridor and not the adjacent uplands that is of significance; that may well be the case to a certain degree, however, the river corridor is not viewed in isolation to the SAM’s wider setting; that setting, as highlighted by Cadw and to which I agree, is predominately rural and agricultural in nature. I appreciate the original setting of the barrow will have been compromised by a landscape that is enclosed and which now features built structures, nonetheless, the SAM has a tranquil rural character to it. I also appreciate that the B4355 intrudes into and affects the setting of the SAM, however from a number of vantage points, the road is well screened by vegetation or local topography.

17. The appellant’s submitted Landscape and Visual Impact Assessment (LVIA) highlights that within LANDMAP the appeal site falls within Upland Moor, Beacon Hill and Gors Lydan Visual and Sensory Aspect Area, the Upper Teme Historical Aspect Area, and the Rural Landscapes Cultural Landscape Aspect Area.

18. In regards to the ‘Visual and Sensory Aspect Area’, the locality is described, amongst others, as a line of wild exposed upland hills with semi-natural rough moorland cover and is a good example of a wild upland moorland. The overall quality of the landscape is classified as ‘high’.

1 Refer to the ‘Lower Vedwllwyd, Dutlas, Powys Historic Environment Appraisal’, Report by Trysor January 2015, along with additional comments dated 19 October 2015.

Page 1133

Appeal Decision APP/T6850/A/16/3157566

19. In regards to the ‘Historical Aspect Area’, the area is characterised by medieval relics and landscape patterns; the overall evaluation of the area is ‘high’ in LANDMAP. It is worth noting that to the west of the proposed turbine lies the Historic Aspect Area known as Beacon Hill which is described as mainly unenclosed 19th century upland commons with some prehistoric remains; this area has an overall evaluation of ‘high’.

20. The ‘Cultural Landscape Aspect Area’ covers large areas of uplands and lowlands and is largely an agricultural landscape with extensive historical references dating from prehistory through to the modern day; this aspect area is given an overall evalaution of ‘high’.

21. Thus, to my mind the rural setting of SAM RD088 contributes to its status because whilst it is set low in the valley, from a number of vantage points it is easily recognised, and its historic character is clearly linked to an historic rural landscape that whilst having changed over time, has not been significantly eroded by built development such that the natural landforms no longer dominate.

22. The relationship of the setting to the asset is not simply seen from the asset, rather it relates to the asset in the landscape. In this respect I viewed SAM RD088 from vantage points in the general area. It was clear from a number of the vantage points along the minor road to the east of the SAM that the proposed turbine, because of its siting to the west, its prominence, its modern engineered appearance and movement, would be visually intrusive and detract from the tranquillity and setting of SAM RD088, notwithstanding its siting adjacent to the B4355.

23. PPW states that it will only be in exceptional circumstances that planning permission will be granted if development would result in an adverse impact on a scheduled monument or has a significantly damaging effect upon its setting; such advice is replicated in Welsh Office Circular 60/96, Planning and the Historic Environment: Archaeology. The harm identified here would result in conflict with national planning policy as espoused in PPW and advice set out in WO 60/96. I also find conflict with policies SP3, E3, & ENV17 of the UDP, which collectively seek to safeguard features of archaeological interest. In addition it would run contrary to policy SP12 of the UDP which states that proposals for energy generation from renewable sources will only be approved providing they meet the landscape, environmental, amenity and other requirements of the plan.

24. The Council’s first reason for refusal refers to insufficient information having been submitted to assess the impact of proposed development on the setting of not only SAM RD088 but also on Beacon Hill Round Barrows Ref. RD111, including the relationship between the two.

25. Whilst I note that Cadw’s main concerns related to the potential impact of the proposed development on SAM RD088, reference was also made to potentially some significance to the relationship between the barrows on Beacon Hill and SAM RD088, although it is accepted there is no intervisibilty between them.

26. The Council refer to the lack of reference to SAM Ref. RD111 in the submitted HEA, with no assessment of the proposal’s impact on their setting when viewed from across the valley having been undertaken. I appreciate the HEA makes little reference to the Beacon Hill barrows, nonetheless, I observed the appeal site from a number of vantage points in the surrounding landscape including those selected for the LVIA, and based on those observations, due to the intervening vegetation, local topography, and the distances involved I do not consider the proposed turbine would be likely to have any significant effect on the setting of the barrows on Beacon Hill. In addition it is

Page 114 4

Appeal Decision APP/T6850/A/16/3157566

apparent from the appellant’s Zone of Theoretical Visibility2 that the proposed turbine would not be visible from the Beacon Hill barrows due to the local topography; based on my site observations I would tend to agree.

27. In their appeal submission, the appellant argues there is no relationship between SAM RD088 and SAM RD111, as they are not intervisible and are set in very different landscape settings, with some distance between them. The appellant states that their common characteristic is the fact that they date from the Bronze Age, which merely places them in a rough chronology, and that they may centuries apart, and may have been built by different communities. Reference is also made to the fact that the Beacon Hill barrows face westwards and not towards SAM RD088, and appear to belong to a different phase or tradition of funerary commemoration.

28. Whilst I appreciate the Council’s concerns in regards to the lack of assessment of the relationship between the two SAM’s, nonetheless, neither they or Cadw have provided any compelling evidence to counter the appellant’s view that there is no relationship. Whilst lack of intervisibility does not in itself rule out the possibility that the SAM’s are related, nonetheless, when you consider the Beacon Hill barrows face westwards away from the SAM RD088, their settings within different landscapes, their distance apart, and as stated by the appellant, that they appear to belong to a different phase or tradition of funerary commemoration, it appears unlikely there is a significant relationship. Therefore based on the written appeal submissions and my site observations over the wider area, and in particular from the SAM’s in question, and without compelling evidence to the contrary, I do not consider there is any significant relationship between SAM’s RD088 & RD111.

29. Overall I conclude on this main issue, for the reasons given above, that the proposed turbine would be detrimental to the setting of SAM RD088 for the reasons previously stated.

Listed Building

30. The Council’s second reason for refusal refers to the proposed development having an unacceptable adverse impact on the setting of Bryndraenog Hall, a grade 1 listed building. It is situated in an elevated position above the valley floor some 1km to the north of the appeal site, although at a lower level than the appeal site.

31. Bryndraenog Hall is listed for its outstanding historic and architectural interest as an almost complete medieval house of lordship status, especially notable for its fine carpentry of the 15th and 17th centuries. I note that the appellant’s HEA states that the hall appears to have been positioned to look out over the Teme Valley and Shropshire hills to the east and that the house and complex of buildings sit within a post medieval field system defined by hedged field parcels, with woodland closeby to the north and south.

32. There is no significant evidence before me regarding the setting of this listed building. However, contrary to the appellant’s views, to my mind the setting, which contributes to the significance of the assets, includes the surrounding open rural land and this contributes to understanding the historic function of the building and its status. The appellant maintains the proposed development would have no impact on the setting of the house or views of it; however from the written evidence and from what I saw on my site visit, I do not accept that this is so. I observed the setting of the hall from a

2 As shown in the submitted LVIA

Page 1155

Appeal Decision APP/T6850/A/16/3157566

number of viewpoints including those indicated on the LVIA. In my view, the proposal, notwithstanding the local topography and vegetation, would be seen as a particularly intrusive engineered feature situated on the hillside above the listed house, and in contrast to the rural landscape surrounding it. Furthermore the proposed turbine would draw attention away from the house and buildings associated with it, which otherwise would be a more natural focal point nestled lower down the valley side.

33. I conclude the proposal would be harmful to the setting of the listed building particularly when seen from views to the east, which contribute to the significance of the asset, because to my mind these surrounding views underpin the historic function and importance of the listed house in relation to the lordship of the lands around.

34. In arriving at this view I am conscious of the existing turbine that is located to the west of Bryndraenog Hall which to a certain extent already compromises its setting, however, the proposed turbine is taller and to my mind would appear as a much more intrusive engineered feature into the rural landscape that forms part of the setting to the hall in a southerly direction; consequently, irrespective of the existing turbine, the proposed turbine in its own right would be harmful to the setting of the listed hall.

35. The harm to the listed building needs to be considered in the wider balances to be made, however the proposal is in conflict with UDP policies SP3, GP1, E3 and ENV14 which collectively seek to protect heritage assets, in addition to advice as contained within WO 61/96, and national planning policy contained within PPW.

Other Matters and Weighing

36. The proposed turbine would generate electricity from renewable resources and thus contribute to national and local planning policy that seeks to help reduce carbon emissions, and combat the cause of global warming. The electricity generated from the proposed turbine would make a worthwhile contribution to the provision of renewable energy which weighs in its favour. It would also help to financially support the farming enterprise at Lower Vedwllwyd by introducing a further income source and by reducing overall expenditure, which weighs in its favour.

37. However, PPW refers to taking into account the impact of renewable energy development on the historic environment. In this instance the benefits do not outweigh the significant harm identified.

38. In addition to the matters already addressed, the main concerns raised by interested parties include landscape and visual impacts, ecology, and the impacts on public rights of way (PROW).

39. The submitted LVIA considered that the visual and landscape impacts of the proposal would not be unacceptable. In this respect the Council in their assessment of the proposal were of the opinion that given the existing landscape features, topography and relative distances involved from identified receptors, the proposal was considered not to have any unacceptable impact on the character or appearance, or visual amenities of the area; based on the submitted evidence and my site observations, I have no reason to take a contrary view.

40. Concerns were raised as regards the impact of the proposal on nearby bridleways, however I note that the Council’s Countryside Services Section state that of the three bridleways that are within 200 metres of the proposal, two of those cross Crown Common land, and therefore horse riders are able to freely cross the area, and can choose to stay further away from the turbine. As regards the other bridleway, I note

Page 116 6

Appeal Decision APP/T6850/A/16/3157566

the appellant offered an alternative route that would allow riders to maintain the recommended 200m from the turbine. Bearing these matters in mind I do not consider the proposed development would have an unacceptable adverse impact on the enjoyment and safe use of the public right of way network in the locality.

41. As regards the impact of the scheme on ecology interests, the appellant has submitted an ecology survey which Natural Resources Wales have confirmed has been carried out to a satisfactory standard, and that there would be no adverse impact on protected species or birds; there is no significant evidence for me to take a contrary view.

42. I have considered the duty to improve the economic, social, environmental and cultural well-being of Wales, in accordance with the sustainable development principle, under section 3 of the Well-Being of Future Generations (Wales) Act 2015 (“the WBFG Act”). In reaching this decision, I have taken into account the ways of working set out at section 5 of the WBFG Act and I consider that this decision is in accordance with the sustainable development principle through its contribution towards one or more of the Welsh Ministers well-being objectives set out as required by section 8 of the WBFG Act.

Conclusions

43. After taking account of all the evidence before me, and for reasons given above, I therefore conclude that the appeal should be dismissed. Declan Beggan

INSPECTOR

Page 1177

This page is intentionally left blank

Penderfyniad ar yr Apêl Appeal Decision gan Robert Sparey MPlan by Robert Sparey MPlan Person a benodir gan Weinidogion Cymru A person appointed by the Welsh Ministers

Dyddiad: 04.01.2017 Date: 04.01.2017

Appeal Ref: APP/T6805/A/16/3165422 Site address: Bryn Afal, Olivers Lane, Tregynon, Newtown, Powys, SY16 3EP The Welsh Ministers have transferred the authority to decide this appeal to me as the appointed person.  The appeal is made under section 62ZB of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990.  The appeal is made by Malcolm Brown against a notice of invalidity issued by Powys County Council.  The Council's reference is P/2016/1083.  The notice was issued on 5 December 2016.  The development proposed is ‘one Affordable Dwelling on land adjacent to Bryn Afal and associated works including a footway to Olivers lane’ (outline application).  The requirement of the notice is to submit ‘Correct planning fee for a full planning application: £380’.  The appeal is proceeding on the grounds set out in sections 62ZB(2) (b) of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 as amended.

Decision

1. The appeal succeeds in part on Ground (b) and the Notice of Invalidity is varied by deleting requirement 1. and substituting the following;

1. The correct planning fee for an outline application as specified in the Town and Country Planning (Fees for Applications, Deemed Applications and Site Visits) (Wales) Regulations 2015

Reasons

2. Regulation 8 of the Town and Country Planning (Fees for Applications, Deemed Applications and Site Visits) (Wales) Regulations 2015 (‘the Fees Regs’) sets out the criteria for exemptions to the requirement to pay a fee. Regulation 8(2)(f) of the Fees Regs states that the exemption will not apply where any previous application by the applicant for the site in question has already been exempted. This interpretation is supported by paragraph 11.14 of Welsh Government’s Development Management Manual: Section 7 Annex: Calculating the Fee (‘the DM Fees Annex’), which clearly states that an “applicant may benefit from the ‘free go’ exemption only once for any given site”.

3. The notice of invalidity states that the submission of a fee is required as the appellant exhausted the free resubmission for this site in respect of application P/2010/1172. The appellant does not dispute that this previous application represented a ‘free go’ on this site. I note the appellant’s arguments regarding the fact that the Fees Regs have

http://planninginspectorate.gov.wales/ Page 119

Appeal Decision: APP/T6805/A/16/3165422

only been in force since 2015, and therefore the ‘free-go’ cannot be considered to have been enabled by ‘these regulations’. However, Regulation 17(2) makes it clear that where regulation 8(2)(f) refers to an exemption under ‘these regulations’, it must be construed as including an exemption under the Town and Country Planning (Fees for Applications and Deemed Applications) Regulations 1989. Therefore, regardless of the arguments regarding whether the character or description of development of the application which is the subject of this appeal (P/2016/1083) is similar enough to that of application P/2015/0878 to be considered to be ‘the same’ in terms of regulation 8(2)(c) of the Fees Regs, in this instance there can be no ‘free go’ exemption and the payment of a fee does form a validation requirement.

4. However, the requirement in the notice of invalidity issued by the Local Planning Authority (LPA) is for the applicant to pay the fee for a full application. This is at odds with the application as made, which is for outline planning permission. There is no validation requirement in the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 (as amended) (‘the 1990 Act’) or the Development Management Procedure Order (Wales) 2012 (as amended) (‘the DMPO’) which specifies that a particular type of application must be made in full in order for it to be considered valid.

5. Article 3(2) of the DMPO specifies that where an LPA consider they ought not to consider all or any of the reserved matters separately, they should notify the applicant and specify what further details they require. I note that the LPA have drawn the appellant’s attention to the Powys Unitary Development Plan (‘the UDP’) and specifically Policy ENV11 – Development in Conservation Areas, which states that full applications are required for developments in or adjoining conservations areas. These matters do not preclude the LPA from validating an outline application, and represent considerations for the LPA’s handling of the application post-validation. Notwithstanding my findings in this regard, it is also incumbent on the LPA when validating applications to ensure that any outline application meets the criteria specified in Article 3 (3) to 3(5) of the DMPO.

Other Matters

6. The appellant has submitted material relating to the LPA’s handling of application P/2015/0878, and whether the resultant decision notice on that application is valid. I note that the applicant has been in correspondence with Powys County Council and the Public Services Ombudsman for Wales regarding these matters. The status of the decision notice for application P/2015/0878 has no bearing on the reasons for my decision on the appeal before me, as I have established that the ‘free-go’ was exhausted by application P/2010/1172. It would therefore not be appropriate for me to comment on matters relating to the LPA’s handling of that application and the validity of that decision.

Conclusion

7. For the foregoing reasons, I consider it necessary to vary the requirement, as detailed in the formal decision, to specify that the fee payable is that which corresponds to an application for outline planning permission. The appeal on Ground (b) therefore succeeds in part. Robert Sparey

Appointed Person

http://planninginspectorate.gov.wales/ Page 1202

PTLRW8 - 2017

CYNGOR SIR POWYS COUNTY COUNCIL

PLANNING, TAXI LICENSING AND RIGHTS OF WAY COMMITTEE 12 th January 2017

REPORT BY: LEISURE & RECREATION SERVICES MANAGER

SUBJECT: Highways Act 1980, section 118 and 26 Public path Order proposal

REPORT FOR: DECISION ______

Proposal to extinguish bridleway DT1697 and footpaths DT1681 and DT1680 (part) and creation of new bridleway DT1687 (A) and footpath DT1680 (A) at Glangwy Farm, Builth Road, LD2 3RL (Community of Disserth and Trecoed.) Proposal to extinguish part of bridleway 5, near to Dolyrerw Farm, Rhosferig (Community of Cilmery)

Background: The need for a Public Path Order has arisen following an application from Mr & Mrs Lewis, as landowners of Glan-gwy farm to divert bridleway DT1697 away from a working farmyard. The original diversion proposal was to terminate the bridleway at the same end point; this has been discounted because the River Wye is considered unfordable. The proposed alternative is to create a bridleway that provides a through route between existing bridleways DT1698 and DT1696. From the point of view of the public, the changes would result in circular network of paths for horse riders and cyclists.

To coincide with the proposed creation of bridleway DT1697 (A) it is proposed to extinguish part of footpath DT1680 and create a new path to realign alongside Nant Y Prophwyd brook and connect to bridleway DT1697 (A). This would allow easier agricultural management for the landowners. The Welsh Government as another affected landowner has given consent to the proposals. It is also intended to extinguish the whole length of existing footpath DT1681 as the proposed new bridleway DT1697 (A) runs in a similar direction.

In addition, it is proposed to extinguish part of bridleway 5 that travels across part of the River Wye as it is considered to be unfordable and not needed for public use. The landowner of Dolyrerw Farm has no objection to this proposal.

Current Definitive routes: Bridleway DT1697: Points A-E-F-G-H as shown on the plan at Appendix A It is proposed to extinguish the whole recorded length of bridleway DT1697. The bridleway commences on the Glan-gwy to Henfaes stoned access track at OS Grid Reference SO 0212, 5366 (point A), at the junction of bridleway DT1698 and footpath DT1681. It proceeds in a generally south-westerly direction along the track over the disused railway line, through a field gate and then turning to

1 Page 121 travel in a south south-westerly direction to enter the farmyard at Glan-gwy. At OS Grid Reference SO 0205, 5326 (point E) the bridleway turns to follow a west south-westerly direction though a field gate, across the farmyard and through a further gate adjacent to the farmhouse and onto a track. At OS Grid Reference SO 0198, 5349 (point F) the route turns to a generally west north-westerly direction and continues by descending along the track to SO Grid Reference SO 0191, 5351 (point G). It then turns again to cross the field in a generally south-westerly direction for approximately 70 metres towards the river bank of the River Wye. The bridleway traverses the river and ends at OS Grid Reference SO 0176, 5344 (point H). The total length of bridleway to be extinguished is 495 metres. The width is undefined in the statement.

Bridleway 5: Points I-J The section of bridleway to be extinguished commences near the bank of the River Wye, to the north west of Dolyrerw farmyard at OS Grid Reference SO 0174, 5345 (point I). It traverses part of the River Wye in an east north-easterly direction for approximately 50 metres to end at the former County/Parish boundary at OS Grid Reference SO 0179, 5347 (point J). The total length of bridleway to be extinguished is approximately 50 metres. The width is undefined in the statement.

Footpath DT1681, Points A-B-C-D The whole length of footpath DT1681 to be extinguished commences on the Glan-gwy to Henfaes stoned access track at a junction with bridleway DT1698 at OS Grid Reference SO 0212, 5366 (point A). It proceeds through a field boundary and follows in a generally easterly direction parallel with the field boundary for approximately 85 metres to a field gate at OS Grid Reference SO 0224, 5368 (point B). The path continues in an east north-easterly direction for approximately 130 metres and then a more north easterly direction parallel with the field boundary for a further 80 metres before turning in a more east north-easterly direction to descend the bank and cross the brook to then join existing Footpath DT1680 at OS Grid Reference SO 0243, 5381 (point C). The path continues in a north north-easterly direction for approximately 30 metres and terminates on the Cwmprophwyd access track at the junction with Bridleway DT1696 at OS Grid Reference SO 0244, 5384 (point D). The total length to be extinguished is approximately 390 metres. The width is undefined in the statement.

Footpath DT1680: Points N-P-M-C The part of the footpath to be extinguished commences at the bank of Nant Y Prophwyd brook at OS Grid Reference SO 0236, 5354 (point N). It travels across the field in a north north-easterly direction for approximately 125 metres to a pedestrian gate in the field boundary at OS Grid Reference SO 0237,5367 (point P) and continues for approximately 110 metres to a field gate at OS Grid Reference SO 0242, 5377 (point M). It passes through the gate and ends after approximately 45 metres at OS Grid Reference SO 0243, 5381 (point C), approximately 10 metres east of Nant Y Prophwyd brook. The total length to be extinguished is approximately 280 metres. The width is undefined in the statement.

2 Page 122 Proposed alternative routes: Bridleway DT1697 (A): Points A-B-K-L-O-M-D The length of bridleway to be created commences on the Glan-gwy to Henfaes stoned access track at a junction with bridleway DT1698 at OS Grid Reference SO 0212, 5366 (point A). It travels through a proposed bridle gate to emerge in a field and travels in a generally easterly direction parallel with the field boundary for approximately 85 metres to a proposed bridle gate at OS Grid Reference SO 0224, 5368 (point B). It continues for approximately 100 metres alongside the field boundary in a generally east north-easterly direction to a field gate at OS Grid Reference SO 0233, 5371 (point K). The bridleway traverses the brook known as Nant y Prophwyd to a proposed bridle gate at OS Grid Reference SO 0233, 5370 (point L) it then emerges into the field and turns to a generally north easterly direction through a bridle gate at OS Grid Reference SO 0234, 5370 (point O) and travels parallel with the field boundary to a field gate at OS Grid Reference SO 0242, 5377 (point M). It continues in a north north-easterly direction for approximately 75 metres and ends at a junction with bridleway DT1696 at OS Grid Reference SO 0244, 5384 (point D) on the access track to Cwmprophwyd. The total distance is approximately 410 metres. The width is 3 metres.

Footpath DT1680 (A), Points N-L The length of footpath to be created commences at the bank of Nant Y Prophwyd brook at OS Grid Reference SO 0236, 5354 (point N). It travels in a generally north direction for approximately 132 metres and then a more north north-westerly direction for a further 25 metres to join proposed new bridleway DT1697 (A) at OS Grid Reference SO 0233, 5370 (point L). The total length to be created is approximately 157 metres. The width is 2 metres.

Works required: Works needed to make proposed new bridleway ready for use:

• Installation of bridle gate with high reach handle, meeting current British Standard (BS5709:2006) at OS Grid Reference SO 0212, 5366 (point A) • Installation of bridle gate with high reach handle, meeting current British Standard (BS5709:2006) at OS Grid Reference SO 0224, 5368 (point B) • Installation of bridle gate with high reach handle, meeting current British Standard (BS5709:2006) at OS Grid Reference SO 0233, 5370 (point L) • Installation of bridle gate with high reach handle, meeting current British Standard (BS5709:2006) at OS Grid Reference SO 0234, 5370 (point O) • Clearance of overhanging branches along section K-L, to ensure a clear height of no less than 12 feet (3.66 metres) above the ground.

Consultation: Countryside Services carried out pre-Order consultation in July 2016. Responses to the proposals have been received from:

• Local member (Councillor D Price), who supports the proposals; • Local Member (Councillor G Williams), who has no objection; • Cilmery Community Council, who supports the proposals; • Disserth and Trecoed Community Council, who have no objection; 3 Page 123 • The Ramblers’ Association, whose response is described below; • The Open Spaces Society, whose response is described below; • BT Open Reach and Dwr Cymru Welsh Water, none of whom objected to the proposals; • The other affected landowners (the Welsh Government and Mr William Baxter) who have no objection to the current proposals.

The Ramblers’ Association confirmed that they have no objection to the proposal. Their response also stated that a problem has arisen with walkers who use the Heart of Wales Railway for walks and who wished to do a circular walk using the ford over the River Wye to link with the Wye Valley Walk. They therefore suggested it would be helpful if permanent notices could be placed on the A470, at Glan-gwy, in Builth Road Station and on the Wye Valley Walk to the south of the river to say that the ford over the River Wye does not now exist.

The Local Correspondent for the Open Spaces Society requested an additional linking path, which would run along the disused railway line or along the field edge adjacent and parallel to the disused railway line as it was felt it would appeal to many walkers especially for its historical and wildlife interest as well as forming part of a useful short circular walk for the local inhabitants of Builth Road. Correspondence can be read at Appendix B.

Mr & Mrs Lewis, as landowners were asked to consider this request, which would represent additional gain in terms of the public rights of way network. They do not wish to provide this extra linking path at the current time. A summary of their reasons for this are contained in a letter found at Appendix C.

The Open Spaces Society have therefore stated that they would be objecting should an Order be made as the proposals would not be acceptable, due to the loss of access for users to the river bank and the large reduction in the rights of way network available for use in this area. This correspondence can be read at Appendix D.

Options: The creation proposals meet the legal criteria and there have been no adverse comments specifically in relation to the new routes that have been put forward. Mr Newman’s comments about the extinguishment Order do not specifically state that the paths affected are ‘needed for public use’ – only that he feels that an additional path should be created. Although Mr Newman notes that the extinguishment of bridleway DT1697 would result in loss of access to the riverside at this location, the additional path that he proposes to be created would not address this issue, as it does not link with the riverbank. Given that, it is felt that the proposed extinguishments do meet the legal criteria, namely that they are not needed for public use in light of the paths that would be created instead.

Because of that, it is considered that the Orders can be made under sections 118 and 26 of the Highways Act 1980. The Orders would be open to public objection. Where concurrent creation and extinguishment Orders are opposed, there is a risk of one order being confirmed but not the other.

4 Page 124 If the Orders are made and then opposed, they could be formally abandoned. Otherwise the Orders could be submitted to the Planning Inspectorate for determination. The Planning Inspectorate will consider concurrently made creation and extinguishment Orders together, but is not obliged to confirm both. One option open to them would be to confirm the Orders with modifications. Alternatively, they may choose to confirm one or both Orders as made, or may decide not to confirm the Orders at all.

The Council can decide to support, remain neutral with respect to, or oppose the confirmation of the Orders.

If the Council decides to support the Orders, then it must make a case as to why the Order should be confirmed. If the Council chooses to remain neutral or oppose the confirmation of the Orders, that responsibility lies with the applicant.

These proposals are considered to be in the public and landowner interest. Given that and as the proposal meets the legal criteria for the making of an extinguishment and creation Order, it is proposed that the Orders be made. If they are opposed, then unless significant new information comes to light, or the landowner wishes to withdraw their support for the proposals, it is proposed that the Orders should be submitted to the Planning Inspectorate for determination, and the Council supports the Orders.

RECOMMENDATIONS: 1. That a Public Path Order be made to extinguish bridleway DT1697, footpath DT1681 and part of footpath DT1680 under section 118 of the Highways Act 1980, as shown on the plan at Appendix A.

2. That a Public Path Order be made to create new bridleway DT1697(A) and footpath DT1680(A), as shown on plan at Appendix A.

3. That, should either or both of these Orders be opposed, they be submitted to the Planning Inspectorate for determination without the need for further consideration by the Committee, unless significant new information becomes available or the landowner wishes to withdraw their support for the proposals;

4. That the Council should support the confirmation of the Orders, if they are opposed.

Appendices: Appendix A: Plan showing routes suggested for public path Extinguishment and Creation Order Appendix B: Email Correspondence from Mr Peter Newman, Local Correspondent for the Open Spaces Society and responses from Countryside Services Appendix C: Letter from Mr & Mrs C Lewis, dated 25/11/2016 in response to comments made by the Open Spaces Society Appendix D: Email Correspondence from Mr Peter Newman Local Correspondent for the Open Spaces Society dated 24 October 2016

5 Page 125 This page is intentionally left blank

253900 253800 253700 253600 253500 253400

D D

S C

302600 ) 302600 y

d

B



D A E

(

h t

6 B C P P M a E F G 9

p B K L M O t 6 y o 1 a Scale 1:2500

o w A AHIJNLA NC T e F l 6

D d e

9 c

i a

Dulas Brook r

r

r e

T

6

y

a

7

w 1 Pond l i B 1 a

T R 2

D 1 6 302500 302500 Trecoed

D

0

M 8

6 EXISTING FOOTPATH UNAFFECTED EXISTING BRIDLEWAY UNAFFECTED KEY TO NOTATION TO KEY TO BRIDLEWAY CREATED BE TO BRIDLEWAYS EXTINGUISHED BE TO FOOTPATH CREATED BE TO FOOTPATHS EXTINGUISHED BE

C h 1

t

T

a

p D

t

o

o F View Dulas 302400 302400

P

)

m Footbridge u

(

h t a P

1

8 N

6 O FB

1

d

L y T

K hw

op

Proposedr

P

y

nt

a D N

h Footpath DT1680 (A)

t

a

p

t

w

302300 o 302300

e

o

)

n

F

A

Cattle Grid Cattle

y

(

d

a

7

e

s 9 y w a lw

ai

o R

6 e d

tle l n

a p

1 m

B is

d D

o i

T

r r

D

b P 302200 302200 T1681 and DT1680 (part), community of Disserth and and of Disserth (part), community DT1680 and T1681 otpath DT1680 (A) community of Disserth and Trecoed and of Disserth community (A) otpathDT1680 ofCilmery

1698 way DT Bridle A Track 302100 302100 E Glan-gwy 302000 302000 F

k c a r T Pond Tank f the Council.

G

301900 y 301900

7

a Builth Road: Glangwy, at pathOrders Public new and fo new Order, Creation (A) DT1697 bridleway footpaths D DT1697, bridleway Order, Extinguishment (part) community 5 bridleway Order, Extinguishment

9

w

y 6

a e

l w 1

il

a

R d

T d i

e

tl r 7 n D

a m B h is t D a tp

neud gopïauunrhyw ychwanegol heb ganiatâd y Cyngor. k o c

ra y 100025371

T J o

dditional copies should without be the made permission o 5 F

wg Ordnanswg 100025371 y

301800 301800 a Council County

k

ac r w

T

e

l

d

H i r

) B m u (

th I a P clairer Date 07/06/2016 301700 301700 Cyngor Sir Cyngor

Printed by:

© Crown copyright© Crown and database rights 2016 Ordnance Surve © Hawlfraint y Goron a hawliau cronfa ddata 2016 Arol Additional information County Council © Powys 2016 No a Gwybodaeth ychwanegol © Cyngor 2016 Sir Ni Powys ddylid gw

253800 253700 253600 253500 253400 253900 Page 127 This page is intentionally left blank Page 129 Page 130 Page 131 Page 132 Page 133 Page 134 Page 135 This page is intentionally left blank Page 137 Page 138 Page 139 Page 140 PTLRW9 - 2017

CYNGOR SIR POWYS COUNTY COUNCIL

PLANNING, TAXI LICENSING AND RIGHTS OF WAY COMMITTEE 12 th January 2017

REPORT BY: Leisure and Recreation Services Manager

SUBJECT: Highways Act 1980, section 119 Public path Order proposal

REPORT FOR: DECISION ______

Proposal to divert Footpath LF104, Brynhoveth (Community of Llanbadarn Fawr.) Proposed abandonment of 2007 Order and making of new public path diversion Order.

Background: A public path diversion Order was made for footpath LF104 at Brynhoveth in 2007 (appendix A.) It was proposed that the footpath be diverted to move it out of a working farmyard. However, the Order was opposed, so the Council was not able to confirm it to bring the diversion into operation.

The opposed 2007 Order was considered by the Council’s former Rights of Way Committee, at their meeting on 25 th June 2009; the report can be found at appendix B. The Committee decided that the 2007 Order should be submitted to the Planning Inspectorate for determination and that the Council should take a supportive stance.

However, during the process of preparing the Order and accompanying documents for submission, it became apparent that a new fence line was in place, crossing the proposed new route, between the points marked as A and B on the 2007 Order plan. This was not part of the 2007 Order and a new gate would be needed to allow for the footpath to follow this alignment.

When making and advertising a diversion Order, it is considered good practice to make sure that the locations of all gates on the proposed new route are made apparent to consultees, so that they can make an informed assessment of the merits of the existing and proposed routes. The Planning Inspectorate will also take this into account when determining an opposed Order, as it affects the physical accessibility and convenience of the route.

Given that, in addition to the drafting issues outlined in the 2009 report to the Rights of Way Committee, it was felt that it might be of benefit to seek to make a new diversion Order. That would allow for the technical drafting issues to be corrected and the route alignment to be altered at the same time. The revised alignment is shown on the plan at appendix C. The revised route would run alongside a boundary fence to the east of point I, being a convenient reference feature for the public and the new gate would be located at point I.

Page 1 of 3 Page 141 Current Definitive route: Points A-B-C-D: The existing route of footpath LF104 commences at a junction with footpath LF106, at OS Grid Reference SO 1064,6599 (point A.) It follows a generally east north-easterly then more easterly direction for approximately 96 metres, ascending the slope to the boundary of the farmyard at Brynhoveth at OS Grid Reference SO 1073,6602 (point B.)

The footpath passes through the farmyard, following a generally north-northwesterly direction for approximately 67 metres. At OS Grid Reference SO 1072,6608 (point C), it leaves the farmyard and turns to follow the farm access track in a generally east north-easterly direction for approximately 66 metres. It ends at OS Grid Reference SO 1078,6611 (point D.) The total distance is approximately 229 metres; the width is undefined in the Statement.

Proposed alternative route: Points E-F-G-H-I-D: The proposed new route of footpath LF104 commences at a junction with footpath LF106 at OS Grid Reference SO 1063,6600 (point E.) It follows a generally north-north-easterly direction up the slope, parallel with the field boundary, for approximately 23 metres. At OS Grid Reference SO 1064,6602 (point F), the proposed route of the footpath and field boundary turn to follow a more northwesterly direction up the slope for approximately 43 metres. At OS Grid Reference SO 1062,6606 (point G), the proposed route if the footpath and field boundary turn again, to follow a generally north-northwesterly direction for approximately 64 metres.

At OS Grid Reference SO 1061,6612 (point H), the path turns to pass through a field gate in the boundary. It then follows a generally east-south-easterly direction for approximately 79 metres across a field to a second field gate at the corner of a small paddock area, at OS Grid Reference SO 1069,6610 (point I.) It then continues in a generally easterly direction for approximately 91 metres, first along a track and then leaving the track to cross an open grassed area to end at OS Grid Reference SO 1078,6611 (point D.) The total distance is approximately 300 metres; the width is 2 metres.

Works required: • Installation of a field gate, meeting current British Standard (BS5709:2006) at OS Grid Reference SO 1069,6610 (point I.)

The new route would also be waymarked as necessary to ensure that it can easily be followed, if the proposed diversion were to come into operation.

Consultation: The diversion application has been made by RH and ME Lewis, as the owners of Brynhoveth. There are no other affected landowners.

Page 2 of 3 Page 142 Consultation for the revised proposal has been sent to:

• Llanbadarn Fawr Community Council; • County Councillor John Powell, as the local member for the ward; • Path user groups: Ramblers’ Association, Open Spaces Society and the Byways and Bridleways Trust; • Natural Resources Wales; • Utility Companies.

No objections have been received to the revised proposals. Of particular note is the response from Mr Peter Newman of the Open Spaces Society, who objected to the 2007 diversion Order. He has responded to advise that he is unlikely to raise any objection to the revised proposals; his email of 7th September 2016 confirming this can be found at appendix D.

Seeking amendments to a diversion Order via the Planning Inspectorate is a very time-consuming process. In view of the number of amendments that are needed to the 2007 Order for footpath LF104, making a new diversion Order may now be the better course of action, given that no objections have been raised to the revised proposals. That would require that the 2007 diversion Order be formally abandoned.

RECOMMENDATIONS:

1. That the 2007 diversion Order for footpath LF104 at Brynhoveth (as at appendix A) be formally abandoned;

2. That a new Order be made to divert footpath LF104, Brynhoveth as shown on Order Plan Ref RCCS/SB/R/127-104 (as at appendix C.)

Appendices:

Appendix A Diversion Order 2007, footpath LF104 Brynhoveth Appendix B Report presented to former Rights of Way Committee on 25 th June 2009 in relation to 2007 Order Appendix C Plan of revised proposals for diversion of footpath LF104 Appendix D Email dated 7th September 2016 from Mr Newman, with Council response.

Page 3 of 3 Page 143 This page is intentionally left blank Appendix A

Page 145 Page 146 Page 147 Page 148 Appendix B

CYNGOR SIR POWYS COUNTY COUNCIL

RIGHTS OF WAY COMMITTEE 25 th June 2009

REPORT BY: COUNTRYSIDE SERVICES MANAGER

SUBJECT: Proposed diversion Order: Determination by Welsh Assembly Government

REPORT FOR: APPROVAL ______

Diversion Order-Footpath LF104, Brynhoveth, Penybont, Llanbadarn Fawr (Community of Llanbadarn Fawr.)

Background: An application to divert footpath LF104 was made on 14 th June 2006, with the aim being to move the path out of the working farmyard of Brynhoveth. The proposed route does not follow a direct route between points A and C for two reasons. The first of these was a potential planning application affecting land immediately to the west of the farm; the second reason was the particularly good views across the surrounding countryside that are available from the existing gate at point B. The route between points B and C could have followed a more direct cross-field route to link to footpath LF108, rather than linking to footpath LF106. However, this would have taken the path onto much steeper ground. It was felt that this would be significantly less convenient for path users than a field edge route, particularly in wet weather.

Consultation: Representatives of rights of way user groups, the Community Council, the Local Member and statutory undertakers were consulted. None of those who responded to the consultation indicated that they were likely to object to the proposal. In addition, the Ramblers’ Association commented on the good views available of the surrounding countryside from the gate at point B. Given the apparent lack of opposition, it was not felt necessary to seek the views of the Rights of Way Committee in respect of this application. A diversion Order was made and advertised in September 2007.

Objections: Objections have been received from the Open Spaces Society, from whom no response was received at the pre-Order consultation stage. Three of the points raised relate to technical issues in the drafting of the Order; these could be resolved by requesting that the Welsh Assembly Government modify the Order. Another relates to hurdles tied across the existing line of the path, which can be resolved through liaison with the landowner. The final issue to be resolved is that the Open Spaces Society representative feels that the proposed route is too circuitous. However, the reasons for the apparent ‘dog-

Page 149 leg’ in the proposed route and likely benefits to path users are as outlined above.

RECOMMENDATION: That the file be sent, along with an officer’s report in support of the Order, to the Welsh Assembly Government, so that it may be determined by the Planning Inspectorate on their behalf.

Page 150 Appendix C

Page 151 This page is intentionally left blank Page 153 This page is intentionally left blank