CITY and COUNTY of SWANSEA 2.00P.M. AGENDA

CITY AND COUNTY OF SWANSEA

NOTICE OF MEETING

You are invited to attend a Meeting of the

AREA 2 DEVELOPMENT CONTROL COMMITTEE

At: Council Chamber, CIVIC CENTRE, SWANSEA

On: Tuesday 27th October 2009

Time: 2.00p.m. Members are asked to contact John Lock (Applications Manager) on 635731 or Phil Baxter (Area Team Leader) on 635733 should they wish to have submitted plans and other images of any of the applications on this agenda to be available for display at the Committee meeting.

AGENDA

1. Apologies for Absence.

2. Declaration of Interest

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

3. Minutes of the meeting of the Area 2 Development Control Committees held on 6th October and site visits held on 13th October 2009.

FOR DECISION

4. Application for the removal of land from the Register of Common Land- Register Unit CL44, Mynydd Garn Goch Common, Community of Llwchwr.

5. Town and Country Planning - Planning Applications.

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

David M. Daycock Head of Legal & Democratic Services 20th October 2009 Contact: Gareth Borsden 01792 636824

ACCESS TO INFORMATION LOCAL GOVERNMENT ACT 1972 (SECTION 100) (AS AMENDED) (NOTE: The documents and files used in the preparation of this Schedule of Planning Applications are identified in the ‘Background Information’ Section of each report. The Application files will be available in the committee room for half an hour before the start of the meeting, to enable Members to inspect the contents). Item No. 2

Disclosures of Personal Interest from Members

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Item No. 3

CITY AND COUNTY OF SWANSEA

MINUTES OF THE AREA 2 DEVELOPMENT CONTROL COMMITTEE

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

PRESENT: Councillor R Lewis (Chairman) presided

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

A C S Colburn J W Jones C L Philpott W Evans S M Jones D Price E W Fitzgerald J B Kelleher T H Rees R Francis-Davies K E Marsh G Seabourne P Hood-Williams P M Matthews M Smith D H James J Newbury P B Smith D I E Jones D Phillips D P Tucker M H Jones

173. APOLOGIES

Apologies for absence were received from Councillors J E Burtonshaw, A M Day, E T Kirchner, J T Miles, P M Meara, R J Stanton, J L Richards and S Waller Thomas.

174. DECLARATION OF INTERESTS

In accordance with the Code of Conduct adopted by the City and County of Swansea the following interests were declared:

Councillor R D Lewis - Item 1 (Application No. 2009/0988) - Personal and vacated Chair and Item Nos. 21 and 22 (Application Nos. 2009/1288 and 2009/1289) Personal and vacated Chair and left Chamber during discussion.

Councillor J Newbury – Item 18 (Application No 2009/1151) – Personal and left during discussion

Councillor D P Tucker - Item 1 (Application No. 2009/0968) - Personal and left during discussion and Item 15 (Application No. 2009/1098) - Personal and left during discussion.

175. MINUTES

RESOLVED that the Minutes of the Area 2 Development Control Committee held on 15th September, 2009 and the site visits held on 22nd September, 2009 were agreed as a correct record subject to the name of Councillor A C S Colburn being added to the list of members present at the 15th September meeting.

Minutes of the Area 2 Development Control Committee (06.10.09) Cont’d

176. ITEMS FOR DEFERRAL

RESOLVED that the undermentioned planning applications BE DEFERRED for the reasons outlined below:

(Item 2) Application No. 2009/0995

Use of part of field from agriculture to camping for a maximum of 20 units from 1st May to 30th September (inclusive) at Eastern Slade Farm, Oxwich, Swansea.

Reason

To allow the applicant to meet with Officers to discuss a way forward.

(Item 13) Application No. 2009/1032

One double sided freestanding for sale sign for a temporary period of nine months at Campion Gardens Retirement Village, Clyne Common, Swansea.

Reason

To allow further Officer consideration.

177. ITEMS DEFERRED FOR SITE VISITS

RESOLVED that the undermentioned planning applications BE DEFERRED for SITE VISITS for the reasons outlined below:

(Item 4) Application No. 2009/0163

Realignment of approximately 110m of existing access track at The Old Rectory, Rhossili, Swansea.

Reason

To consider the impact of the development on the character of the area.

Minutes of the Area 2 Development Control Committee (06.10.09) Cont’d

(Item 5) Application No. 2009/0360

Replacement detached dwelling and detached garage at Cliffe Cottage, Langland Bay, Langland, Swansea.

Reason

To consider the impact of the development upon the Gower AONB. (Item 6) Application No. 2009/0435

Replacement detached dwelling and alterations to outhouse to form garage at Ash Tree Hall, Rhossili, Swansea.

Reason

To consider the impact of the development on the character and appearance of the conservation area and to assess the perceived overdevelopment of the site.

(Item 7) Application No. 2009/0438

Demolition of existing detached dwelling (application for Conservation Area Consent) at Ash Tree Hall, Rhossili, Swansea.

Reason

To consider the impact of the development on the character and appearance of the conservation area and to assess the perceived overdevelopment of the site. (Item 8) Application No. 2009/0439

Two storey side extension, single storey rear extension with balcony above, single storey side extension and alterations to outhouse to form garage at Ash Tree Hall, Rhossli, Swansea.

Reason

To consider the impact of the development on the character and appearance of the conservation area and to assess the perceived overdevelopment of the site.

Minutes of the Area 2 Development Control Committee (06.10.09) Cont’d

(Item 12) Application No. 2009/1016

Construction of a manège area at 219 Llwyn Du Pentre Road, Grovesend, Swansea.

Reason

To assess the impact of the development on the immediate area.

(Item 14) Application No. 2009/1085 Detached dwelling (outline) at land adjacent to 8 Y Berllan, Dunvant, Swansea.

Reason To consider traffic and parking issues

(Item 19) Application No. 2009/1200

Front gable roof extension, single storey front extension, single storey rear/side extension with balcony above, two rear dormers and fenestration alterations at 28 Higher Lane, Langland, Swansea.

Reason

To consider the impact of the development upon the existing building and the street scene.

178. SCHEDULE OF PLANNING APPLICATIONS UNDER THE TOWN AND COUNTRY PLANNING ACT 1990

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

RESOLVED that:

(1) Committee being minded to approve the following application contrary to officer recommendation on the basis that the Committee considered that the development would not detract from the character and appearance of the area and the natural beauty of the Gower AONB nor would it have a detrimental impact upon the amenities of adjoining residents, the undermentioned planning application BE REFERRED to Planning Committee.

Minutes of the Area 2 Development Control Committee (06.10.09) Cont’d

# (Item 1) Application No. 2009/0968

Demolition of existing bungalow and garage, construction of detached dwelling at Byways Lunnon, Swansea.

(NOTE: Late letter from Martin Caton M.P. reported.)

(Councillor D Phillips abstained from voting on the above item).

(Councillor J Kelleher presided for Item 1 above )

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

# (Item 3) Planning Application No. 2008/1515

Detached single storey timber stable block with tack room at Field at Landimore Farm, Landimore, Swansea.

Amend Condition 03 to read:

Prior to the development commencing, details of the paint/stain colour of the stable block shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The stable shall be painted in accordance with the approved details prior to its beneficial use commencing and shall thereafter be maintained in accordance with the approved details unless otherwise agreed in writing by the Local Planning Authority.

Amend Condition 4 to read:

No development shall take place without the prior written approval of the Local Planning Authority of a scheme for the landscaping of the site. The landscaping scheme shall be carried out within 6 months from the completion of the development. Any trees or shrubs planted in accordance with this condition which are removed, die, become seriously diseased within two years of planting shall be replaced by trees or shrubs of similar size and species to those originally required to be planted.

Minutes of the Area 2 Development Control Committee (06.10.09) Cont’d

# (Item 9) Application No. 2009/0610

Detached dwelling at 25 Hendrefoilan Road, Sketty, Swansea.

Add additional Condition 7 in respect of drainage:

Development shall not commence until details of foul, surface and land drainage works have been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The development shall not be brought into beneficial use until the works have been completed in accordance with the approved details.

# (Item 10) Application No. 2009/0986

Increase in ridge height to provide further living accommodation in the roof space at 50 Heol Pen Y Scallen, Loughor.

Amend Informative 1:

Delete ‘(insert the policies referred to in the officer report)’ and replace with ‘Policies AS6, EV1, and HC7’

(Item 15) Application 2009/1098

Single storey side extension (incorporating garage to provide annexe at Welsh Moor Farm, Llanrhidian, Swansea.

# (Item 16) Application 2009/1125

Side conservatory at Belmont, Port Eynon, Swansea.

(NOTE: Letter received from Port Eynon Community Council raising no objection to the development.)

(Item 17) Application No. 2009/1130

Rear porch at Foxgloves, Pitton, Swansea.

Minutes of the Area 2 Development Control Committee (06.10.09) Cont’d

# (Item 21) Application No. 2009/1268

Use of land for a caravan rally for a maximum of 30 units from 12th to 14th March, 2010 (inclusive) at Field 0005 Bank Farm, Horton, Swansea.

(NOTE: Additional letter of comment from the Gower Society reported.)

# (Item 22) Application No. 2009/1269

Use of land for a caravan rally for a maximum of 30 units from 21st to 23rd May 2010 (inclusive).

Additional letter of comment from the Gower Society reported. (Councillor D P Tucker, Vice Chairman presided for Items 21 and 22 above)

(3) the undermentioned planning applications BE REFUSED for the reasons in the report and/or outlined below:

# (Item 11) Application No. 2009/0987

Detached bungalow (outline) at land rear of 39 and 41 Glebe Road, Loughor, Swansea.

Amend report by referring to 7 letters of objection as opposed to 6.

(Councillor P Matthews abstained from voting on the above matter).

(Item 18) Application No. 2009/1151

Detached log cabin at Bay House, Caswell Road, Caswell.

# (Item 20) Application No. 2009/1237

Construction of new access road at Ty Rhosyn 16 Frampton Road, Gorseinon, Swansea. (Note: Late letter of objection reported)

Minutes of the Area 2 Development Control Committee (06.10.09) Cont’d

179. EXCLUSION OF THE PUBLIC

The Committee was requested to exclude the public from the meeting during consideration of the following item on the grounds that it involves the likely disclosure of exempt information as set out in paragraphs 17 and 18 of Part 4 of Schedule 12A of the Local Government (Access to Information) (Variation) (Wales) Order 2007.

The Committee having considered paragraphs 17 and 18 and the public interest and the advice of the Proper Officer (Monitoring Officer) decided that the public interest in maintaining the exemption outweighed the public interest in disclosing the information and RESOLVED to exclude the public.

(CLOSED SESSION)

180. ERECTION OF A SATELLITE DISH ON THE SITE OF THE FORMER ST. ANNE’S HOTEL, MUMBLES

The Head of Planning Services presented a report relating to a complaint regarding the erection of a satellite dish in the conservation area.

The possible “precedent” issue that could be set was outlined to Members.

RESOLVED that the matters be deferred pending a further report relating to the issues surrounding the complaint.

The meeting ended at 3.37 p.m.

CHAIRMAN

Z: Area 2 Development Control Committee - 6 October 2009 (GB/GDL) 7 October 2009

CITY AND COUNTY OF SWANSEA

MINUTES OF THE AREA 2 DEVELOPMENT CONTROL COMMITTEE SITE VISITS

HELD ON SITE ON TUESDAY 13TH OCTOBER 2009 AT 10.00AM

PRESENT: Councillor R D Lewis (Chairman) presided

Councillor(s): Councillor(s): Councillor(s): A C S Colburn M H Jones (b only) D P Tucker E W Fitzgerald G Seabourne (g only) S M Waller Thomas (b only) D I E Jones (g only) P B Smith J W Jones (b only) N J Tregoning (h only)

1. APOLOGIES

Apologies for absence were received from Councillors A M Day, W Evans, S M Jones, E T Kirchner, K E Marsh, J Newbury, C L Philpott and J C Richards.

2. TOWN AND COUNTRY PLANNING SITE VISITS

Following deferment for site visits at the meeting of the Area 2 Development Control Committee held on Tuesday 6th October 2009, Members visited the undermentioned sites prior to their determination at the Committee scheduled for Tuesday 27th October 2009:

(a) Planning Application No 2009/1200 - 28 Higher Lane Langland Swansea SA3 4NS. Front gable roof extension, single storey front extension, single storey rear/side extension with balcony above, two rear dormers and fenestration alterations.

(b) Planning Application No 2009/0360 - Cliffe Cottage, Langland Bay, Langland, Swansea, SA3 4RE. Replacement detached dwelling and detached garage.

(c) Planning Application No 2009/0435 - Ash Tree Hall, Rhossili, Swansea, SA3 1PL. Replacement detached dwelling and alterations to outhouse to form garage.

(d) Planning Application No 2009/0438 - Ash Tree Hall, Rhossili, Swansea, SA3 1PL. Demolition of existing detached dwelling (application for Conservation Area Consent)

(e) Planning Application No 2009/0439 – Ash Tree Hall, Rhossili, Swansea, SA3 1PL. Two storey side extension, single storey rear extension with balcony above, single storey side extension and alterations to outhouse to form garage.

(f) Planning Application No 2009/0163 - The Old Rectory, Rhossili, Swansea, SA3 1PL. Realignment of approximately 110m of existing access track.

(g) Planning Application No 2009/1016 - 219 Llwyn Du Pentre Road, Grovesend, Swansea SA4 8DD. Construction of a manège area.

(h) Planning Application No 2009/1085 - Land adjacent to 8 Y Berllan, Dunvant, Swansea. Detached dwelling (outline).

The meeting ended at 3.45 pm.

CHAIRMAN

Item No. 4

REPORT OF THE HEAD OF LEGAL AND DEMOCRATIC SERVICES

AREA 2 DEVELOPMENT CONTROL COMMITTEE - 27th October 2009

Application for the Removal of Land from the Register of Common Land (App No: 2712(S))

Summary

PURPOSE: An application has been received from Julian’s Supermarkets Limited to amend the Register of Common Land by removing an area of 6275 square metres from Register Unit CL44, Mynydd Garn Goch Common

POLICY FRAMEWORK: None. REASON FOR The land identified in the accompanying plan has ceased DECISION: to be common land.

STATUTORY TESTS: Commons Registration Act 1965, Section 22 Commons Registration Act 1965, Section 13 Commons Registration (General) Regulations 1966, Regulation 27

CONSULTEES: The following persons and bodies have been consulted as statutory consultees:

West Glamorgan Commoners Association Llwchwr Town Council Corporate Property Department Countryside Council for Wales Open Spaces Society Gower Society Penllergaer Estates Limited Parc Mawr Investments Penllergaer Demense Land Settlement Trustees of the Somerset Trust Local Members Garngoch Commoners Association All those persons appearing from the Register of Common Land to have an interest in the land.

RECOMMENDATION: It is recommended:

That the application be accepted and the land identified on the attached plan be removed from Register Unit CL44 (Mynydd Garngoch Common) of the Register of Common Land.

INTRODUCTION

1.1 An application has been received to amend the Register of Common Land by removing approximately 6275 square metres from Register Unit CL44, Mynydd Garn Goch Common, as shown on the attached plan (Application No: 2712(S)).

1.2 An application was initially submitted on 12th December 1990. However, the necessary paperwork was not forthcoming from the applicant and the application could not be processed.

1.2 A further application was submitted on 10th April 2007 by Julian’s Supermarkets Limited, Dryslyn House, De La Beche Street, Swansea on the basis that the land ceased to be common land on 4th March 1970 for the reasons set out in paragraph 4 below.

1.3 The land in question has since been tarmacked. No exchange land was provided for. The land is owned by the applicant.

1.4 This matter was reported to Committee on 25th November 2008. However, due to discrepancies in the consultation process and concerns relating to the quality of the plans, the matter was deferred. These issues have now been addressed.

LEGAL PRINCIPLES

2.1 Section 22 of the Commons Registration Act 1965 sets out the definition of Common Land (see Appendix I)

2.2 Under s.13 of the Commons Registration Act 1965, provision is made for the amendment of the register of common land where any land registered under the Act ceases to be common land (see Appendix II).

2.2 The procedure to be followed in determining the application for such a removal is set out in regulation 27 of the Commons Registration (General) Regulations 1966 (see Appendix III).

2.3 In order to make an application, the applicant must show that the land had already ceased to be common land at the date of the application. Consequently, this Council does not need to consider whether the land should cease to have common land status as the events leading to any change in status will have already taken effect. This Council must instead decide whether the application to remove the land is well founded and whether the necessary procedures for removal have been complied with.

2.4 There are a number of ways that land may cease to be common land and qualify for removal from the register. For the purposes of this application, the applicant relies on the legal doctrine of Unity of Seisin (i.e. unity of ownership and possession). Its effect is that land ceases to be common land if the owner acquires all of the grazing rights which attach to the land (and so long as there are no public access rights over the land).

CONSULTATION

3.1 Consultations were undertaken on 1st March 2008 in accordance with Regulation 27 of the Commons Registration (General) Regulations 1966. The following responses were received:

An objection has been received from Mr W H James, a local resident.

An objection was lodged by the Open Spaces Society but subsequently withdrawn.

GROUNDS FOR REMOVING LAND FROM THE REGISTER.

4.1 The applicant claims that the land has ceased to be common land by virtue of the following:

(a) A deed of agreement between the Commoners and the Most Honourable George Francis Hugh, Marquess of Cambridge (the Lord of the Manor) dated 7th July 1970 under which the Lord of the Manor acquired all the grazing rights; and (b) The exclusion of the public rights of access by virtue of a resolution of Council made by the former West Glamorgan County Council on 4th March 1970 and approved by the Secretary of State for Wales on 31st July 1970 to exclude 66 acres of land forming part of Mynydd Garngoch Common from the provisions of sections 193 and 194 of the Law of Property Act 1925.

4.2 The parties to the agreement dated 7th July 1970, between the Lord of the Manor and the commoners, represented all the interests in the land. Consequently, the parties are entitled to enclose it and divide it up amongst themselves so long as there are no public rights of access over the land.

4.3 Having consented to the exclusion of sections 193 and 194 of the Law of Property Act 1925, the West Glamorgan County Council and the Secretary of State for Wales agreed to the land ceasing to be common land and to its subsequent removal from the register of Common Land.

4.4 Documents submitted with the application confirm the above. Consequently, the land has ceased to be common land within the meaning of S.22 of the Commons Registration Act 1965.

OBJECTIONS RECEIVED

5.1 An objection to the removal of the land from the Register of Common Land has been received from Mr W H James, a local resident, on the basis that Register Unit CL44 (Mynydd Garngoch Common) has been gradually reduced in area. He argues that the length of time it has taken for the applicant to apply for the removal of the land should prevent the application being considered.

5.2 In the officer’s opinion, the land has already ceased to be common land by virtue of the matters set out in paragraphs 4.1 – 4.4 above. The length of time that the applicant has taken to apply for its removal does not provide sufficient grounds for rejection. Consequently, although the objection has been duly

made within the necessary timescales, it does not provide valid grounds for rejecting the application.

FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS

6.1 There are no financial implications for this Authority.

CONCLUSION

7.1 The application is in the correct form.

7.2 The evidence supplied by the applicant is sufficient to show that the land has ceased to be common land.

7.3 The objection received does not provide sufficient grounds for rejecting the application for the reasons set out in paragraph 5.2.

RECOMMENDATION

That the application be accepted and the land identified on the attached plan be removed from Register Unit CL44 (Mynydd Garngoch Common) of the Register of Common Land

Background papers: Documents file contained within 044-6

Contact officer: R. J. Cridland Ext: 6772

Appendix I

Extract from Section 22 of the Commons Registration Act 1965

(1) In this Act, unless the context otherwise requires,—

“common land” means—

(a) land subject to rights of common (as defined in this Act) whether those rights are exercisable at all times or only during limited periods;

(b) waste land of a manor not subject to rights of common; but does not include a town or village green or any land which forms part of a highway;

Appendix II

Extract from Section 13 of the Commons Registration Act 1965

Regulations under this Act shall provide for the amendment of the registers maintained under this Act where— (a) any land registered under this Act ceases to be common land or a town or village green; or (b) any land becomes common land or a town or village green; or (c) any rights registered under this Act are apportioned, extinguished or released, or are varied or transferred in such circumstances as may be prescribed;

Appendix III

Extract from the Commons Registration (General) Regulations 1966

Amendment of Registers under Section 13 of the Commons Registration Act 1965

Regulation 27 - Land ceasing to be common land or a town or village green

(1) Where any land registered under the Act has ceased to be common land or a town or village green, application may be made to the registration authority, in accordance with the following provisions of this regulation, for the amendment of the register.

[(2) An application under this regulation may be made by the person who, at the date of the application, would have been entitled (whether or not by virtue of any provision of these Regulations) to apply under section 4 of the Act for the registration of a claim to the ownership of the land if at that date such an application could have been made.]

(3) Every such application must be— (a) in Form 17;

(b) signed by [or on behalf of] every applicant who is an individual, and by the secretary or other duly authorized officer of every applicant which is a body corporate; and

(c) supported by a statutory declaration made by every person who has signed the application, and by such further evidence (if any) as, after considering the application and declaration, the registration authority may reasonably require.

(4) Applications under this regulation shall be numbered in order of receipt by the registration authority, and shall be entitled, unless rejected, to be given effect to on the register in that order.

(5) The registration authority shall, on receipt of any application under this regulation which it does not, after preliminary consideration, determine to reject, publish in the concerned area, and shall display, a notice in Form 18, and shall send the notice to— (a) every concerned authority;

(b) any person other than the applicant who is registered as owner of the land;

(c) where a right of common is registered as exercisable over the land, any person appearing from the register to be interested therein, and, where the registration is provisional, the person on whose application it was made and any person whose application is noted under regulation 9(5) above.

(6) Every authority receiving a Form 18 notice under this regulation shall display copies thereof.

(7) Upon the expiration of forty days from the date on which paragraph (5) above is complied with, the registration authority shall further consider the application and shall consider any written representations which it has received, and, if it deems the application well-founded, shall amend the register as shown in Standard Entry 6.

(8) In this regulation “concerned area” means, in the case of a registration authority which is the council of a county borough, an area including the area of the county borough and the areas of every concerned authority, and, in any other case, an area including the areas of every concerned authority

E T COMMONS REGISRATION ACT 1965 L

APPLICATION NO. 2712(S) BY JULIANS SUPERMARKETS LIMITED TO REMOVE LAND FORM THE REGISTER OF COMMON LAND AT MYNYDD GARNGOCH COMMON 41.061276 StILES 41.061276 Pen-y-waun 1974 REGISTER UNIT CL44 4 1974 Collects

Spreads

ck ra T

White Lodge

S WA NS EA RO Garage AD

Garage 53.2m

n i a r D

53.0m

54.5m Dr ain D rain

Sh elt Ty-Gwyn er Glasfryn 4

Terrace 1

Issues Issues

Land to be removed from Register Reproduced from the Ordnance Survey Map with the permission of the controller of HMSO Crown Copyright Registered common land City and County of Swansea licence no. 100023509 Scale: 1:2500 CITY AND COUNTY OF SWANSEA 1. BISHOPSTON DINAS A SIR ABERTAWE 5. COCKETT 7. DUVANT Report of the Head of Planning Services to the 8. FAIRWOOD Chairman and Members of the Area 2 9. GORSEINON Development Control Committee 10. GOWER 11. GOWERTON 12. KILLAY NORTH DATE: 27TH OCTOBER 2009 13. KILLAY SOUTH 14. KINGSBRIDGE 29 18. LOWER LOUGHOR 20. MAYALS 9 27 23. NEWTON 35 18 24. OYSTERMOUTH 14 25. PENCLAWDD 27. PENLLERGAER 11 28. PENNARD 5 29. PENYRHEOL 25 32. SKETTY 35. UPPER LOUGHOR 7 8 12 36. WEST CROSS

13 32

20 10 36 28 1 23 24

Bryan Graham B.A. (HONS); Dip. T.P.; M.R.T.P.I. Head of Planning Services CONTENTS

ITEM APP. NO. SITE LOCATION OFFICER REC.

1 2009/0788 Plot 1 Lady Housty Avenue, Newton, Swansea, SA3 4TS APPROVE Detached dwelling with integral garage

2 2009/0791 Plot 2 Lady Housty Avenue Newton Swansea SA3 4TS APPROVE Detached dwelling with integral garage

3 2009/0792 Plot 3, Lady Housty Avenue Newton Swansea SA3 4TS APPROVE Detached dwelling with integral store and garage

4 2009/0793 Plot 4, Lady Housty Avenue, Newton, Swansea, SA3 APPROVE 4TS Detached dwelling with integral store and garage

5 2009/0794 Plot 5, Lady Housty Avenue, Newton, Swansea, SA3 APPROVE 4TS Detached dwelling with attached garage

6 2009/0435 Ash Tree Hall, Rhossili, Swansea, SA3 1PL APPROVE Replacement detached dwelling and alterations to outhouse to form garage

7 2009/0438 Ash Tree Hall, Rhossili, Swansea, SA3 1PL APPROVE Demolition of existing detached dwelling (application for Conservation Area Consent)

8 2009/0439 Ash Tree Hall, Rhossili, Swansea, SA3 1PL APPROVE Two storey side extension, single storey rear extension with balcony above, single storey side extension and alterations to outhouse to form garage

9 2009/0360 Cliffe Cottage, Langland Bay, Langland, Swansea, SA3 APPROVE 4RE Replacement detached dwelling and detached garage

10 2009/0163 The Old Rectory, Rhossili, Swansea, SA3 1PL REFUSE Realignment of approximately 110m of existing access track

AREA 2 DEVELOPMENT CONTROL COMMITTEE – 27TH OCTOBER 2009

ITEM APP. NO. SITE LOCATION OFFICER REC.

11 2009/1200 28 Higher Lane Langland Swansea SA3 4NS APPROVE Front gable roof extension, single storey front extension, single storey rear/side extension with balcony above, two rear dormers and fenestration alterations

12 2009/1085 Land adjacent to 8 Y Berllan Dunvant Swansea APPROVE Detached dwelling (outline)

13 2009/1016 219 Llwyn Du Pentre Road Grovesend Swansea SA4 APPROVE 8DD Construction of a manège area

14 2009/1032 Campion Gardens Retirement Village, Clyne Common, REFUSE Swansea, SA3 3JB One double sided freestanding for sale sign for a temporary period of nine months

15 2008/0598 St Nicholas Church, Penmaen, Gower APPROVE Change of use from agricultural land to provide extension to existing graveyard together with provision of splay, new wall and double pedestrian gates

16 2008/1882 Land at Railway Terrace Gorseinon Swansea APPROVE Retention of use of land as a winter quarters for travelling fair

17 2009/1143 7 Parklands View Sketty Swansea SA2 8LX REFUSE Front roof extension

18 2009/0902 6 West Street Gorseinon Swansea SA4 4AA REFUSE Change of use from a cafe (Class A3) to offices (Class B1) with two storey rear extension above to provide 2 no. 1 bed flats and construction of detached two storey building to provide 2 no. 1 bed flats

19 2009/1294 Rock Cottage, Landimore, Swansea SA3 1HD APPROVE Retention of detached summer house

AREA 2 DEVELOPMENT CONTROL COMMITTEE – 27TH OCTOBER 2009

ITEM APP. NO. SITE LOCATION OFFICER REC.

20 2009/1375 Llanrhidian Primary School, Llanrhidian, Swansea, SA3 APPROVE 1EH Single storey detached building to house sprinkler system (Council Development Regulation 3)

21 2009/1381 Field 7376, Pilton Moor Stables, Pitton Cross, Rhossili, APPROVE Swansea Use of land for the siting of 5 touring caravans from Good Friday or 1st April (whichever is the earlier) to 31st October during the 2010/2011 seasons

22 2009/0224 Dolphin and Hillcrest Cottages, Stonesfield, North Hill APPROVE Lane, Penmaen SA3 2HD Two replacement single storey oak framed detached chalets

23 2009/1001 1 Higher Pitton Cottage, Rhossili, Swansea SA3 1PH APPROVE Two storey rear extension, single storey front extension and new entrance gates

24 2009/1252 Land east of Pontarddulais Road, Penllergaer, Swansea APPROVE Construction of 106 no. two and three storey dwellings and garages/parking, landscaping and associated works - amended house types (amendment to planning permission 2006/1487 granted on 13th November 2006)

AREA 2 DEVELOPMENT CONTROL COMMITTEE – 27TH OCTOBER 2009 AREA 2 DEVELOPMENT CONTROL COMMITTEE – 27TH OCTOBER 2009

ITEM 1 APPLICATION NO. 2009/0788 WARD: Area 2 Newton West Cross

Location: Plot 1 Lady Housty Avenue, Newton, Swansea, SA3 4TS Proposal: Detached dwelling with integral garage Applicant: Mr Ian Jonathan

BACKGROUND INFORMATION

POLICIES

Policy Policy Description Policy AS6 Provision of car parking in accordance with adopted standards. (City & County of Swansea Unitary Development Plan 2008)

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

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

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

SITE HISTORY

App No. Proposal 88/0070/03 ERECTION OF A TWO STOREY GRANNY FLAT ANNEXE. Decision: *HGPC - GRANT PERMISSION CONDITIONAL Decision Date: 12/04/1988

2006/2228 Residential development (outline) Decision: Refuse Decision Date: 30/01/2007 Allowed on appeal

2008/0398 Detached dwelling (outline) Decision: Refuse Decision Date: 21/04/2008 AREA 2 DEVELOPMENT CONTROL COMMITTEE – 27TH OCTOBER 2009

ITEM 1 (CONT’D) APPLICATION NO. 2009/0788

2008/1242 Detached dwelling (outline) Decision: Refuse Decision Date: 15/08/2008

RESPONSE TO CONSULTATIONS

The application was advertised on site and 17 individual properties consulted. SEVEN LETTERS OF OBJECTION and ONE PETITION OF OBJECTION containing 30 signatures received which are summarised as follows:

• The previous inspector gave permission for outline for 5 dwellings and as detailed plans were not available the following provisos applied –“that the development would not result in unacceptable loss of residential amenity to the occupiers of neighbouring properties. This can be controlled by the council when considering the detailed plans. I have imposed the planning conditions suggested by the council at this hearing in order to ensure that the development would be in keeping with its surroundings” • It was agreed “in residential amenity terms it is considered that a sensitively designed scheme could ensure no overlooking impact on the occupiers of neighbouring properties” • The Swansea Unitary Development states that the area has been over developed and sounds a note of caution on future size of proposed buildings – this is since the approval of the outline two years ago. • The inspectors report stated “no development shall take place until there has been submitted to and approved in writing by the local planning authority a plan indicating the positions, design, materials and type of boundary treatment to be erected. The boundary treatment for the plot shall be completed before the dwelling is occupied. Development shall be carried out in accordance with the approved details”. No boundary proposals have been received to date for any of the plots. • It is no coincidence that the area is named “Highpool” Close – there are already problems with water drainage. There is a serious concern that the proposal may not be adequate to ensure gardens in neighbouring Highpool Close adjacent to soakaways will be worse affected. • The proposed housing does not accord in any way with existing housing in the area or with the general landscape. • The height of the proposed houses are excessive resulting in an unacceptable loss of privacy in varying degrees to No’s 28 and 20 Highpool Close. The height must be reduced. • Any soakaways situated adjacent to neighbouring gardens must be sited a safe and suitable distance. There is already a problem with rain water in the winter and this should not be aggravated. • Policies should be adhered to and no serious adverse physical overbearing, overshadowing or overlooking impact on any neighbouring property should occur. • The current proposal speaks for itself and if the objectives of current policy are not met, then no development should go ahead. • Boundary treatment needs to be carefully considered and landscaping details provided. Is there a need for an ecological/wildlife survey? • If planning permission is forthcoming a high close boarded sturdy and good quality fence should be erected between the application sites and neighbouring gardens. • The unique character of the peninsular is slowly becoming eroded by new and often inappropriate development. AREA 2 DEVELOPMENT CONTROL COMMITTEE – 27TH OCTOBER 2009

ITEM 1 (CONT’D) APPLICATION NO. 2009/0788

• On the basis that there was no proposed layout put before the appeal inspector the responsibility now lies with the local authority. • Why not utilise the site for a more dense form of development and build smaller houses thus catering for the young started-home market thereby helping to make Swansea the greener, socially-aware city it ought to be. • The resulting cost and problems relating to surface water is drainage is inevitable. Concern over the future of the existing boundary hedge. The hedge is considered special, the developer shows little regard for the natural world or existing residents. • The entire project is clearly purely commercial. • The access is dangerous, and if the development goes ahead the entrance should be either gated or speed bumps introduced. If this is not the case the access will be dangerous due to the blind and narrow entrance. • The proposed dwellings do not relate at all to the surrounding dormer bungalows. • The proposal will lead to loss of value of existing neighbouring properties. • The existing hedge is having a damaging effect on some neighbouring gardens and should be cut. The hedge should not be used as an excuse to hide extra large houses.

Petition of objection containing 30 signatures raising the following concerns:

• The proposal will have a serious adverse physical overbearing, overshadowing and overlooking impact on the occupiers of neighbouring properties

The Gower Society – Express regret at the decision to grant outline planning permission and consider the houses generally too large for their location; the Gower Society consider that they should be lower in order to give less impact on the open countryside.

Mumbles Community Council – Out of keeping with existing houses. Intrusion on houses in Highpool Close and Green Wedge. Difficult access and narrow lane.

Welsh Water Dwr Cymru - No adverse comments subject to standard conditions.

Highway Observations - This application is one of five separate applications each for a dwelling served by a shared private drive off Lady Housty Avenue. Outline consent was granted at appeal and in his determination of the appeal; the Inspector imposed a condition relating to the standard of the shared private drive as follows;

No development shall take place until there has been submitted to and approved in writing by the local planning authority a plan indicating an access drive with a minimum width of 4.5m and a suitably positioned passing bay. Development shall be carried out in accordance with the approved details.

The drive details submitted with this application indicate compliance with the Inspector’s condition showing a 4.5m minimum width with a passing place where the drive turns through 90 degrees within the site. The remaining drive is of sufficient standard indicating a suitable turning facility for resident and visiting vehicles ensuring that all vehicles can enter and leave the site in a forward gear. Each plot is provided with 4 parking spaces and whilst 3 spaces is the maximum required for a residential dwelling, these proposed dwellings are large and therefore the additional space and the individual access drives will provide adequately for any additional demand and also visitor parking. AREA 2 DEVELOPMENT CONTROL COMMITTEE – 27TH OCTOBER 2009

ITEM 1 (CONT’D) APPLICATION NO. 2009/0788

I recommend no highway objection subject to the shared private drive access being completed to an acceptable standard of hard surfacing prior to the occupation of this dwelling.

APPRAISAL

This application is reported to Committee for decision at the request of Councillor Susan Waller Thomas.

In terms of planning history, Outline planning permission for the residential development of the site was granted at appeal by the Welsh Assembly Government in 2007 (2006/2228 refers) and as such the principle of developing this land is established. The outline application sought approval in principle for the demolition of No. 20 Lady Housty Avenue and the erection of five detached dwellings, although all matters other than means of access were reserved for future subsequent approval and as such no layout or design detail was submitted for consideration.

Five full planning applications have now been submitted concurrently, yet separately, each seeking approval for the construction of a detached dwelling house.

This application relates to a proposed detached dwelling on Plot 1 (of 5) on the development site. Plot 1 is a roughly rectangular shaped plot located north of No’s 20 and 22 Highpool Lane. It is bound to the south, by adjoining existing residential curtilages, the west by Plot 2 and to the north and east by surrounding open countryside.

Given that the principle of the form of development has been clearly established, the main issue for consideration in the determination of this application is whether the detailed design would be acceptable at the location, having regard to visual and residential amenity and highway safety standards in the context of prevailing development plan policies. There are in this instance no additional overriding issues to consider under the provisions of the Human Rights Act.

Planning Policy Wales states that new housing developments should be well integrated within and connected to the existing pattern of settlements. Sensitive infilling of small gaps within small groups of houses, or minor extensions to groups, may be acceptable though much will depend on the character of the surroundings. Insensitive infilling or the cumulative effects of development or redevelopment, including conversion and adaptation, should not be allowed to damage an area’s character and amenity.

Policy HC2 of the Unitary Development Plan seeks to support housing within the urban area unless the development will result in ribbon development or contribute to the coalescence of settlements; result in an overintensive form of development, loss of residential amenity, have an adverse effect upon the character and appearance of the area; result in the loss of important urban green space or have significant harm upon highway safety conditions

Policy EV1 of the Development Plan seeks to ensure that new development follow set objectives of good design that include, being appropriate to the local context in terms of scale height, elevation treatment, materials and detailing and ensuring that development does not result in significant detrimental impact upon local amenity in terms of visual impact, loss of light or privacy, disturbance or traffic movement. AREA 2 DEVELOPMENT CONTROL COMMITTEE – 27TH OCTOBER 2009

ITEM 1 (CONT’D) APPLICATION NO. 2009/0788

Policy EV2 states that the siting of new development must have regard to the physical character and topography of the site and its surroundings. Policy AS6 seeks to ensure that all new developments are assessed against adopted maximum parking standards.

The proposed dwelling is a substantial property, principally two storey in design albeit a third floor of accommodation is provided within the roof void. The design of the dwelling is elaborate insofar as it includes a significant amount of architectural detail together with a significant amount of glazing. The area is characterised by a mixture of house types, styles and sizes with no specific prevailing character dominant in the vicinity. As such the proposed house does not, it is considered, need to respond to any specific design criteria. External finishes include a combination of facing stone and render with fibrous cement slates to the roof.

The application plot measures some 1680m² and the proposed dwelling has an irregular footprint occupying approximately 200m² of the plot, (excluding the garage which is attached to the dwelling) thus allowing a substantial area of associated amenity space both to the front and rear of the property. The extent of curtilage is considered appropriate for a dwelling of the scale proposed, and the building to plot ratio proposed is considered acceptable. Overall whilst it is accepted that the proposed dwelling is a sizeable dwelling, the application site is of ample size to accommodate the proposed dwelling without giving rise to a cramped or overdeveloped plot.

With regard to visual amenity issues, Plot 1 will not be clearly visible from Lady Housty Avenue or other public viewpoints and as such it is not considered that the proposal gives rise to any visual detriment. Furthermore, it is considered that the scale, siting and design of the dwelling is appropriate at this location and whilst this is an application for a single detached dwelling, it is important to note that the proposed dwelling on plot 1 features an architectural style, and characteristics consistent with the proposed dwellings on plots, 2, 3, 4 and 5 (being considered concurrently) and as such a visually coherent setting and context is achieved. Overall therefore it is considered that the scale and proportion of the dwelling is acceptable and accords with the overall scale and character of the wider development and the proposal is not considered to have a detrimental impact upon the visual amenities of the area to an extent that could warrant refusal of this application.

In terms of residential amenity, as stated above, a satisfactory building to plot ratio is achieved and a level of amenity space provided that is considered appropriate for a large family dwelling such as that proposed. Furthermore, careful attention has been paid to the siting and design of the dwelling and fenestration detail to ensure that no harmful overbearing or overlooking is raised in respect of the nearest neighbouring dwellings. A minimum rear garden depth of 12m is provided (extending to 16m), which greatly exceeds the 10.5m standard normally applied in such situations. It is important to note that the closest part of the dwelling to the rear boundary is a single storey element where all ground floor windows will be screened by the existing high mature hedge that forms the southern boundary of the site and is to be retained. A two storey rear gable projection is included on this dwelling; however, this element of the dwelling achieves a 13m separation from the boundary and 25m separation (wall to wall) with No, 22 Highpool Lane. These separation distances exceed the minimum distances normally applied in these circumstances of 10.5m and 21m respectively and as such a recommendation of refusal on the grounds of physical overbearance and/or unacceptable levels of overlooking can not therefore be justified. In additional, the design, scale and siting of Plot 1 would not have a detrimental visual or residential amenity impact upon proposed Plot 2. AREA 2 DEVELOPMENT CONTROL COMMITTEE – 27TH OCTOBER 2009

ITEM 1 (CONT’D) APPLICATION NO. 2009/0788

Turning to highway safety matters, this application is one of five separate applications each for a dwelling served by a shared private drive off Lady Housty Avenue. As stated, outline consent was granted at appeal and in his determination of the appeal, the Inspector imposed a condition relating to the standard of the shared private drive.

The drive details submitted with this application indicate compliance with the Inspectors condition showing a 4.5m minimum width with a passing place where the drive turns through 90 degrees within the site. The remaining drive is of sufficient standard indicating a suitable turning facility for resident and visiting vehicles ensuring that all vehicles can enter and leave the site in a forward gear.

The Head of Transportation and Engineering recommends no highway objection subject to the shared private drive access being completed to an acceptable standard of hard surfacing prior to the occupation of this dwelling.

With regard to the objection letters received which refer principally to matters of visual and residential amenity, sensitivity of the design and the character of the area, all of which are addressed in detail above. Similarly issues of concern relating to highway safety are also addressed in detail above. With regard to land drainage and the proximity of surface water soakaways, the observations are noted, however no adverse comments have been received form Welsh Water Dwr Cymru subject to compliance with a number of standard conditions, and drainage was not identified as an issue during the consideration of the previous outline application or appeal, such an issue would also be dealt with under Building Regulations. Further points relating to the appropriateness of the density of development are noted; however the authority must determine the proposal as submitted and on merit. The fear of devaluation of neighbouring dwellings is not material to the consideration of this application. Finally many comments have been received in relation to the existing hedgeline that forms the southern site boundary to the rear of properties along Highpool Lane. The applicant has provided additional survey information relating to this hedgerow which identifies areas that require work, both in terms of thinning out and infill planting to strengthen the hedge. The applicant indicates an intention to retain the hedge and achieve a healthy and species diverse hedge, to be protected during construction and ultimately form an improved and strengthened boundary. The species and density of planting illustrated on the submitted plan is considered acceptable and appropriate and will be controlled fully via condition. With regard to the domestic landscaping within each plot, this will be controlled via an appropriately worded condition.

In conclusion and having regard to all material considerations including the Human Rights Act, the proposal is considered an appropriate form of development which will have an acceptable impact upon the visual and residential amenities of the area and will not adversely impact upon current highway safety standards. The proposal therefore satisfies Polices AS6, HC2, EV1 and EV2 of the Swansea Unitary Development Plan and approval of planning permission is recommended.

RECOMMENDATION

APPROVE, subject to the following conditions: AREA 2 DEVELOPMENT CONTROL COMMITTEE – 27TH OCTOBER 2009

ITEM 1 (CONT’D) APPLICATION NO. 2009/0788

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

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

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

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

5 Foul water and surface discharges shall be drained separately from the site. Reason: To protect the integrity of the public sewerage system

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

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

AREA 2 DEVELOPMENT CONTROL COMMITTEE – 27TH OCTOBER 2009

ITEM 1 (CONT’D) APPLICATION NO. 2009/0788

INFORMATIVES

1 The development plan covering the City and County of Swansea is the City and County of Swansea Unitary Development Plan. The following policies were relevant to the consideration of the application: Policies AS6, EV1, EV2 and HC2 of the Swansea Unitary Development Plan.

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

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

PLANS

HG.08.41.P102 Site plan/survey as existing dated 29the May 2009. Amended plan HG.08.41.P104 Rev B floor plans, HG.08.41.P101 Rev B, OS extracts & block plan and HG.08.41.P103 Rev B site plan as proposed received 13th October 2009, additional plan HG.08.41.LS100 hedge survey & appraisal plan received 8th September 2009.

AREA 2 DEVELOPMENT CONTROL COMMITTEE – 27TH OCTOBER 2009

ITEM 2 APPLICATION NO. 2009/0791 WARD: Area 2 Newton

Location: Plot 2 Lady Housty Avenue Newton Swansea SA3 4TS Proposal: Detached dwelling with integral garage Applicant: Mr Ian Jonathan

BACKGROUND INFORMATION

POLICIES

Policy Policy Description Policy AS6 Provision of car parking in accordance with adopted standards. (City & County of Swansea Unitary Development Plan 2008)

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

SITE HISTORY

App No. Proposal 88/0070/03 ERECTION OF A TWO STOREY GRANNY FLAT ANNEXE. Decision: *HGPC - GRANT PERMISSION CONDITIONAL Decision Date: 12/04/1988

2006/2228 Residential development (outline) Decision: Refuse Decision Date: 30/01/2007 Allowed on appeal

2008/0398 Detached dwelling (outline) Decision: Refuse Decision Date: 21/04/2008

AREA 2 DEVELOPMENT CONTROL COMMITTEE – 27TH OCTOBER 2009

ITEM 2 (CONT’D) APPLICATION NO. 2009/0791

2008/1242 Detached dwelling (outline) Decision: Refuse Decision Date: 15/08/2008

RESPONSE TO CONSULTATIONS

ITEM 2 (CONT’D) APPLICATION NO. 2009/0791

Petition of objection containing 30 signatures raising the following concerns:

• The proposal will have a serious adverse physical overbearing, overshadowing and overlooking impact on the occupiers of neighbouring properties

Mumbles Community Council – Out of keeping with existing houses. Intrusion on houses in Highpool Close and Green Wedge. Difficult access and narrow lane.

Welsh Water Dwr Cymru - No adverse comments subject to standard conditions.

AREA 2 DEVELOPMENT CONTROL COMMITTEE – 27TH OCTOBER 2009

ITEM 2 (CONT’D) APPLICATION NO. 2009/0791

I recommend no highway objection subject to the shared private drive access being completed to an acceptable standard of hard surfacing prior to the occupation of this dwelling.

APPRAISAL

This application is reported to Committee for decision at the request of Councillor Susan Waller Thomas.

Five full planning applications have now been submitted concurrently, yet separately, each seeking approval for the construction of a detached dwelling house.

This application relates to a proposed detached dwelling on Plot 2 (of 5) on the development site. Plot 2 is a roughly square shaped plot located north of No’s 24 and 26 Highpool Lane. It is bound to the south, by adjoining existing residential curtilages and to the east and west by Plots 1 and 3 respectively and to the north by an area of open countryside.

ITEM 2 (CONT’D) APPLICATION NO. 2009/0791

Policy EV1 of the Development Plan seeks to ensure that new development follow set objectives of good design that include, being appropriate to the local context in terms of scale height, elevation treatment, materials and detailing and ensuring that development does not result in significant detrimental impact upon local amenity in terms of visual impact, loss of light or privacy, disturbance or traffic movement. Policy EV2 states that the siting of new development must have regard to the physical character and topography of the site and its surroundings. Policy AS6 seeks to ensure that all new developments are assessed against adopted maximum parking standards.

The application plot measures some 790m² and the proposed dwelling has a footprint occupying approximately 187m² of the plot, (excluding the attached garage) thus allowing a substantial area of associated amenity space both to the front and rear of the property. The extent of curtilage is considered appropriate for a dwelling of the scale proposed, and the building to plot ratio proposed is considered acceptable. Overall whilst it is accepted that the proposed dwelling is a sizeable dwelling, the application site is of ample size to accommodate the proposed dwelling without giving rise to a cramped or overdeveloped plot.

With regard to visual amenity issues, Plot 2 will not be clearly visible from Lady Housty Avenue or other public viewpoint and as such it is not considered that the proposal gives rise to any visual detriment. Furthermore, it is considered that the scale, siting and design of the dwelling is appropriate at this location and whilst this is an application for a single detached dwelling, it is important to note that the proposed dwelling on plot 2 features an architectural style, and characteristics consistent with the proposed dwellings on plots, 1, 3, 4 and 5 (being considered concurrently) and as such a visually coherent setting and context is achieved. Overall therefore it is considered that the scale and proportion of the dwelling is acceptable and accords with the overall scale and character of the wider development and the proposal is not considered to have a detrimental impact upon the visual amenities of the area to an extent that could warrant refusal of this application.

In addition, the design, scale and siting of Plot 2 would not have a detrimental visual or residential amenity impact upon proposed Plot 1 or 3. AREA 2 DEVELOPMENT CONTROL COMMITTEE – 27TH OCTOBER 2009

ITEM 2 (CONT’D) APPLICATION NO. 2009/0791

With regard to the objection letters received which refer principally to matters of visual and residential amenity, sensitivity of the design and the character of the area, all of which are addressed in detail above. Similarly issues of concern relating to highway safety are also addressed in detail above. With regard to land drainage and the proximity of surface water soakaways, the observations are noted, however no adverse comments have been received form Welsh Water Dwr Cymru subject to compliance with a number of standard conditions, and drainage was not identified as an issue during the consideration of the previous outline application or appeal, such an issue would also be dealt with under Building Regulations. Further points relating to the appropriateness of the density of development are noted; however the authority must determine the proposal as submitted and on merit. The fear of devaluation of neighbouring dwellings is not material to the consideration of this application. Finally many comments have been received in relation to the existing hedgeline that forms the southern site boundary to the rear of properties along Highpool Lane. The applicant has provided additional survey information relating to thus hedgerow which identifies areas that require work, both in terms of thinning out and infill planting to strengthen the hedge. The applicant indicates an intention to retain the hedge and achieve a healthy and species diverse hedge, to be protected during construction and ultimately form an improved and strengthened boundary. The species and density of planting illustrated on the submitted plan is considered acceptable and appropriate and will be controlled fully via condition. With regard to the domestic landscaping within each plot, this will be controlled via an appropriately worded condition.

RECOMMENDATION

APPROVE, subject to the following conditions: AREA 2 DEVELOPMENT CONTROL COMMITTEE – 27TH OCTOBER 2009

ITEM 2 (CONT’D) APPLICATION NO. 2009/0791

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

5 Foul and surface water discharge shall be drained separately from the site Reason: To protect the integrity of the public sewerage system.

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

AREA 2 DEVELOPMENT CONTROL COMMITTEE – 27TH OCTOBER 2009

ITEM 2 (CONT’D) APPLICATION NO. 2009/0791

INFORMATIVES

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

PLANS

HG 08 41 P201 Rev B Site and block plan received 13th October 2009. HG 08 41 0202 Site plan/survey as existing, HG 08 41 P204 all plans received 29th May 2009. Amended plan HG 08 41 P203 Rev B site plan as proposed received 13th October 2009. Additional plan HG 08 41 LS100 Rev 0 hedge survey & appraisal received 8th September 2009.

AREA 2 DEVELOPMENT CONTROL COMMITTEE – 27TH OCTOBER 2009

ITEM 3 APPLICATION NO. 2009/0792 WARD: Area 2 Newton

Location: Plot 3, Lady Housty Avenue Newton Swansea SA3 4TS Proposal: Detached dwelling with integral store and garage Applicant: Mr Ian Jonathan

BACKGROUND INFORMATION

POLICIES

Policy Policy Description Policy AS6 Provision of car parking in accordance with adopted standards. (City & County of Swansea Unitary Development Plan 2008)

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

SITE HISTORY

App No. Proposal 88/0070/03 ERECTION OF A TWO STOREY GRANNY FLAT ANNEXE. Decision: *HGPC - GRANT PERMISSION CONDITIONAL Decision Date: 12/04/1988

2006/2228 Residential development (outline) Decision: Refuse Decision Date: 30/01/2007 Allowed on appeal

2008/0398 Detached dwelling (outline) Decision: Refuse Decision Date: 21/04/2008

AREA 2 DEVELOPMENT CONTROL COMMITTEE – 27TH OCTOBER 2009

ITEM 3 (CONT’D) APPLICATION NO. 2009/0792

2008/1242 Detached dwelling (outline) Decision: Refuse Decision Date: 15/08/2008

RESPONSE TO CONSULTATIONS

ITEM 3 (CONT’D) APPLICATION NO. 2009/0792

Petition of objection containing 30 signatures raising the following concerns:

• The proposal will have a serious adverse physical overbearing, overshadowing and overlooking impact on the occupiers of neighbouring properties

Mumbles Community Council – Out of keeping with existing houses. Intrusion on houses in Highpool Close and Green Wedge. Difficult access and narrow lane.

Welsh Water Dwr Cymru - No adverse comments subject to standard conditions.

AREA 2 DEVELOPMENT CONTROL COMMITTEE – 27TH OCTOBER 2009

ITEM 3 (CONT’D) APPLICATION NO. 2009/0792

I recommend no highway objection subject to the shared private drive access being completed to an acceptable standard of hard surfacing prior to the occupation of this dwelling.

APPRAISAL

This application is reported to Committee for decision at the request of Councillor Susan Waller Thomas.

Five full planning applications have now been submitted concurrently, yet separately, each seeking approval for the construction of a detached dwelling house.

This application relates to a proposed detached dwelling on Plot 3 (of 5) on the development site. Plot 3 is a roughly triangular shaped plot located north-west of No. 26 Highpool Lane. It is bound to the south, by adjoining existing residential curtilages and to the east and west by Plots 2 and 4 respectively and to the north by an area of open countryside.

ITEM 3 (CONT’D) APPLICATION NO. 2009/0792

Policy EV1 of the Development Plan seeks to ensure that new development follow set objectives of good design that include, being appropriate to the local context in terms of scale height, elevation treatment, materials and detailing and ensuring that development does not result in significant detrimental impact upon local amenity in terms of visual impact, loss of light or privacy, disturbance or traffic movement. Policy EV2 states that the siting of new development must have regard to the physical character and topography of the site and its surroundings. Policy AS6 seeks to ensure that all new developments are assessed against adopted maximum parking standards.

The application plot measures some 980m² and the proposed dwelling has an irregular footprint occupying approximately 192.5m² of the plot, (excluding the garage which is attached to the dwelling via a tenuous link) thus allowing a substantial area of associated amenity space both to the front and rear of the property. The extent of curtilage is considered appropriate for a dwelling of the scale proposed, and the building to plot ratio proposed is considered acceptable. Overall whilst it is accepted that the proposed dwelling is a sizeable dwelling, the application site is of ample size to accommodate the proposed dwelling without giving rise to a cramped or overdeveloped plot.

With regard to visual amenity issues, Plot 3 will not be clearly visible from Lady Housty Avenue or other public viewpoints and as such it is not considered that the proposal gives rise to any visual detriment. Furthermore, it is considered that the scale, siting and design of the dwelling is appropriate at this location and whilst this is an application for a single detached dwelling, it is important to note that the proposed dwelling on plot 3 features an architectural style, and characteristics consistent with the proposed dwellings on plots, 1, 2, 4 and 5 (being considered concurrently) and as such a visually coherent setting and context is achieved. Overall therefore it is considered that the scale and proportion of the dwelling is acceptable and accords with the overall scale and character of the wider development and the proposal is not considered to have a detrimental impact upon the visual amenities of the area to an extent that could warrant refusal of this application.

In addition, the design, scale and siting of Plot 3 would not have a detrimental visual or residential amenity impact upon proposed Plot 2 or 4. AREA 2 DEVELOPMENT CONTROL COMMITTEE – 27TH OCTOBER 2009

ITEM 3 (CONT’D) APPLICATION NO. 2009/0792

With regard to the objection letters received which refer principally to matters of visual and residential amenity, sensitivity of the design and the character of the area, all of which are addressed in detail above. Similarly issues of concern relating to highway safety are also addressed in detail above. With regard to land drainage and the proximity of surface water soakaways, the observations are noted, however no adverse comments have been received form Welsh Water Dwr Cymru subject to compliance with a number of standard conditions, and drainage was not identified as an issue during the consideration of the previous outline application or appeal, such an issue would also be dealt with under Building Regulations. Further points relating to the appropriateness of the density of development are noted; however the authority must determine the proposal as submitted and on merit. The fear of devaluation of neighbouring dwellings is not material to the consideration of this application. Finally many comments have been received in relation to the existing hedgeline that forms the southern site boundary to the rear of properties along Highpool Lane. The applicant has provided additional survey information relating to thus hedgerow which identifies areas that require work, both in terms of thinning out and infill planting to strengthen the hedge. The applicant indicates an intention to retain the hedge and achieve a healthy and species diverse hedge, to be protected during construction and ultimately form an improved and strengthened boundary. The species and density of planting illustrated on the submitted plan is considered acceptable and appropriate and will be controlled fully via condition. With regard to the domestic landscaping within each plot, this will be controlled via an appropriately worded condition.

RECOMMENDATION

APPROVE, subject to the following conditions: AREA 2 DEVELOPMENT CONTROL COMMITTEE – 27TH OCTOBER 2009

ITEM 3 (CONT’D) APPLICATION NO. 2009/0792

5 Foul water discharges shall be drained separately from the site Reason: To protect the integrity of the public sewerage system.

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

AREA 2 DEVELOPMENT CONTROL COMMITTEE – 27TH OCTOBER 2009

ITEM 3 (CONT’D) APPLICATION NO. 2009/0792

INFORMATIVES

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

2 The development plan covering the City and County of Swansea is the City and County of Swansea Unitary Development Plan. The following policies were relevant to the consideration of the application: Policies AS6, EV1. EV2 and HC2 of the Swansea Unitary Development Plan.

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

PLANS

HG.08.41.P0302 Site plan/survey as existing received 29th May 2009. HG.08.41.P304 Rev A floor plans, sections & elevations as proposed, HG.08.41.P301 Rev B OS Extract & block plan, HG.08.41.P303 Rev B site plan as proposed received 13th October 2009. Additional plan HG.08.41.LS100 hedge survey & appraisal received 8th September 2009.

AREA 2 DEVELOPMENT CONTROL COMMITTEE – 27TH OCTOBER 2009

ITEM 4 APPLICATION NO. 2009/0793 WARD: Area 2 Newton

Location: Plot 4, Lady Housty Avenue, Newton, Swansea, SA3 4TS Proposal: Detached dwelling with integral store and garage Applicant: Mr Ian Jonathan

BACKGROUND INFORMATION

POLICIES

Policy Policy Description Policy AS6 Provision of car parking in accordance with adopted standards. (City & County of Swansea Unitary Development Plan 2008)

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

SITE HISTORY

App No. Proposal 88/0070/03 ERECTION OF A TWO STOREY GRANNY FLAT ANNEXE. Decision: *HGPC - GRANT PERMISSION CONDITIONAL Decision Date: 12/04/1988

2006/2228 Residential development (outline) Decision: Refuse Decision Date: 30/01/2007 Allowed on appeal

2008/0398 Detached dwelling (outline) Decision: Refuse Decision Date: 21/04/2008

AREA 2 DEVELOPMENT CONTROL COMMITTEE – 27TH OCTOBER 2009

ITEM 4 (CONT’D) APPLICATION NO. 2009/0793

2008/1242 Detached dwelling (outline) Decision: Refuse Decision Date: 15/08/2008

RESPONSE TO CONSULTATIONS

ITEM 4 (CONT’D) APPLICATION NO. 2009/0793

Petition of objection containing 30 signatures raising the following concerns:

• The proposal will have a serious adverse physical overbearing, overshadowing and overlooking impact on the occupiers of neighbouring properties

Mumbles Community Council – Out of keeping with existing houses. Intrusion on houses in Highpool Close and Green Wedge. Difficult access and narrow lane.

Welsh Water Dwr Cymru - No adverse comments subject to standard conditions.

Highway Observations – This application is one of five separate applications each for a dwelling served by a shared private drive off Lady Housty Avenue. Outline consent was granted at appeal and in his determination of the appeal; the Inspector imposed a condition relating to the standard of the shared private drive as follows;

ITEM 4 (CONT’D) APPLICATION NO. 2009/0793

I recommend no highway objection subject to the shared private drive access being completed to an acceptable standard of hard surfacing prior to the occupation of this dwelling.

APPRAISAL

This application is reported to Committee for decision at the request of Councillor Susan Waller Thomas.

Five full planning applications have now been submitted concurrently, yet separately, each seeking approval for the construction of a detached dwelling house.

This application relates to a proposed detached dwelling on Plot 4 (of 5) on the development site. Plot 4 is a roughly triangular shaped plot located immediately north of No. 18 Lady Housty Avenue and is currently occupied by a substantial detached dwelling (No, 20) It is bound to the south, east and west by existing adjoining residential curtilages and to the north by the proposed new shared access and Plot 3.

ITEM 4 (CONT’D) APPLICATION NO. 2009/0793

Policy EV1 of the Development Plan seeks to ensure that new development follow set objectives of good design that include, being appropriate to the local context in terms of scale height, elevation treatment, materials and detailing and ensuring that development does not result in significant detrimental impact upon local amenity in terms of visual impact, loss of light or privacy, disturbance or traffic movement. Policy EV2 states that the siting of new development must have regard to the physical character and topography of the site and its surroundings. Policy AS6 seeks to ensure that all new developments are assessed against adopted maximum parking standards.

The proposed dwelling is a substantial property, principally two storey in design albeit a third floor of accommodation is provided within the roof void. The design of the dwelling is elaborate insofar as it includes a significant amount of architectural detail together with a significant amount of glazing. The area is however characterised by a mixture of house types, styles and sizes with no specific prevailing character dominant in the vicinity. As such the proposed house does not, it is considered, need to respond to any specific design criteria. External finishes include a combination of facing stone and render with fiberous cement slates to the roof.

The application plot measures some 1100m² and the proposed dwelling has an irregular footprint occupying approximately 198m² of the plot, (excluding the garage which is attached to the dwelling via a tenuous link) thus allowing a substantial area of associated amenity space both to the front and rear of the property. The extent of curtilage is considered appropriate for a dwelling of the scale proposed, and the building to plot ratio proposed is considered acceptable. Overall whilst it is accepted that the proposed dwelling is a sizeable dwelling, the application site is of ample size to accommodate the proposed dwelling without giving rise to a cramped or overdeveloped plot.

With regard to visual amenity issues, whilst Plot 4 will be partially visible form oblique angles when viewed form the turning head of Lady Housty Avenue; it is not considered that the limited visibility of the dwelling form this public viewpoint gives rise to any visual detriment. Furthermore, it is considered that the scale, siting and design of the dwelling is appropriate at this location and whilst this is an application for a single detached dwelling, it is important to note that the proposed dwelling on plot 4 features an architectural style, and characteristics consistent with the proposed dwellings on plots, 1, 2, 3 and 5 (being considered concurrently) and as such a visually coherent setting and context is achieved. Overall therefore it is considered that the scale and proportion of the dwelling is acceptable and accords with the overall scale and character of the wider development and the proposal is not considered to have a detrimental impact upon the visual amenities of the area to an extent that could warrant refusal of this application.

ITEM 4 (CONT’D) APPLICATION NO. 2009/0793

To this end first floor habitable room windows have been re-sited to ensure that any overlooking that occurs is to the front and side area of Plot 3 and not to the main private amenity space to the rear. Furthermore the proposed dwelling features a secondary window to bedroom one at first floor level which will be obscure glazed, and as a secondary window this is achievable without conflicting with current building regulations. Whilst obscure glazing the window will mitigate entirely against any overlooking of the adjacent No. 18, it is considered that the separation distance of 7m (gable to gable) achieved between the two dwellings is adequate in any event. Furthermore the separation achieved between the proposed dwelling on Plot 4, and No. 18 to the south and Plot 3 to the north east ensures that any physical effect form of the proposed dwelling is minimal and acceptable.

With regard to the objection letters received which refer principally to matters of visual and residential amenity, sensitivity of the design and the character of the area, all of which are addressed in detail above. Similarly issues of concern relating to highway safety are also addressed in detail above. With regard to land drainage and the proximity of surface water soakaways, the observations are noted, however no adverse comments have been received form Welsh Water Dwr Cymru subject to compliance with a number of standard conditions, and drainage was not identified as an issue during the consideration of the previous outline application or appeal such an issue would also be dealt with under Building Regulations. Further points relating to the appropriateness of the density of development are noted; however the authority must determine the proposal as submitted and on merit. The fear of devaluation of neighbouring dwellings is not material to the consideration of this application. Finally many comments have been received in relation to the existing hedgeline that forms the southern site boundary to the rear of properties along Highpool Lane. The applicant has provided additional survey information relating to this hedgerow which identifies areas that require work, both in terms of thinning out and infill planting to strengthen the hedge. The applicant indicates an intention to retain the hedge and achieve a healthy and species diverse hedge, to be protected during construction and ultimately form an improved and strengthened boundary. The species and density of planting illustrated on the submitted plan is considered acceptable and appropriate and will be controlled fully via condition. With regard to the domestic landscaping within each plot, this will be controlled via an appropriately worded condition. AREA 2 DEVELOPMENT CONTROL COMMITTEE – 27TH OCTOBER 2009

ITEM 4 (CONT’D) APPLICATION NO. 2009/0793

In conclusion and having regard to all material considerations including the Human Rights Act, the proposal is considered an appropriate form of development which will have a limited impact upon the visual and residential amenities of the area and will not adversely impact upon current highway safety standards. The proposal therefore satisfies Polices AS6, HC2, EV1 and EV2 of the Swansea Unitary Development Plan and approval of planning permission is recommended.

RECOMMENDATION

APPROVE, subject to the following conditions:

5 Foul water and surface water discharge shall be drained separately from the site Reason: To protect the integrity of the public sewerage system

AREA 2 DEVELOPMENT CONTROL COMMITTEE – 27TH OCTOBER 2009

ITEM 4 (CONT’D) APPLICATION NO. 2009/0793

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

8 The first floor windows in the southern side elevation, as indicated on Plan No. HG.08.41.P404 Rev A shall be obscure glazed and unopenable except for a fan light and shall be retained as such unless otherwise agreed in writing by the Local Planning Authority. Reason: In the interest of privacy protection.

INFORMATIVES

1 The development plan covering the City and County of Swansea is the City and County of Swansea Unitary Development Plan. The following policies were relevant to the consideration of the application: Policies HC2, EV1, EV2 and AS6 of the Swansea Unitary Development Plan.

PLANS

HG.08.41.P401 Rev B OS extract and block plan received 13th October 2009. HG.08.41.P402 site plan/survey as existing received 29th May 2009. Amended plans HG.08.41.403 Rev B site plan as proposed received 25th June 2009. HG08.41.404 Rev A floor plans, sections and elevations as proposed received 25th June 2009. Amended plan HG.08.41.LS100 received 8th September 2009.

AREA 2 DEVELOPMENT CONTROL COMMITTEE – 27TH OCTOBER 2009

ITEM 5 APPLICATION NO. 2009/0794 WARD: Area 2 Newton

Location: Plot 5, Lady Housty Avenue, Newton, Swansea, SA3 4TS Proposal: Detached dwelling with attached garage Applicant: Mr Ian Jonathan

BACKGROUND INFORMATION

POLICIES

Policy Policy Description Policy AS6 Provision of car parking in accordance with adopted standards. (City & County of Swansea Unitary Development Plan 2008)

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

SITE HISTORY

App No. Proposal 2008/0398 Detached dwelling (outline) Decision: Refuse Decision Date: 21/04/2008

88/0717/03 ERECTION OF A FIRST FLOOR EXTENSION. Decision: *HGPC - GRANT PERMISSION CONDITIONAL Decision Date: 05/07/1988

88/0070/03 ERECTION OF A TWO STOREY GRANNY FLAT ANNEXE. Decision: *HGPC - GRANT PERMISSION CONDITIONAL Decision Date: 12/04/1988

AREA 2 DEVELOPMENT CONTROL COMMITTEE – 27TH OCTOBER 2009

ITEM 5 (CONT’D) APPLICATION NO. 2009/0794

2006/2228 Residential development (outline) Decision: Refuse Decision Date: 30/01/2007 Allowed on appeal

RESPONSE TO CONSULTATIONS

The application was advertised on site and 17 individual properties consulted. SIX LETTERS OF OBJECTION and ONE PETITION OF OBJECTION containing 30 signatures received which are summarised as follows:

• The previous inspector gave permission for outline for 5 dwellings and as detailed plans were not available the following provisos applied –“that the development would not result in unacceptable loss of residential amenity to the occupiers of neighbouring properties. This can be controlled by the council when considering the detailed plans. I have imposed the planning conditions suggested by the council at this hearing in order to ensure that the development would be in keeping with its surroundings” • It was agreed “in residential amenity terms it is considered that a sensitively designed scheme could ensure no overlooking impact on the occupiers of neighbouring properties” • The Swansea Unitary Development states that the area has been over developed and sounds a note of caution on future size of proposed buildings – this is since the approval of the outline two years ago. • The inspectors report stated “no development shall take place until there has been submitted to and approved in writing by the local planning authority a plan indicating the positions, design, materials and type of boundary treatment to be erected. The boundary treatment for the plot shall be completed before the dwelling is occupied. Development shall be carried out in accordance with the approved details”. No boundary proposals have been received to date for any of the plots. • It is no coincidence that the area is named “Highpool” Close – there are already problems with water drainage. There is a serious concern that the proposal may not be adequate to ensure gardens in neighbouring Highpool Close adjacent to soakaways will be worse affected. • The proposed housing does not accord in any way with existing housing in the area or with the general landscape. • The height of the proposed houses are excessive resulting in an unacceptable loss of privacy in varying degrees to No’s 28 and 20 Highpool Close. The height must be reduced. • Any soakaways situated adjacent to neighbouring gardens must be sited a safe and suitable distance. There is already a problem with rain water in the winter and this should not be aggravated. • Policies should be adhered to and no serious adverse physical overbearing, overshadowing or overlooking impact on any neighbouring property should occur. • The current proposal speaks for itself and if the objectives of current policy are not met, then no development should go ahead. • Boundary treatment needs to be carefully considered and landscaping details provided. Is there a need for an ecological/wildlife survey? • If planning permission is forthcoming a high close boarded sturdy and good quality fence should be erected between the application sites and neighbouring gardens. AREA 2 DEVELOPMENT CONTROL COMMITTEE – 27TH OCTOBER 2009

ITEM 5 (CONT’D) APPLICATION NO. 2009/0794

• The unique character of the peninsular is slowly becoming eroded by new and often inappropriate development. • On the basis that there was no proposed layout put before the appeal inspector the responsibility now lies with the local authority. • Why not utilise the site for a more dense form of development and build smaller houses thus catering for the young started-home market thereby helping to make Swansea the greener, socially-aware city it ought to be. • The resulting cost and problems relating to surface water is drainage is inevitable. Concern over the future of the existing boundary hedge. The hedge is considered special, the developer shows little regard for the natural world or existing residents. • The entire project is clearly purely commercial. • The access is dangerous, and if the development goes ahead the entrance should be either gated or speed bumps introduced. If this is not the case the access will be dangerous due to the blind and narrow entrance. • The proposed dwellings do not relate at all to the surrounding dormer bungalows. • The proposal will lead to loss of value of existing neighbiurng properties. • The existing hedge is having a damaging effect on some neighbouring gardens and should be cut. The hedge should not be used as an excuse to hide extra large houses.

Petition of objection containing 30 signatures raising the following concerns:

• The proposal will have serious adverse physical overbearing, overshadowing and overlooking impact on the occupiers of neighbouring properties

Mumbles Community Council – Out of keeping with existing houses. Intrusion on houses in Highpool Close and Green Wedge. Difficult access and narrow lane.

Welsh Water Dwr Cymru - No adverse comments subject to standard conditions.

ITEM 5 (CONT’D) APPLICATION NO. 2009/0794

Each plot is provided with 4 parking spaces and whilst 3 spaces is the maximum required for a residential dwelling, these proposed dwellings are large and therefore the additional space and the individual access drives will provide adequately for any additional demand and also visitor parking.

I recommend no highway objection subject to the shared private drive access being completed to an acceptable standard of hard surfacing prior to the occupation of this dwelling.

APPRAISAL

This application is reported to Committee for decision at the request of Councillor Susan Waller Thomas.

Five full planning applications have now been submitted concurrently, yet separately, each seeking approval for the construction of a detached dwelling house.

This application relates to a proposed detached dwelling on Plot 5 (of 5) on the development site. Plot 5 is a roughly rectangular shaped plot located immediately north of No. 19 Lady Housty Avenue. It is bound to the south, east and west by adjoining residential curtilages and to the north by an area of open countryside.

ITEM 5 (CONT’D) APPLICATION NO. 2009/0794

Policy EV1 of the Development Plan seeks to ensure that new development follow set objectives of good design that include, being appropriate to the local context in terms of scale height, elevation treatment, materials and detailing and ensuring that development does not result in significant detrimental impact upon local amenity in terms of visual impact, loss of light or privacy, disturbance or traffic movement. Policy EV2 states that the siting of new development must have regard to the physical character and topography of the site and its surroundings. Policy AS6 seeks to ensure that all new developments are assessed against adopted maximum parking standards.

The proposed dwelling is a substantial property, principally two storey in design albeit a third floor of accommodation is provided within the roof void. The design of the dwelling is elaborate insofar as it includes a significant amount of architectural detail together with a significant amount of glazing. The area is however characterised by a mixture of house types, styles and sizes with no specific prevailing character dominant in the vicinity. As such the proposed house does, it is considered, not need to respond to any specific design criteria. External finishes include a combination of facing stone and render with fibrous cement slates to the roof.

The application plot measures some 1580m² and the proposed dwelling has an irregular footprint occupying approximately 330m² of the plot, thus allowing a substantial area of associated amenity space both to the front and rear of the property. The extent of curtilage is considered appropriate for a dwelling of the scale proposed, and the building to plot ratio proposed is considered acceptable. Overall whilst it is accepted that the proposed dwelling is a sizeable dwelling, the application site is of ample size to accommodate the proposed dwelling without giving rise to a cramped or overdeveloped plot.

With regard to visual amenity issues, whilst Plot 5 will be partially visible form oblique angles when viewed form the turning head of Lady Housty Avenue; it is not considered that the limited visibility of the dwelling from this public viewpoint or further a field gives rise to any visual detriment. Furthermore, it is considered that the scale, siting and design of the dwelling is appropriate at this location and whilst this is an application for a single detached dwelling, it is important to note that the proposed dwelling on plot 5 features an architectural style, and characteristics consistent with the proposed dwellings on plots, 1-4 (being considered concurrently) and as such a visually coherent setting and context is achieved. Overall therefore it is considered that the scale and proportion of the dwelling is acceptable and accords with the overall scale and character of the wider development and the proposal is not considered to have a detrimental impact upon the visual amenities of the area to an extent that could warrant refusal of this application.

ITEM 5 (CONT’D) APPLICATION NO. 2009/0794

The side elevation of the proposed dwelling overlooking No. 19 features no windows other than ground floor doors, which will inevitable be screened by a means of enclosure thus mitigating against overlooking. Furthermore the physical form of the proposed dwelling is limited to single storey to the left hand side adjacent to No. 19 which contributes towards minimising the physical effect of the dwelling upon the existing neighbouring dwelling and any future neighbouring dwelling that may be constructed.

In conclusion and having regard to all material considerations including the Human Rights Act, the proposal is considered an appropriate form of development which will have an acceptable impact upon the visual and residential amenities of the area and will not adversely impact upon current highway safety standards. The proposal therefore satisfies Polices AS6, HC2, EV1 and EV2 of the Swansea Unitary Development Plan, and approval of planning permission is recommended.

RECOMMENDATION

APPROVE, subject to the following conditions: AREA 2 DEVELOPMENT CONTROL COMMITTEE – 27TH OCTOBER 2009

ITEM 5 (CONT’D) APPLICATION NO. 2009/0794

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

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

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

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

6 Foul water and surface water discharge shall be drained separately from the site. Reason: To protect the integrity of the public sewerage system.

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

AREA 2 DEVELOPMENT CONTROL COMMITTEE – 27TH OCTOBER 2009

ITEM 5 (CONT’D) APPLICATION NO. 2009/0794

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

INFORMATIVES

PLANS

HG 08 41 P501 Rev B site and block plan received 13th October 2009. HG 08 41 P502 site plan as existing, HG 08 41 P503 Rev B proposed site plan received 13th October 2009, HG 08 41 P504 proposed floor plans, HG 08 41 P505 proposed elevations received 29th May 2009.

AREA 2 DEVELOPMENT CONTROL COMMITTEE – 27TH OCTOBER 2009

ITEM 6 APPLICATION NO. 2009/0435 WARD: Area 2 Gower

Location: Ash Tree Hall, Rhossili, Swansea, SA3 1PL Proposal: Replacement detached dwelling and alterations to outhouse to form garage Applicant: Mr P Isaacs

BACKGROUND INFORMATION

This application was DEFERRED from the Area 2 Development Control Committee on the 6th October 2009 to consider the impact of the development on the character and appearance of the Conservation Area and to assess the perceived overdevelopment of the site. My report has been updated to include further letters from the Community Council and the Gower Society and address in further detail both the objection letter received from the Community Council and the issue of demolition, however my recommendation of APPROVAL remains the same.

POLICIES

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

Policy EV3 Proposals for new development and alterations to and change of use of existing buildings will be required to meet defined standards of access. (City & County of Swansea Unitary Development Plan 2008)

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

Policy EV26 Within the Gower AONB, the primary objective is the conservation and enhancement of the area's natural beauty. Development that would have a material adverse effect on the natural beauty, wildlife and cultural heritage of the AONB will not be permitted. (City & County of Swansea Unitary Development Plan 2008)

Policy EV16 Within the small villages identified on the Proposals Map, small-scale development will be approved only where it is appropriate to the location in terms of the defined criteria. (City & County of Swansea Unitary Development Plan 2008)

AREA 2 DEVELOPMENT CONTROL COMMITTEE – 27TH OCTOBER 2009

ITEM 6 (CONT’D) APPLICATION NO. 2009/0435

SITE HISTORY

App No. Proposal 2008/2048 Replacement detached dwelling with integral garage Decision: Withdrawn Decision Date: 03/12/2008

2008/2053 Replacement detached self contained annexe Decision: Withdrawn Decision Date: 03/12/2008

2009/0438 Demolition of existing detached dwelling (application for Conservation Area Consent). Being considered and on this agenda for decision.

2009/0439 Two storey side extension, single storey rear extension with balcony above, single storey side extension and alterations to outhouse to form garage. Being considered and on this agenda for decision.

RESPONSE TO CONSULTATIONS

Neighbours: The application was advertised on site in the form of a site notice and in the press as development within a Conservation Area. In addition to this NINE neighbouring dwellings were individually consulted and EIGHT LETTERS OF OBJECTION were received the main points of which are summarised below:

1 The proposal involves the destruction of a historic building. 2 The site is in a prominent location in the locality. 3 It would have an unacceptable impact upon the character of the Conservation Area. 4 The replacement building is out of scale and style with the area. 5 Overdevelopment of the site. 6 It would result in a loss of privacy. 7 Loss of symmetry and subsequent detrimental impact on street-scene. 8 The proposed dwelling has a lopsided front elevation. 9 Dormers are out of character with the area. 10 Additional 2nd floor is not in keeping with the area. 11 The addition of extra parking suggests multiple occupancy for holiday let. 12 A balcony is contrary to the provisions of the development plan. 13 Question the need for demolition. 14 The development is not sympathetic to the special architectural and aesthetic qualities of the area, particularly in terms of scale, design, materials and space between buildings. 15 No justification for demolition of the existing dwelling. 16 Incongruous addition to the settlement. 17 The property should be listed. 18 The loss of a chimney is objected to. 19 Unacceptable impact upon the old bakery. 20 Restoration and renovation are far better alternatives to demolition. 21 Unacceptable impact upon Gower AONB. 22 The developer should have known about renovation work prior to purchase. AREA 2 DEVELOPMENT CONTROL COMMITTEE – 27TH OCTOBER 2009

ITEM 6 (CONT’D) APPLICATION NO. 2009/0435

23 The two-storey side element leaves little room for maintenance.

Countryside Council for Wales: No objection in principle as a bat was using the house CCW would advise that a further internal inspection, along with a dawn and dusk survey is carried out between now and the end of August 2009. This would help to confirm the findings from September 2008, which was relatively late considering the poor Summer.

No objection subject to the imposition of recommended conditions and the additional surveys.

Glamorgan Gwent Archaeological Trust: The proposed new dwelling will be on very similar footprint to the existing, although with some extension. It is unlikely therefore that any features located would be of major importance, however, as the proposed work has the potential to reveal archaeological material, we recommend that a condition ensuring that an archaeologist conducts a watching brief during any ground works required for the development to be attached to any planning permission granted by your Members in response to the current application.

Highways: This proposal to demolish and rebuild the premises includes more than adequate parking and also turning facilities within the site. Access will be as existing albeit slightly improved in width but visibility for emerging drivers will continue to be restricted by the existing outbuilding next to the access. The access is being moved further away from the building and therefore visibility will improve provided that the proposed boundary wall is kept below 1m high.

I recommend no highway objection subject to the boundary wall along the site frontage being no more than 1m high for its entire length.

Rhossili Community Council: Object on following grounds (summarised):-

1. The proposed alterations affect the scale and height of this building by increasing the height of the wall bordering the road by approximately 1m, which, whilst apparently maintaining the same roof ridge level, leads to a change in roof pitch. Whilst this will be incompatible with the main dwelling roof pitch we do not wish the ridge level to rise. The proposed development will not enhance the character or appearance of the Conservation Area (Policy EV9). 2. The change of roof pitch and the increase in overall wall heights is unsympathetic to the architectural character of the village. It is hard to judge whether the proposed materials to be used on this development will be sympathetic to the architectural character of the village, as they are not fully detailed on the plans. (Small village Policy EV16). 3. Scale and height – The development footprint area will increase from approximately 100m2 to approximately 140m2, an increase of about 40% (Policy EV1 – i, Design). 4. Massing – The total development (including coach house) ratio of footprint to plot area rises from approximately 28% to approximately 38% (Policy EV1 – i, Policy EV16 – i, Small Villages, Design and Policy EV9 – i, Conservation Area). 5. Materials and Detailing – The use of materials is unsympathetic to the architectural character of the village. This is hard to judge, as they are not fully detailed on the plans (Policy EV1 – i, Design). AREA 2 DEVELOPMENT CONTROL COMMITTEE – 27TH OCTOBER 2009

ITEM 6 (CONT’D) APPLICATION NO. 2009/0435

6. The proposed new build does not integrate with the surrounding buildings. Whilst the front elevation is more in keeping with typical Gower house design, the south-west facing rear elevation does not conform with other existing architectural features found within the Rhossili Conservation Area (Policy EV1 – ii and EV1 – iii, Design). 7. Despite the low partial wall screening of the balcony ends and the skewed angle of the proposed development, both features contribute the overlooking of the adjacent neighbour with greater loss of privacy (Policy EV1 – iii, Design, Policy EV16). 8. The proposed development does not appear to meet with requirements of EV2 – i; especially the design features (balcony and mass glazing) in the façade to the south west elevation and the dormer windows in the south-west facing roof. These features will have an adverse impact on the landscape, the adjacent open space, the general locality, including loss of visual amenity. The rear southwestern elevation will be visible from the very popular footpath to and from Worm’s Head headland (Siting – Policy EV2). 9. The total rebuild proposal does not meet the conditions of this policy where emphasis is for the retention of site features including existing buildings (EV2 – iv, Siting). 10. The siting of a balcony on the southwestern façade has no regard for adjacent properties nor their privacy (Policy EV2 – xiii, Siting). 11. It is not wholly understood as to the need for dormer windows to an attic space, especially as the installation of dormer windows will change the existing roofscape design; this is particularly uncharacteristic of Rhossili village, as would be a three storey building, which is the appearance that this feature will give. The use of three ‘Velux’ style windows will maintain the roofscape more appropriately rather than three dormer windows or a mixture of both. The front elevation preserves the character and appearance of the Conservation Area but the southwest rear elevation does not with its large expanse of glazing and (presumed) fully glazed balcony (Policy EV9 – i, Conservation Area). 12. The proposed drawings present few descriptions of the building materials to be used and as such it is not possible to determine whether these will meet and respond to the area’s special characteristics. This is particularly so with respect to the balcony to the southwest rear elevation where little or no information is presented regarding the large expanse of glazing and (presumed) fully glazed balcony. The proposed development roof and rear aspects will not preserve or enhance the character or appearance of the Conservation Area (Policy EV9 – v, Conservation Area). 13. The existing building is appropriate to and gives a positive contribution to the character and appearance of, the conservation area both in character and size. We do not feel it is legitimate that this property should be demolished with the justification that its present condition does not warrant ‘economic repair’. If this were allowed it would set a precedent for people to leave properties unoccupied for a relatively short period of time and then declare them dilapidated and uneconomic to repair in order to gain consent for a new build (Policy EV10 – i Demolition of Unlisted Buildings in Conservation Area). 14. The demolition of this house and the building of new will not produce substantial benefits to Rhossili community (Policy EV10 – iii Demolition of Unlisted Buildings in Conservation Area). 15. The current house is a typical Gower building and most of the houses in the immediate area are of a similar design. The southwest elevation proposal with its large expanse of glazing and (presumed) fully glazed balcony is not of a compatible design and is unsympathetic to the architectural character of the village. The property will be seen from the road, the coastal path leading down to/from the Worms Head and Rhossili Downs so both front and rear elevations and roof lines are equally important. The proposed rear elevation is especially inappropriate to the Rhossili Conservation Area. AREA 2 DEVELOPMENT CONTROL COMMITTEE – 27TH OCTOBER 2009

ITEM 6 (CONT’D) APPLICATION NO. 2009/0435

It is hard to judge whether the proposed materials to be used on this development will be sympathetic to the architectural character of the village, as they are not fully detailed on the plans (Policy EV16 – ii, Small Villages). 16. The size of the proposed building and the ratio of the building footprint to plot size are significantly greater than its local neighbour (Policy EV16 – iv, Small Villages). 17. If the development option of the non-retention of existing walls is allowed to go ahead, it would set a dangerous precedent for Conservation Areas within Gower. It would open the way for new developments within Conservation Areas by the wholesale demolition of unlisted buildings with the resulting detrimental effect this will have on their character, environmental and natural heritage of the AONB villages.

Gower Society: Object on the following grounds:

1. The proposal is better than the previous application for this site, but in our opinion it is still unacceptable. 2. This traditional Gower house is noted for its originality; from external appearance as well as local knowledge of the property, it does not warrant demolition. We note vague references to possible defects, but no firm indications of structural problems. 3. In our opinion, to demolish a perfectly adequate building is not an option from a sustainability point of view. A complete restoration would surely not cost as much as a demolition and rebuild? 4. The plot is small – the owners knew this on purchase. We firmly believe that to try to nearly double its footprint is unacceptable. If the owners do not like what they bought, it is surely a case of caveat emptor? 5. Whilst we appreciate the frontal design is more appropriate to the Conservation Area and streetscape, the rear design is unacceptable. 6. The proposals for the old wash house are better, and its use as a garage, acceptable. 7. There are no or very few dimensions shown on the drawings.

Our society has no alternative but to strongly object to this application; we ask that you take all of the above points into consideration when making your decision or recommendation to the Planning Committee. We reiterate that this property warrants restoration in its original form; the trend for demolition and rebuild in conservation areas and associated loss of historic buildings is to be deplored.

Gower Society: Object on the following grounds:

1. This does not fit any criterion of sustainability – this building is a notable historic feature in the village and is habitable. 2. To demolish it and carry rubble to some landfill site approx 20 miles away is not sensible or sustainable. 3. This property is within the Conservation Area of Rhossili. 4. The plot on which the property stands is small; the increased frontal aspect is not acceptable within the AONB, and the non-sympathetic rear elevation has no place in this location. 5. Has no credence been given to the Gower Society’s detailed letter of objection to this speculative build? 6. Have the views of Rhossili Community Council been disregarded? It does appear so. 7. This building could make an admirable home if it were to be sympathetically modernised, retaining its character. AREA 2 DEVELOPMENT CONTROL COMMITTEE – 27TH OCTOBER 2009

ITEM 6 (CONT’D) APPLICATION NO. 2009/0435

8. This AONB needs a robust and consistent planning policy to be applied to it. 9. Please re-look at this application and judge the impact of the proposals on the location, neighbourhood and above all, on local opinion. 10. A site visit should be mandatory.

Rhossili Community Council: The Community Council reiterate their previous objections and raise concerns that their crucial points have not been fully reported to Committee for decision.

APPRAISAL

This application is reported to Committee for decision at the request of Councillor Richard Lewis

Full planning permission is sought for a replacement detached dwelling and alterations to an existing outhouse to form a garage at Ash Tree Hall, Rhossili. The application site falls within the Rhossili Conservation Area and Gower AONB. The current dwelling is not listed, however is of traditional character and appearance. The dwelling has been modernised over the years and has lost some of its original character with the incorporation of a concrete tiled roof, UPVC windows to the rear and UPVC facia boards.

A concurrent Conservation Area consent application Ref: 2009/0438 is also reported to this Committee for decision for the demolition of the existing dwelling. The proposed new dwelling would be sited predominately on the same footprint as the existing dwelling with a single storey rear extension and two-storey side extension. A structural report has been submitted which concludes that it would be more structurally and cost effective to demolish the existing structure and build a new dwelling to current standards. The issues relating to demolition have been further expanded upon in the concurrent Conservation Area consent application Ref: 2009/0438.

The main issues for consideration during the determination of this application are the impact of the proposed development on the character and appearance of the Rhossili Conservation Area, the wider Gower AONB and the prevailing street-scene together with the impact upon the amenities of neighbouring residents and highway safety, having regard to the prevailing policies of the Swansea Unitary Development Plan (UDP), and recent National Planning Policy Guidance provided by Planning Policy Wales 2002. There are considered to be no additional issues arising from the provisions of the human rights Act.

Rhossili is characterised by a mixture of housing types and styles and with this in mind it is considered that for a dwelling to integrate seamlessly into the street-scene, issues such as scale, design, materials and external appearance are factors which are important material planning considerations.

ITEM 6 (CONT’D) APPLICATION NO. 2009/0435

The original plans were amended by reducing the size of the rear single storey flat roof element and balcony, reducing the size, number and scale of the dormers and incorporating alterations to the pattern of fenestration. As such in visual amenity terms it is considered that the proposed dwelling makes a significant and positive contribution to the character and appearance of the Conservation Area. The general footprint uses traditional one and two storey forms to break down the overall massing so that the building is in scale with the plot and the wider rural area and also creates a series of spaces around the dwelling. It is considered that the revised design will reduce the visual impact upon the wider landscape and fundamentally respects and enhances the character and appearance of its local context. This application reflects a recent trend of traditional public front elevations which reflects Gower character with a more contemporary private rear elevation utilising areas of glazing. The roof accommodation is not considered to be an issue in principle and its minimal height will ensure that the property will appear two-storey in appearance which reflects the prevailing street-scene and respects the character of the existing dwelling which is two-storey in appearance. Whilst the application plans indicate that quality materials will be used in its construction, notwithstanding this, further information will be required to ensure the quality of the scheme is maintained. Appropriately worded conditions are therefore recommended.

The proposed alterations to the outbuilding are regarded as sympathetic and will involve the reuse and renovation of an existing building of character within the streetscene which will, it is considered, also preserve and enhance the character and appearance of the Conservation Area and Gower AONB.

In terms of residential amenity the proposed dwelling is similar in size and scale to the existing property and the outbuilding conversion will not significantly alter in size and as such it is not considered that these developments will prove unacceptably overbearing or overshadowing upon the residential amenities of the neighbouring occupiers. In terms of overlooking, subject to a condition requiring the erection of a privacy screen on the flanks of the rear balcony, it is not considered that the proposed development will result in unacceptable overlooking over and above what is currently experienced. The proposal is therefore considered to comply with the principles of Policy EV1 and EV16 of the Swansea UDP.

The proposed redevelopment is considered acceptable at this location and would, it is considered, enhance the character and appearance of the Conservation Area and Gower AONB. It would be necessary, however, to impose a condition on the respective Conservation Area Consent application that the demolition of the building is not commenced before a contract for the redevelopment of the site has been signed.

Having consulted the Council’s Ecologist it is considered that as the building only appears to be used by a single bat a further survey is not needed. As the house has been identified as a bat roost, the project will be subject to a WAG protected species license and obtaining this should form a condition of any permission given. The submitted mitigation plan that is contained within the previously submitted bat report should be used to form the basis for the license application. AREA 2 DEVELOPMENT CONTROL COMMITTEE – 27TH OCTOBER 2009

ITEM 6 (CONT’D) APPLICATION NO. 2009/0435

Notwithstanding the above, 12 letters of objection (including the Gower Society and Community Council) have been received largely raising concerns relating to the justification of the proposed demolition, the proposals impact upon the character and appearance of the Conservation Area and wider Gower AONB and the amenities of adjoining occupiers. These issues have been addressed in the main body of my report.

Concern has been raised with regard the precedent for future development however the application should be determined on its own individual merit given that it is not considered that it would set a damaging precedent. Likewise, the potential for the conversion of the property into multiple holiday lets does not form part of this application and would require a separate application for planning permission.

The issue of sustainability has been raised and whilst it is regrettable that the existing building is proposed to be demolished, it could also be argued that the construction of a new dwelling built to modern building practices would be more energy efficient and sustainable than the existing dwelling and therefore it is not considered that the Council could warrant a recommendation of refusal based on sustainability grounds.

In summary the replacement dwelling demonstrates that a contemporary idiom can inform a sensitive, contextual approach to redeveloping this site. The design combines a mix of traditional and modern forms and materials to create a dwelling that respects the local vernacular of Gower and the immediate Conservation Area and wider Gower AONB whilst also offering modern, flexible accommodation for its occupants. Therefore it is considered that the development complies with the principles of Policies EV1, EV2, EV3, EV16, EV9 and EV26 of the Swansea Unitary Development Plan. Approval of planning permission is therefore recommended.

RECOMMENDATION

APPROVE, subject to the following conditions:

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

3 Notwithstanding the provisions of the Town and Country Planning (General Permitted Development) Order 1995, (or any Order revoking or amending that Order), Classes A, B, C and D of Part 1 of Schedule 2 shall not apply. Reason: The development hereby approved is such that the Council wish to retain control over any future development being permitted in order to ensure that a satisfactory form of development is achieved at all times. AREA 2 DEVELOPMENT CONTROL COMMITTEE – 27TH OCTOBER 2009

ITEM 6 (CONT’D) APPLICATION NO. 2009/0435

4 The converted outbuilding hereby approved shall remain at all times an integral part of the main dwelling and shall not be sold, let or otherwise occupied as a separate unit of accommodation. Reason: In order to prevent the establishment of an unrelated independent unit on the site.

5 No site works shall be undertaken until an appropriate programme of building recording and analysis has been implemented and deposited with the Local Planning Authority in accordance with details to be submitted to and agreed in writing by the Local Planning Authority. Reason: To ensure that a record of the building is completed and maintained prior to the commencement of works.

6 Where any species listed under Schedule 2 and 4 of the Conservation (Natural Habitats) Regulations 1994 is present on the site (or other identified part) in respect of which this permission is hereby granted, no works of site clearance, demolition or construction shall take place in pursuance of this permission unless a license to disturb any such species has been granted in accordance with the aforementioned Regulations and a copy thereof has been produced to the Local Planning Authority. Reason: In the interest of protecting species listed under Schedule 2 and 4 of the Conservation (Natural Habitats) Regulation 1994.

7 Prior to the demolition of the building a `Schwegler' type bat box shall be located on the site in a position to be agreed in writing by the Local Planning Authority. Reason: In the interest of protecting species listed under Schedule 2 and 4 of the Conservation (Natural Habitats) Regulation 1994.

8 The developer shall ensure that a suitably qualified archaeologist is present during the undertaking of any ground disturbing works in the development area, so that an archaeological watching brief can be conducted. The archaeological watching brief shall be undertaken to the standards of the Institute for Archaeologists. The Local Planning Authority shall be informed, in writing at least two weeks prior to the commencement of the development of the name of the said archaeologist and no work shall begin until the Local Planning Authority has confirmed, in writing that the proposed archaeologist is suitable. A copy of the watching brief report shall be submitted to the Local Planning Authority within two months of the fieldwork being completed by the archaeologist. Reason: To identify and record any features of archaeological interest discovered during the works, in order to mitigate the impact of the works on the archaeological resource.

AREA 2 DEVELOPMENT CONTROL COMMITTEE – 27TH OCTOBER 2009

ITEM 6 (CONT’D) APPLICATION NO. 2009/0435

9 Before the development hereby permitted is first brought into beneficial use a 2m high privacy screen shall be erected on the balcony along the north west and south east facing elevations, in accordance with details to be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The balcony screening shall thereafter be maintained in the condition as approved unless otherwise agreed in writing by the Local Planning Authority. Reason: In the interest of residential amenity.

10 Notwithstanding the plans hereby approved and unless otherwise agreed in writing by the Local Planning Authority, all new window and door frames shall be set back at least 100mm from the external face of the wall. Prior to commencement of development, details of a typical window and door (inclusive of cross-sections, mullions, transoms, sills and glazing bar details) shall be submitted to an approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. Reason: In the interest of the visual amenity of the surrounding area.

11 Notwithstanding the plans hereby approved, details of the height of the proposed boundary wall fronting the highway shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority prior to its erection. The wall shall be erected in accordance with the approved details. Reason: In the interest of highway safety.

INFORMATIVES

1 The development plan covering the City and County of Swansea is the City and County of Swansea Unitary Development Plan. The following policies were relevant to the consideration of the application: (Policies EV1, EV2, EV3, EV9, EV16 and EV26 of the Swansea UDP).

2 A list of archaeological contractors who work in Wales is available from http://www.archaeologists.net/modules/icontent/index.php?page=22 and also http:www.bajr.org/whose/Contractor.asp.

3 In accordance with the advice of Welsh Water, foul and surface water discharges shall be drained separately from the site and no surface water or land drainage shall be allowed to connect to the public sewerage system.

PLANS

Site location plan, block plan, 1 existing plans received 23rd March 2009 and Drg No 2 dated 7th July 2009.

AREA 2 DEVELOPMENT CONTROL COMMITTEE – 27TH OCTOBER 2009

ITEM 7 APPLICATION NO. 2009/0438 WARD: Area 2 Gower

Location: Ash Tree Hall, Rhossili, Swansea, SA3 1PL Proposal: Demolition of existing detached dwelling (application for Conservation Area Consent) Applicant: Mr P Isaacs

BACKGROUND INFORMATION

POLICIES

Policy Policy Description Policy EV10 Demolition of unlisted buildings that contribute to the character or appearance of a Conservation Area will not be granted unless fully justified. (City & County of Swansea Unitary Development Plan 2008)

SITE HISTORY

App No. Proposal 2009/0435 Replacement detached dwelling and alterations to outhouse to form garage. Being considered and on this agenda for decision.

2008/2048 Replacement detached dwelling with integral garage Decision: Withdrawn Decision Date: 03/12/2008

2008/2053 Replacement detached self contained annexe Decision: Withdrawn Decision Date: 03/12/2008

RESPONSE TO CONSULTATIONS

Neighbours: Nine neighbouring dwellings were individually consulted and the application was advertised on site and in the press as Demolition of an existing dwelling in a Conservation Area. EIGHT LETTERS OF OBJECTION have been received which are summarised below: AREA 2 DEVELOPMENT CONTROL COMMITTEE – 27TH OCTOBER 2009

ITEM 7 (CONT’D) APPLICATION NO. 2009/0438

1 The proposal involves the destruction of a historic building. 2 The site is in a prominent location in the locality. 3 It would have an unacceptable impact upon the character of the Conservation Area. 4 The replacement building is out of scale and style with the area. 5 Overdevelopment of the site. 6 It would result in a loss of privacy. 7 Loss of symmetry and subsequent detrimental impact on street-scene. 8 The proposed dwelling has a lopsided front elevation. 9 Dormers are out of character with the area. 10 Additional 2nd floor is not in keeping with the area. 11 The addition of extra parking suggests multiple occupancy for holiday let. 12 A balcony is contrary to the provisions of the development plan. 13 Question the need for demolition. 14 The development is not sympathetic to the special architectural and aesthetic qualities of the area, particularly in terms of scale, design, materials and space between buildings. 15 No justification for demolition of the existing dwelling. 16 Incongruous addition to the settlement. 17 The property should be listed. 18 The loss of a chimney is objected to. 19 Unacceptable impact upon the old bakery. 20 Restoration and renovation are far better alternatives to demolition. 21 Unacceptable impact upon Gower AONB. 22 The developer should have known about renovation work prior to purchase. 23 The two-storey side element leaves little room for maintenance.

Rhossili Community Council: Object on following grounds (summarised):-

1 The proposed alterations affect the scale and height of this building by increasing the height of the wall bordering the road by approximately 1m, which, whilst apparently maintaining the same roof ridge level, leads to a change in roof pitch. Whilst this will be incompatible with the main dwelling roof pitch we do not wish the ridge level to rise. The proposed development will not enhance the character or appearance of the Conservation Area (Policy EV9). 2 The change of roof pitch and the increase in overall wall heights is unsympathetic to the architectural character of the village. It is hard to judge whether the proposed materials to be used on this development will be sympathetic to the architectural character of the village, as they are not fully detailed on the plans. (Small village Policy EV16). 3 Scale and height – The development footprint area will increase from approximately 100m2 to approximately 140m2, an increase of about 40% (Policy EV1 – i, Design). 4 Massing – The total development (including coach house) ratio of footprint to plot area rises from approximately 28% to approximately 38% (Policy EV1 – i, Policy EV16 – i, Small Villages, Design and Policy EV9 – i, Conservation Area). 5 Materials and Detailing – The use of materials is unsympathetic to the architectural character of the village. This hard to judge, as they are not fully detailed on the plans (Policy EV1 – i, Design). 6 The proposed new build does not integrate with the surrounding buildings. Whilst the front elevation is more in keeping with typical Gower house design, the south-west facing rear elevation does not conform with other existing architectural features found within the Rhossili Conservation Area (Policy EV1 – ii and EV1 – iii, Design). AREA 2 DEVELOPMENT CONTROL COMMITTEE – 27TH OCTOBER 2009 7 Despite the low partial wall screening of the balcony ends and the skewed angle of the proposed development, both features contribute the overlooking of the adjacent neighbour with greater loss of privacy (Policy EV1 – iii, Design, Policy EV16). 8 The proposed development does not appear to meet with requirements of EV2 – i; especially the design features (balcony and mass glazing) in the façade to the south west elevation and the dormer windows in the south-west facing roof. These features will have an adverse impact on the landscape, the adjacent open space, the general locality, including loss of visual amenity. The rear southwestern elevation will be visible from the very popular footpath to and from Worm’s Head headland (Siting – Policy EV2). 9 The total rebuild proposal does not meet the conditions of this policy where emphasis is for the retention of site features including existing buildings (EV2 – iv, Siting). 10 The siting of a balcony on the southwestern façade has no regard for adjacent properties nor their privacy (Policy EV2 – xiii, Siting). 11 It is not wholly understood as to the need for dormer windows to an attic space, especially as the installation of dormer windows will change the existing roofscape design; this is particularly uncharacteristic of Rhossili village, as would be a three storey building, which is the appearance that this feature will give. The use of three ‘Velux’ style windows will maintain the roofscape more appropriately rather than three dormer windows or a mixture of both. The front elevation preserves the character and appearance of the Conservation Area but the southwest rear elevation does not with its large expanse of glazing and (presumed) fully glazed balcony (Policy EV9 – i, Conservation Area). 12 The proposed drawings present few descriptions of the building materials to be used and as such it is not possible to determine whether these will meet and respond to the area’s special characteristics. This is particularly so with respect to the balcony to the southwest rear elevation where little or no information is presented regarding the large expanse of glazing and (presumed) fully glazed balcony. The proposed development roof and rear aspects will not preserve or enhance the character or appearance of the Conservation Area (Policy EV9 – v, Conservation Area). 13 The existing building is appropriate to and gives a positive contribution to the character and appearance of, the conservation area both in character and size. We do not feel it is legitimate that this property should be demolished with the justification that its present condition does not warrant ‘economic repair’. If this were allowed it would set a precedent for people to leave properties unoccupied for a relatively short period of time and then declare them dilapidated and uneconomic to repair in order to gain consent for a new build (Policy EV10 – i Demolition of Unlisted Buildings in Conservation Area). 14 The demolition of this house and the building of new will not produce substantial benefits to Rhossili community (Policy EV10 – iii Demolition of Unlisted Buildings in Conservation Area). 15 The current house is a typical Gower building and most of the houses in the immediate area are of a similar design. The southwest elevation proposal with its large expanse of glazing and (presumed) fully glazed balcony is not of a compatible design and is unsympathetic to the architectural character of the village. The property will be seen from the road, the coastal path leading down to/from the Worms Head and Rhossili Downs so both front and rear elevations and roof lines are equally important. The proposed rear elevation is especially inappropriate to the Rhossili Conservation Area. It is hard to judge whether the proposed materials to be used on this development will be sympathetic to the architectural character of the village, as they are not fully detailed on the plans (Policy EV16 – ii, Small Villages). 16 The size of the proposed building and the ratio of the building footprint to plot size are significantly greater than its local neighbour (Policy EV16 – iv, Small Villages). AREA 2 DEVELOPMENT CONTROL COMMITTEE – 27TH OCTOBER 2009

ITEM 7 (CONT’D) APPLICATION NO. 2009/0438

17 If the development option of the non-retention of existing walls is allowed to go ahead, it would set a dangerous precedent for Conservation Areas within Gower. It would open the way for new developments within Conservation Areas by the wholesale demolition of unlisted buildings with the resulting detrimental effect this will have on their character, environmental and natural heritage of the AONB villages.

Gower Society: Object on the following grounds:

1 The proposal is better than the previous application for this site, but in our opinion it is still unacceptable. 2 This traditional Gower house is noted for its originality; from external appearance as well as local knowledge of the property, it does not warrant demolition. We note vague references to possible defects, but no firm indications of structural problems. 3 In our opinion, to demolish a perfectly adequate building is not an option from a sustainability point of view. A complete restoration would surely not cost as much as a demolition and rebuild? 4 The plot is small – the owners knew this on purchase. We firmly believe that to try to nearly double its footprint is unacceptable. If the owners do not like what they bought, it is surely a case of caveat emptor? 5 Whilst we appreciate the frontal design is more appropriate to the Conservation Area and streetscape, the rear design is unacceptable. 6 The proposals for the old wash house are better, and its use as a garage, acceptable. 7 There are no or very few dimensions shown on the drawings.

No objection subject to the imposition of recommended conditions and the additional surveys.

Gower Society: Object on the following grounds:

1. This does not fit any criterion of sustainability – this building is a notable historic feature in the village and is habitable. AREA 2 DEVELOPMENT CONTROL COMMITTEE – 27TH OCTOBER 2009

ITEM 7 (CONT’D) APPLICATION NO. 2009/0438

2. To demolish it and carry rubble to some landfill site approx 20 miles away is not sensible or sustainable. 3. This property is within the Conservation Area of Rhossili. 4. The plot on which the property stands is small; the increased frontal aspect is not acceptable within the AONB, and the non-sympathetic rear elevation has no place in this location. 5. Has no credence been given to the Gower Society’s detailed letter of objection to this speculative build? 6. Have the views of Rhossili Community Council been disregarded? It does appear so. 7. This building could make an admirable home if it were to be sympathetically modernised, retaining its character. 8. This AONB needs a robust and consistent planning policy to be applied to it. 9. Please re-look at this application and judge the impact of the proposals on the location, neighbourhood and above all, on local opinion. 10. A site visit should be mandatory.

Rhossili Community Council: The Community Council reiterate their previous objections and raise concerns that their crucial points have not been fully reported to Committee for decision.

APPRAISAL

This application is reported to Committee for decision at the request of Councillor Richard Lewis

Conservation Area Consent is sought for the demolition of the existing dwelling at Ash Tree Hall, Rhossili. The current dwelling is not listed, however is of traditional character and appearance.

Policy EV10 of the City & County of Swansea Unitary Development Plan states that consent for the demolition of unlisted buildings that make a positive contribution to the character or appearance of the Conservation Area will not be granted unless it can be demonstrated that the condition of the buildings would not justify the cost of repair, efforts have been made to find a viable use, redevelopment would produce substantial benefits and there are acceptable plans for redevelopment.

Notwithstanding a separate application being submitted for an extension to the dwelling, a structural report was submitted with the respective planning application for the replacement dwelling which concludes that it would be more structurally and cost effective to demolish the existing structure and build a new dwelling to current standards.

The dwelling has been modernised over the years and has clearly lost some of its original character with the incorporation of a concrete tiled roof, UPVC windows to the rear and UPVC facia boards. As such subject to its replacement with a similar styled dwelling constructed from a palette of quality materials, it is not considered that its demolition would detract from the overall character and appearance of the Conservation Area.

Planning Application Ref: 2009/0435 is also reported to this Committee for decision and is a detailed proposal for the redevelopment of the site with a replacement two storey dwelling house, which is being considered on a ‘one for one’ basis. AREA 2 DEVELOPMENT CONTROL COMMITTEE – 27TH OCTOBER 2009

ITEM 7 (CONT’D) APPLICATION NO. 2009/0438

This new dwelling would be situated predominately on the same footprint as the existing dwelling with a single storey rear extension and two-storey side extension being designed to respect the scale, character and form of the existing development within the landscape and Conservation Area. The proposed redevelopment is considered acceptable at this location and would, it is considered, enhance the character and appearance of the Conservation Area and Gower AONB.

It would be necessary, however, to impose a condition that the demolition of the building is not commenced before a contract for the redevelopment of the site has been signed.

Having consulted the Council’s Ecologist it is considered that as the building only appears to be used by a single bat a further survey is not needed. As the house has been identified as a bat roost, the project will be subject to a WAG protected species license and obtaining this should form a condition of any permission given. The submitted mitigation plan that is included within the previously submitted bat report should be used to form the basis for the license application.

Notwithstanding the above, 12 letters of objection have been received largely raising concerns relating to the impact upon the character and appearance of the Conservation Area and wider Gower AONB and the amenities of adjoining occupiers.

However, the majority of these concerns, apart from those associated with the impact of the demolition upon the character and appearance of the Conservation Area are not material to this application for Conservation Area Consent because they relate largely to and are addressed as part of the replacement dwelling application (Ref: 2009/0435).

In conclusion, and having regard to all material considerations including the Human Rights Act, it is considered that demolition of this building would conform with the provisions of the Development Plan. Approval is therefore recommended.

RECOMMENDATION

APPROVE, subject to the following conditions:

1 The developer shall not commence any works for the demolition of the buildings before a contract for the carrying out of the works for the redevelopment of the site has been signed and planning permission granted for the redevelopment for which the contract provides and a date for the commencement of these works agreed in writing with the Local Planning Authority. Reason: To ensure that the character and appearance of the area is not detrimentally affected by the demolition works.

AREA 2 DEVELOPMENT CONTROL COMMITTEE – 27TH OCTOBER 2009

ITEM 7 (CONT’D) APPLICATION NO. 2009/0438

2 The demolition shall be undertaken not later than 5 years from the date of this consent and shall be completed in accordance with the said applications, plans, and conditions. Reason: To comply with the provisions of Section 18 of the Planning (Listed Buildings and Conservation Areas) Act 1990 (as amended) and to ensure the demolition is undertaken within a reasonable period.

3 No site works shall be undertaken until an appropriate programme of building recording and analysis has been implemented and deposited with the Local Planning Authority in accordance with details to be submitted to and agreed in writing by the Local Planning Authority. Reason: To ensure that a record of the building is completed and maintained prior to the commencement of works.

4 Where any species listed under Schedule 2 and 4 of the Conservation (Natural Habitats) Regulations 1994 is present on the site (or other identified part) in respect of which this permission is hereby granted, no works of site clearance, demolition or construction shall take place in pursuance of this permission unless a license to disturb any such species has been granted in accordance with the aforementioned Regulations and a copy thereof has been produced to the Local Planning Authority. Reason: In the interest of protecting species listed under Schedule 2 and 4 of the Conservation (Natural Habitats) Regulation 1994.

5 Prior to the demolition of the building a 'Schwegler' type bat box shall be located on the site in a position to be agreed in writing by the Local Planning Authority. Reason: In the interest of protecting species listed under Schedule 2 and 4 of the Conservation (Natural Habitats) Regulation 1994.

INFORMATIVES

PLANS

Site location plan, block plan, 1 existing plan received 23rd March 2009

AREA 2 DEVELOPMENT CONTROL COMMITTEE – 27TH OCTOBER 2009

ITEM 8 APPLICATION NO. 2009/0439 WARD: Area 2 Gower

Location: Ash Tree Hall, Rhossili, Swansea, SA3 1PL Proposal: Two storey side extension, single storey rear extension with balcony above, single storey side extension and alterations to outhouse to form garage Applicant: Mr P Isaacs

BACKGROUND INFORMATION

POLICIES

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

AREA 2 DEVELOPMENT CONTROL COMMITTEE – 27TH OCTOBER 2009

ITEM 8 (CONT’D) APPLICATION NO. 2009/0439

SITE HISTORY

App No. Proposal 2009/0435 Replacement detached dwelling and alterations to outhouse to form garage. Being considered and on this agenda for decision.

2008/2048 Replacement detached dwelling with integral garage Decision: Withdrawn Decision Date: 03/12/2008

2008/2053 Replacement detached self contained annexe Decision: Withdrawn Decision Date: 03/12/2008

2009/0438 Demolition of existing detached dwelling (application for Conservation Area Consent). Being considered and on this agenda for decision.

RESPONSE TO CONSULTATIONS

1 The proposal involves the destruction of a historic building. 2 The site is in a prominent location in the locality. 3 It would have an unacceptable impact upon the character of the Conservation Area. 4 The replacement building is out of scale and style with the area. 5 Overdevelopment of the site. 6 It would result in a loss of privacy. 7 Loss of symmetry and subsequent detrimental impact on street-scene. 8 The proposed dwelling has a lopsided front elevation. 9 Dormers are out of character with the area. 10 Additional 2nd floor is not in keeping with the area. 11 The addition of extra parking suggests multiple occupancy for holiday let. 12 A balcony is contrary to the provisions of the development plan. 13 Question the need for demolition. 14 The development is not sympathetic to the special architectural and aesthetic qualities of the area, particularly in terms of scale, design, materials and space between buildings. 15 No justification for demolition of the existing dwelling. 16 Incongruous addition to the settlement. 17 The property should be listed. 18 The loss of a chimney is objected to. 19 Unacceptable impact upon the old bakery. 20 Restoration and renovation are far better alternatives to demolition. 21 Unacceptable impact upon Gower AONB. 22 The developer should have known about renovation work prior to purchase. 23 The two-storey side element leaves little room for maintenance. AREA 2 DEVELOPMENT CONTROL COMMITTEE – 27TH OCTOBER 2009

ITEM 8 (CONT’D) APPLICATION NO. 2009/0439

No objection subject to the imposition of recommended conditions and the additional surveys.

Highways: This proposal for alterations and extensions to the premises includes more than adequate parking and also turning facilities within the site. Access will be as existing albeit slightly improved in width but visibility for emerging drivers will continue to be restricted by the existing outbuilding next to the access. The access is being moved further away from the building and therefore visibility will improve provided that the proposed boundary wall is kept below 1m high.

I recommend no highway objection subject to the boundary wall along the site frontage being no more than 1m high for its entire length.

Rhossili Community Council: Object on following grounds (summarised):

ITEM 8 (CONT’D) APPLICATION NO. 2009/0439

7 Despite the low partial wall screening of the balcony ends and the skewed angle of the proposed development, both features contribute the overlooking of the adjacent neighbour with greater loss of privacy (Policy EV1 – iii, Design, Policy EV16). 8 The proposed development does not appear to meet with requirements of EV2 – i; especially the design features (balcony and mass glazing) in the façade to the south west elevation and the dormer windows in the south-west facing roof. These features will have an adverse impact on the landscape, the adjacent open space, the general locality, including loss of visual amenity. The rear southwestern elevation will be visible from the very popular footpath to and from Worm’s Head headland (Siting – Policy EV2). 9 The total rebuild proposal does not meet the conditions of this policy where emphasis is for the retention of site features including existing buildings (EV2 – iv, Siting). 10 The siting of a balcony on the southwestern façade has no regard for adjacent properties nor their privacy (Policy EV2 – xiii, Siting). 11 It is not wholly understood as to the need for dormer windows to an attic space, especially as the installation of dormer windows will change the existing roofscape design; this is particularly uncharacteristic of Rhossili village, as would be a three storey building, which is the appearance that this feature will give. The use of three ‘Velux’ style windows will maintain the roofscape more appropriately rather than three dormer windows or a mixture of both. The front elevation preserves the character and appearance of the Conservation Area but the southwest rear elevation does not with its large expanse of glazing and (presumed) fully glazed balcony (Policy EV9 – i, Conservation Area). 12 The proposed drawings present few descriptions of the building materials to be used and as such it is not possible to determine whether these will meet and respond to the area’s special characteristics. This is particularly so with respect to the balcony to the southwest rear elevation where little or no information is presented regarding the large expanse of glazing and (presumed) fully glazed balcony. The proposed development roof and rear aspects will not preserve or enhance the character or appearance of the Conservation Area (Policy EV9 – v, Conservation Area). 13 The existing building is appropriate to and gives a positive contribution to the character and appearance of, the conservation area both in character and size. We do not feel it is legitimate that this property should be demolished with the justification that its present condition does not warrant ‘economic repair’. If this were allowed it would set a precedent for people to leave properties unoccupied for a relatively short period of time and then declare them dilapidated and uneconomic to repair in order to gain consent for a new build (Policy EV10 – i Demolition of Unlisted Buildings in Conservation Area). 14 The demolition of this house and the building of new will not produce substantial benefits to Rhossili community (Policy EV10 – iii Demolition of Unlisted Buildings in Conservation Area). 15 The current house is a typical Gower building and most of the houses in the immediate area are of a similar design. The southwest elevation proposal with its large expanse of glazing and (presumed) fully glazed balcony is not of a compatible design and is unsympathetic to the architectural character of the village. The property will be seen from the road, the coastal path leading down to/from the Worms Head and Rhossili Downs so both front and rear elevations and roof lines are equally important. The proposed rear elevation is especially inappropriate to the Rhossili Conservation Area. It is hard to judge whether the proposed materials to be used on this development will be sympathetic to the architectural character of the village, as they are not fully detailed on the plans (Policy EV16 – ii, Small Villages). AREA 2 DEVELOPMENT CONTROL COMMITTEE – 27TH OCTOBER 2009

ITEM 8 (CONT’D) APPLICATION NO. 2009/0439

16 The size of the proposed building and the ratio of the building footprint to plot size are significantly greater than its local neighbour (Policy EV16 – iv, Small Villages). 17 If the development option of the non-retention of existing walls is allowed to go ahead, it would set a dangerous precedent for Conservation Areas within Gower. It would open the way for new developments within Conservation Areas by the wholesale demolition of unlisted buildings with the resulting detrimental effect this will have on their character, environmental and natural heritage of the AONB villages.

Gower Society: Object on the following grounds:

1 This does not fit any criterion of sustainability – this building is a notable historic feature in the village and is habitable. 2 To demolish it and carry rubble to some landfill site approx 20 miles away is not sensible or sustainable. 3 This property is within the Conservation Area of Rhossili. 4 The plot on which the property stands is small; the increased frontal aspect is not acceptable within the AONB, and the non-sympathetic rear elevation has no place in this location. 5 Has no credence been given to the Gower Society’s detailed letter of objection to this speculative build? 6 Have the views of Rhossili Community Council been disregarded? It does appear so. 7 This building could make an admirable home if it were to be sympathetically modernised, retaining its character. 8 This AONB needs a robust and consistent planning policy to be applied to it. 9 Please re-look at this application and judge the impact of the proposals on the location, neighbourhood and above all, on local opinion. AREA 2 DEVELOPMENT CONTROL COMMITTEE – 27TH OCTOBER 2009

ITEM 8 (CONT’D) APPLICATION NO. 2009/0439

10 A site visit should be mandatory.

Rhossili Community Council: The Community Council reiterate their previous objections and raise concerns that their crucial points have not been fully reported to Committee for decision.

APPRAISAL

This application is reported to Committee for decision at the request of Councillor Richard Lewis.

Full planning permission is sought for a two-storey side extension, single storey rear extension with balcony above, single storey side extension and alterations to an existing outhouse to form a garage at Ash Tree Hall, Rhossili. The application site falls within the Rhossili Conservation Area and Gower AONB. The current dwelling is not listed, however is of traditional character and appearance. The dwelling has been modernised over the years and has lost some of its original character with the incorporation of a concrete tiled roof, UPVC windows to the rear and UPVC facia boards.

Concurrent applications have been submitted on the site Ref: 2009/0438 Conservation Area Consent for its demolition and Ref: 2009/0435 for a replacement dwelling and are reported to this Committee for decision.

The main issues for consideration during the determination of this application are the impact of the proposed developments on the character and appearance of the Rhossili Conservation Area, the wider Gower AONB and the prevailing street-scene together with the impact upon the amenities of neighbouring residents and highway safety, having regard to the prevailing policies of the Swansea Unitary Development Plan (UDP), and recent National Planning Policy Guidance provided by Planning Policy Wales 2002. There are considered to be no additional issues arising from the provisions of the Human Rights Act.

Rhossili is characterised by a mixture of housing types and styles and with this in mind it is considered that for the extensions to integrate seamlessly into the street-scene and relate to existing dwellings, issues such as scale, design, materials and external appearance are important factors which are important material planning considerations.

Given the variation in house design exhibited at this location, there is no objection in principle to a sensitive design response in this location which would accord with Policies EV1, EV2, EV16, EV9 EV26 of the Swansea UDP, the aims of which are to protect and enhance the character and appearance of the Conservation Area and wider Gower AONB, and the amenity of neighbouring properties and ensure appropriate small-scale development within the small villages on Gower. However the design of any new development in this location has to strike a balance between a design that exhibits a strong composition and high quality materials with a need to ensure that the scale and massing of the extensions respects the character and appearance of the existing property, the Conservation Area, the wider landscape, Gower AONB, street scene and the amenity of neighbouring properties. AREA 2 DEVELOPMENT CONTROL COMMITTEE – 27TH OCTOBER 2009

ITEM 8 (CONT’D) APPLICATION NO. 2009/0439

The original plans were amended by reducing the size of the rear single storey flat roof element and balcony, reducing the size, number and scale of the dormers and incorporating alterations to the pattern of fenestration. As such in visual amenity terms it is considered that the proposed extensions are proportionate to the character and appearance of the existing dwelling and make a significant and positive contribution to the character and appearance of the Conservation Area. This application reflects a recent trend of traditional public front elevations which reflects Gower character with a more contemporary private rear elevation utilising areas of glassing. The roof accommodation is not considered to be an issue in principle and its minimal height will ensure that the property will appear two-storey in appearance which reflects the prevailing street-scene and respects the character of the existing dwelling which is two-storey in appearance. Whilst the application plans indicate that quality materials will be used in its construction, notwithstanding this, further information will be required to ensure the quality of the scheme is maintained. Appropriately worded conditions are therefore recommended.

The proposed alterations to the outbuilding are regarded as sympathetic and will involve the re-use and renovation of an existing building of character within the streetscene which will, it is considered, also preserve the character and appearance of the Conservation Area and Gower AONB.

In terms of residential amenity the proposed extensions and the outbuilding conversion will not significantly alter the size and scale of the existing dwelling and as such it is not considered that these developments will prove unacceptably overbearing or overshadowing upon the residential amenities of the neighbouring occupiers. In terms of overlooking, subject to a condition requiring the erection of a privacy screen on the flanks of the rear balcony, it is not considered that the proposed development will result in unacceptable overlooking over and above what is currently experienced. The proposal is therefore considered to comply with the principles of Policies EV1 and EV16 of the Swansea UDP.

Concern has been raised with regard the precedent for future development however the application should be determined on its own individual merit given that it is not considered that it would set a dangerous precedent. Likewise, the potential for the conversion of the property into multiple holiday lets does not form part of this application and would require a separate application for planning permission. AREA 2 DEVELOPMENT CONTROL COMMITTEE – 27TH OCTOBER 2009

ITEM 8 (CONT’D) APPLICATION NO. 2009/0439

In addition to this concern has been raised regarding the justification for and the sustainability of the demolition of the building, however this does not form part of this application and is not therefore a material planning consideration and was not taken into consideration during the determination of the application.

In summary the extensions and conversion of the outbuilding are considered to preserve the character and appearance of the existing dwelling, the Conservation Area and wider Gower AONB and the residential amenities of the neighbouring occupiers and as such is considered to comply with the principles of Policies EV1, EV2, EV3, EV16, EV9 and EV26 of the Swansea UDP. Approval of planning permission is therefore recommended.

RECOMMENDATION

APPROVE, subject to the following conditions:

3 The converted outbuilding hereby approved shall remain at all times an integral part of the main dwelling and shall not be sold, let or otherwise occupied as a separate unit of accommodation. Reason: In order to safeguard the residential amenities of the area and in order to prevent the establishment of an unrelated independent unit on the site.

4 No site works shall be undertaken until an appropriate programme of building recording and analysis has been implemented and deposited with the Local Planning Authority in accordance with details to be submitted to and agreed in writing by the Local Planning Authority. Reason: To ensure that a record of the building is completed and maintained prior to the commencement of works.

5 Where any species listed under Schedule 2 and 4 of the Conservation (Natural Habitats) Regulations 1994 is present on the site (or other identified part) in respect of which this permission is hereby granted, no works of site clearance, demolition or construction shall take place in pursuance of this permission unless a license to disturb any such species has been granted in accordance with the aforementioned Regulations and a copy thereof has been produced to the Local Planning Authority. AREA 2 DEVELOPMENT CONTROL COMMITTEE – 27TH OCTOBER 2009

ITEM 8 (CONT’D) APPLICATION NO. 2009/0439

Reason: In the interest of protecting species listed under Schedule 2 and 4 of the Conservation (Natural Habitats) Regulation 1994.

6 Prior to the commencement of work on site a `Schwegler' type bat box shall be located on the site in a position to be agreed in writing by the Local Planning Authority. Reason: In the interest of protecting species listed under Schedule 2 and 4 of the Conservation (Natural Habitats) Regulation 1994.

7 The developer shall ensure that a suitably qualified archaeologist is present during the undertaking of any ground disturbing works in the development area, so that an archaeological watching brief can be conducted. The archaeological watching brief shall be undertaken to the standards of the Institute for Archaeologists. The Local Planning Authority shall be informed, in writing at least two weeks prior to the commencement of the development of the name of the said archaeologist and no work shall begin until the Local Planning Authority has confirmed, in writing that the proposed archaeologist is suitable. A copy of the watching brief report shall be submitted to the Local Planning Authority within two months of the fieldwork being completed by the archaeologist. Reason: To identify and record any features of archaeological interest discovered during the works, in order to mitigate the impact of the works on the archaeological resource.

8 Before the development hereby permitted is first brought into beneficial use a 2m high privacy screen shall be erected on the balcony along the north west and south east facing elevations , in accordance with details to be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The balcony screening shall thereafter be maintained in the condition as approved unless otherwise agreed in writing by the Local Planning Authority. Reason: In the interest of residential amenity.

9 Notwithstanding the plans hereby approved, details of the height of the proposed boundary wall front the highway shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority prior to its erection. The wall shall be erected as approved. Reason: In the interest of highway safety.

INFORMATIVES

1 The development plan covering the City and County of Swansea is the City and County of Swansea Unitary Development Plan. The following policies were relevant to the consideration of the application: (Policies EV1, EV2, EV9, EV16 and EV26 of the Swansea UDP).

2 A list of archaeological contractors who work in Wales is available from http://www.archaeologists.net/modules/icontent/index.php?page=22 and also http:www.bajr.org/whose/Contractor.asp.

AREA 2 DEVELOPMENT CONTROL COMMITTEE – 27TH OCTOBER 2009

ITEM 8 (CONT’D) APPLICATION NO. 2009/0439

PLANS

Site location plan, existing block plan, proposed block plan, 1 existing plans, received 23rd March 2009 and Drg No 4 dated 7th July 2009.

AREA 2 DEVELOPMENT CONTROL COMMITTEE – 27TH OCTOBER 2009

ITEM 9 APPLICATION NO. 2009/0360 WARD: Area 2 Newton

Location: Cliffe Cottage, Langland Bay, Langland, Swansea, SA3 4RE Proposal: Replacement detached dwelling and detached garage Applicant: Langland Bay Golf Club Ltd

BACKGROUND INFORMATION

This application was DEFERRED from the Area 2 Development Control Committee on the 6th October 2009 in order to consider the impact of the development upon the Gower AONB. My report has been amended to include revised Highway Observations, address the abandonment issue and the addition of a condition relating to boundary treatment and a condition clarifying the status of the land to the west of the site. My recommendation of APPROVAL remains the same.

POLICIES

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

Policy EV12 The character of lanes and public paths that contribute to the amenity, natural and historical qualities of an area will be protected. (City & County of Swansea Unitary Development Plan 2008)

Policy EV19 Replacement dwellings in the countryside, including residential chalets, will only be permitted where the residential use has not been abandoned, the proposed new dwelling is similar in terms of siting, scale, design and character and compliments the character of the surrounding area. (City & County of Swansea Unitary Development Plan 2008)

Policy EV22 The countryside throughout the County will be conserved and enhanced for the sake of its natural heritage, natural resources, historic and cultural environment and agricultural and recreational value through: i) The control of development, and ii) Practical management and improvement measures. (City & County of Swansea Unitary Development Plan 2008)

AREA 2 DEVELOPMENT CONTROL COMMITTEE – 27TH OCTOBER 2009

ITEM 9 (CONT’D) APPLICATION NO. 2009/0360

SITE HISTORY

None

RESPONSE TO CONSULTATIONS

The application was advertised on site in the form of a site notice and in the press as development which affects a Right of Way and as a Departure from the Provisions of the Development Plan. ONE neighbouring dwelling was individually consulted. FIVE LETTERS OF OBJECTION have been received and are summarised as follows:

1. Wrong to remove the right of way. 2. Modern dwelling is not in keeping with the site. 3. Character of this area would be lost forever. 4. Unacceptable impact upon the Gower AONB. 5. Contrary to UDP policies. 6. Unacceptable impact upon the character of the access track contrary to Policy EV12 of the UDP. 7. Unacceptable impact upon access and highway safety. 8. Proposal is contrary to the Countryside and Rights of Way Act 2000. 9. Proposal is purely for financial gain. 10. Unacceptable impact upon SSSI and historical landscape. 11. New dwellings should make sustainability a top priority. 12. Carbon footprint will be high.

Gower Society: Following observations to make:

1. We accept that the existing property has little historical or architectural merit. However it could be restored to its original format, but we think it has been ‘bastardised’ too much over the last 40 years or so. 2. We note however the proposal to increase its footprint from a square form into a linear structure of twice the footprint. 3. When viewed from the north, this structure will have more an impact on the land and seascape. 4. The opportunity exists to create a house of ultra-modern design that would be invisible from the north and which would blend into the landscape. This design is over-large and ordinary for such a high profile, but unique location. 5. There are insufficient (if any) dimensions on the drawings.

Our society strongly objects to this application; we ask that you take all of the above points into consideration when making your decision or recommendation to the Planning Committee. AREA 2 DEVELOPMENT CONTROL COMMITTEE – 27TH OCTOBER 2009

ITEM 9 (CONT’D) APPLICATION NO. 2009/0360

Gower Society: Object on the following grounds:

1. The existing property is within the AONB. 2. It is close to and adjacent to the cliff headland that is a SSSI. 3. The public footpath that passes directly adjacent to the property will be compromised. 4. Access for such a large property will inevitably lead to more vehicle movements in this sensitive area. 5. It is clear that only the most sensitive of developments can take place on this site without compromising the impact on the landscape. 6. We appreciate that the application is only outline, but in view of the detail shown, we have responded accordingly.

Our society reiterates its objection to this application we ask that you take all of the above points into consideration when making your decision or recommendation to the Planning Committee.

Mumbles Community Council: Object on the following grounds:

1. Out of keeping with visual aspect of the site. 2. Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty.

Highway Observations: This development proposes the replacement of an existing dwelling within the grounds of Langland Bay Golf Club. The existing dwelling is accessed from Mary Twill Lane and I would not support a new dwelling with access along the current route due to its restricted nature in terms of width and lack of sufficient passing facilities. However, the dwelling is in existence and therefore the principle of access to a residential dwelling is established.

The site is very remote from other residences and is over 500 metres from the end of the adopted length of Mary Twill Lane. Whilst the proposed house is a large 5 bedroom property there is unlikely to be a significant difference in terms of traffic use from the potential of that which currently exists. Adequate parking is available without causing any problems on the access track as facilities are being provided within the site.

On balance, as this is a replacement for an existing established dwelling, I recommend that no highway objections are raised.

The Ramblers Association: I wish to register an objection on behalf of West Glamorgan Ramblers to this application.

The plan shows the proposed building obstructing the right of way which traverses the area. This path was diverted to accommodate the golf club a few years ago and its loss would be detrimental to public amenity.

Glamorgan Gwent Archaeological Trust: We have considered the impact of the proposed development on the historic landscape and have concluded that it will be of local relevance. It is therefore our opinion that this impact will not be a factor in the determination of this application. AREA 2 DEVELOPMENT CONTROL COMMITTEE – 27TH OCTOBER 2009

ITEM 9 (CONT’D) APPLICATION NO. 2009/0360

The record is not definitive, however and unrecorded or unknown archaeological features or finds still may be located during the development. Should this occur, please contact this Division of this trust in this event for the site to be assessed. Nevertheless, as the archaeological advisors to your Members, we have no objection to the determination of this application.

Following concern relating to the visual impact of the proposed development the Local Planning Authority invoked the General Development Order and requested the submission of all details prior to the determination of this application. All previous objectors were re- consulted and the following comments were received:

Neighbours: THREE LETTERS OF OBJECTION were received which are summarised below:

1. Previous objections stand. 2. Impact upon the historic environment. 3. Impact upon the Right of Way. 4. Contrary to Policy EV3 of the UDP.

Gower Society: The Gower Society has inspected the amended plans for the above application and has the following observations to make:

It wishes its comments contained in the two letters of 9th May 2009 to remain. There is nothing in this new application to change its view of this proposal.

We object to this application and ask that you take the above comment into consideration.

Highways: Additional Plans

No further comments to make.

Highways: Addendum to Highways Report. There is an error in my previous report regarding access to the site. My report advises that access is gained from Mary Twill Lane, whilst pedestrian access is possible along that route, the vehicular access is via Hillgrove. I would not support any new development off Hillgrove due to its substandard nature however this is for a replacement dwelling and therefore the same considerations do not apply. My recommendations therefore remain unchanged.

APPRAISAL

This application has been reported to Committee for decision at the request of Councillor Susan Waller Thomas.

Full planning permission is sought for a replacement detached dwelling with detached garage at Cliffe Cottage, Langland. The site is situated approximately 190m at it’s nearest to the west of the settlement boundary of Langland as identified on the Proposals Map for the UDP. The site lies in the middle of Langland Golf Club both within the countryside and Gower AONB.

AREA 2 DEVELOPMENT CONTROL COMMITTEE – 27TH OCTOBER 2009

ITEM 9 (CONT’D) APPLICATION NO. 2009/0360

The main issues for consideration during the determination of this application are the impact of the development upon the visual amenity of the countryside, the Gower AONB and the surrounding area, the impact upon the residential amenities of the neighbouring dwellings and highway safety having regard for the policies of the Swansea UDP. It is not considered the Human Rights Act raise any further additional issues.

Policy EV1, to which Policy EV19 is cross referenced, states that where there is scope; design should seek to improve the built environment. This also needs to be considered in the context of the Strategic objectives of the Plan, which amongst other things seek to upgrade the visual environment and image of the area, promote locally distinct, innovative design sensitive to the location and setting and to protect the countryside from development that would cause material harm.

Although the area lies within the countryside and Gower AONB there is no prevailing characteristic or dominant house type to suggest a specific architectural response on this site. In terms of the principle of development countryside and Gower AONB Policies EV22 and EV26 seek to conserve and enhance the natural environment and natural beauty of the Gower AONB. UDP Policy EV19 relates specifically to replacement dwellings in the open countryside requiring proposals to be similar in terms of siting, scale, design and character with the dwelling it is to replace. Such developments are also required to complement the character of the surrounding area. This policy is intended to avoid the replacement of rural dwellings with inappropriate new development that detracts from the character of the countryside. Whilst the policy requires proposals to be similar in siting, scale, design and character it is not considered that it is intended to prevent appropriate development where it can be clearly demonstrated that there would be no harmful impact on the character of the area through the increased size of a dwelling or where there is an enhancement in the appearance of the existing dwelling. At the same time it is paramount that any new dwelling achieves a high quality design that responds to, protects and enhances the inherent qualities of the countryside whilst also respecting the residential amenity of surrounding properties and the scale and the scale and massing of the existing dwelling. Where abandonment has occurred or the dwelling has been vacant for a considerable period of time and/or deteriorated to the extent that re-use for residential purposes would involve rebuild, such proposals would fall to be considered as new residential development in the countryside and assessed against appropriate policies.

Turning firstly to the issue of abandonment. This issue is a material consideration in the determination of applications and is a legal concept used by the courts to describe the circumstances in which rights to resume a use which has been lawfully carried on in the past may be lost because of the cessation of that use.

In considering the issue of abandonment, Hughes v Secretary of State established that there are four criteria relevant to the issue:

1. The physical condition of the building 2. The length of time for which the building has not been used for residential purposes 3. Whether it had been used for any other purposes, and 4. The owners intention

With regard to the physical condition of the building, the submitted photographs and an inspection of the site reveal that the building is intact (i.e. all four walls are standing, there is a roof and internal walls doors and stairs remain). AREA 2 DEVELOPMENT CONTROL COMMITTEE – 27TH OCTOBER 2009

ITEM 9 (CONT’D) APPLICATION NO. 2009/0360

All external walls are currently intact together with the majority of the roof structure. Most of the window openings have been boarded up and the applicant contends that this is to keep the building as secure as possible. The applicant ensures that the site curtilage is maintained.

It is unclear from visiting the site when the building was last used for residential purposes; however, the applicant indicates that it was purchased in 2003 and prior to that was used as a private dwelling. It has remained unoccupied since that time for a period of 6 years.

The fourth criterion relates to the owner’s intentions. The applicant indicates that due to the need to purchase the garden area to the west of the application site in order to safeguard the playability of the 8th hole the Golf club was left with little choice other than to purchase the dwelling to prevent it falling into private hands. This purchase put considerable strain on the clubs finances and it was concluded that the site must be redeveloped for a private dwelling whilst retaining the western garden area. In 2004 in order to facilitate the redevelopment an application for diverting the footpath was submitted which took almost 2 years and therefore it is not considered conducive to intentional abandonment. Whilst the property is vacant it is clear that the use for residential purposes is an established authorised use and with this in mind it is considered that the applicant has demonstrated beyond reasonable doubt that intentional abandonment has not occurred. Moreover, it is also considered that this proposal satisfies the three other criteria referred to above and that the applicant has proved that the residential use of the property has not been abandoned. Furthermore, it is considered that whilst the applicant proposes to demolish and rebuild, the existing building is capable of minimal renovation to allow for its reuse. This further reinforces the argument that the building has not been abandoned.

Although the applicant may wish to retain control over part of the site to the west they have not explicitly sought consent for a change of use of this land from residential use to golf course. Whilst the change of use is unlikely to be objected to in principle, at officer level, for the avoidance of any doubt a condition is recommended indicating that notwithstanding the plans submitted, no consent is granted for the change of use of part of this land to golf course and that such a change of use would require the express consent of the Local Planning Authority through the submission of a new application. This would not, however, prevent them from retaining ownership over this part of the site should they chose to do so.

Following concerns from the Local Planning Authority the side wing of the proposed replacement dwelling was removed in order for the dwelling to comply with the criteria set out in Policy EV19 (Replacement Dwellings) of the UDP. The general footprint uses traditional one and two storey forms to break down the overall massing so that the building respects the scale of the existing dwelling, the plot and the wider rural area. It is considered that the design, coupled with the height of the main ridge which is similar to the existing dwelling and also the subordinate single storey elements will reduce the visual impact upon the wider landscape and fundamentally respects and enhances the character and appearance of its local context. Whilst the application plans indicate that quality materials will be used in its construction i.e. slate for the roof, render and stone for walls and timber windows, further information will be required to ensure the quality of the scheme is maintained as it is essential that the proposal relates to its wider context. A condition is therefore recommended in this respect. AREA 2 DEVELOPMENT CONTROL COMMITTEE – 27TH OCTOBER 2009

ITEM 9 (CONT’D) APPLICATION NO. 2009/0360

Whilst the proposal is marginally larger than the existing dwelling it is of a size, scale and siting which is similar to the existing dwelling. Similarly the proposed dwelling is similar in character and design to the original property in that it reflects the character of a traditional double fronted, pitched roof two storey dwelling. On this basis, it is considered that the proposal complies with the provisions of Policy EV19 of the UDP and furthermore given that the design and materials proposed are of a high quality it is considered that the proposal is an improvement in visual terms and will enhance the character and appearance of the Gower AONB. Criteria (i) of Policy EV19 specifically relates to whether the building has been abandoned and whilst it is acknowledged the building has been unoccupied for a number of years the physical condition of the building is satisfactory and watertight and could be physically re-occupied with a minimal amount of refurbishment. Although the application was originally advertised as a Departure to the Development Plan because of its size, the amendments to reduce its size mean that it is not now considered to depart from Policy EV19 of the Unitary Development Plan.

With regard the proposed garage, given its limited size, scale and existing screening it is considered that its impact upon the visual amenity of the area is considered to be minimal in compliance with the above policies of the prevailing Unitary Development Plan.

Turning to residential amenities there are no immediate neighbours which will be affected by the proposed works and as such will have no impact upon residential amenity. Therefore the proposal is considered to comply with the principles of Policy EV1 of the Swansea UDP.

Having consulted the Head of Transportation and Engineering it is considered that as this is an application for a replacement dwelling there are no adverse highway implications associated with the proposed development and as such there are no highway objections.

The proposal is situated within a historic landscape and the Glamorgan Gwent Archaeological Trust concluded that the proposed replacement dwelling will be only of local relevance. It is therefore their opinion that this impact will not be a factor in the determination of this application.

In terms of the impact upon protected species the submitted survey has been reviewed by the Council’s Ecologist and is considered acceptable. Therefore the proposal is considered to have an acceptable impact upon protected species.

The plot runs parallel to a Right of Way, however having consulted the Council’s Countryside Access Team there are no objections to the proposed scheme subject to the applicant being made aware of the existence of the Public Footpath which must be protected at all times in compliance with the requirements of Policy EV12 of the UDP.

Notwithstanding the above, thirteen letters of objection were received raising concern relating to the impact upon the character and appearance of the Gower AONB, the wider countryside, the seascape and the historic landscape, access, highway safety, impact upon the Right of Way, overdevelopment, design and the proposal being an insensitive form of development. The issues pertaining to which have been addressed above.

Concern has been raised with regard the impact upon the adjacent SSSI, however given the proposal is for a replacement dwelling on a similar footprint it is not considered that the proposed dwelling would have an unacceptable impact upon this. AREA 2 DEVELOPMENT CONTROL COMMITTEE – 27TH OCTOBER 2009

ITEM 9 (CONT’D) APPLICATION NO. 2009/0360

In addition to this, concern has been raised regarding the carbon footprint and sustainability of a dwelling in this location. It is considered, however, that in this instance the construction of a modern dwelling as opposed to the renovation and the re-use of the existing property would not be unacceptable in policy terms in this instance and furthermore elements associated with construction are considered under separate legislation.

Concern has been raised relating to the lack of dimensions on the submitted plans, however it must be noted that they are scaled drawings and thus are acceptable in planning terms.

In conclusion, the submitted scheme in policy terms is of an appropriate scale, design and siting for a replacement dwelling, incorporates a traditional form and materials which, it is considered, creates a dwelling that respects the local vernacular of Gower and the landscape of the AONB and countryside. Therefore it is considered that the proposed development complies with the principles of Policies EV1, EV2, EV3, EV12, EV19, EV22 and EV26 of the Swansea UDP and is recommended for approval.

RECOMMENDATION

APPROVE, subject to the following conditions:

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

4 Before the development hereby permitted is commenced, details of the levels of the building(s), road(s) and footpath(s) in relation to the adjoining land and access roads together with any changes proposed in the levels of the site shall be submitted to and agreed by the Local Planning Authority in writing. Reason: To ensure that the work is carried out at suitable levels in relation to the highway and adjoining land having regard to drainage, gradient of access, and the amenities of adjoining occupiers. AREA 2 DEVELOPMENT CONTROL COMMITTEE – 27TH OCTOBER 2009

ITEM 9 (CONT’D) APPLICATION NO. 2009/0360

5 Notwithstanding the submitted plans, where any new boundary treatment is proposed, details shall first be submitted to and agreed in writing by the Local Planning Authority prior to the beneficial occupation of the dwelling commencing. Reason: In the interest of visual amenity.

6 Notwithstanding the plans submitted, no consent is granted for the change of use of part of the site to the west from residential use to golf course use. Reason: For the avoidance of any doubt given that the application does not formally seek a change of use of this land, which in itself would require the express consent of the Local Planning Authority through the submission of a change of use planning application.

INFORMATIVES

2 Please note that there is a Public Footpath running across part of the application site and as such must be protected at all times.

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

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

PLANS

Amended plans: DRW-No 001 Rev D -existing & proposed scheme, DRW-No 2 Rev B- proposed scheme, DRW-No 3 Rev B- proposed scheme, DRW-No4 Rev B-proposed scheme, DRW-No 5- existing elevations received 21st September 2009.

AREA 2 DEVELOPMENT CONTROL COMMITTEE – 27TH OCTOBER 2009

ITEM 10 APPLICATION NO. 2009/0163 WARD: Area 2 Gower

Location: The Old Rectory, Rhossili, Swansea, SA3 1PL Proposal: Realignment of approximately 110m of existing access track Applicant: The National Trust

BACKGROUND INFORMATION

This application was DEFERRED FOR A SITE VISIT at Area 2 Development Control Committee on 6th October 2009 to consider the impact of the development on the character of the area. My recommendation of refusal remains unchanged.

Relevant Planning Policies

National Planning Policy Guidance

Technical Advice Note (TAN 5) Nature Conservation and Planning (2009)

Technical Advice Note (TAN 14) Coastal Planning (1998)

Planning Policy Wales (PPW) 2002

City and County of Swansea Unitary Development Plan

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

Policy EV25 Development, alone or in combination with other plans or projects, which is likely to adversely affect the integrity of a European protected site (SAC, Marine SAC, SPA and Ramsar Sites) and is not directly connected with or necessary to the management of the site will not be permitted. (City & County of Swansea Unitary Development Plan 2008)

AREA 2 DEVELOPMENT CONTROL COMMITTEE – 27TH OCTOBER 2009

ITEM 10 (CONT’D) APPLICATION NO. 2009/0163

Policy EV27 Development that significantly adversely affects the special interests of sites designated as SSSI's and NNR's will not be permitted unless the need for the development is of such significance that it outweighs the national importance of the designation. (City & County of Swansea Unitary Development Plan 2008)

Policy EC17 Proposals for tourism and recreation developments of an appropriate scale in locations which relate acceptably to the existing patter of development and/or their surroundings in terms of the nature of the proposal concerned will be permitted provided they comply with a specified list of criteria including standard of design, effect on landscape and nature conservation, effect of visitor pressure on sensitive locations, provide acceptable and safe access, would not cause a loss of best agricultural land. (City & County of Swansea Unitary Development Plan 2008)

Policy EC18 Development that improves the range and quality of serviced tourist accommodation will be permitted subject to specific criteria. (City & County of Swansea Unitary Development Plan 2008)

SITE HISTORY

App No. Proposal 2005/0765 New access track to replace existing track Decision: Withdrawn Decision Date: 13/10/2005

2008/1899 Realignment of approximately 110m of existing access track Decision: Withdrawn Decision Date: 03/02/2009

RESPONSE TO CONSULTATIONS

The application was advertised on site. No response.

Environment Agency - The Environment Agency would have no objection to the proposal as submitted as the track only passes through improved grassland. Therefore we are satisfied that there is no risk to the features of the SAC/SSSI.

Glamorgan Gwent Archaeological Trust Ltd – No objection to the determination of this application. AREA 2 DEVELOPMENT CONTROL COMMITTEE – 27TH OCTOBER 2009

ITEM 10 (CONT’D) APPLICATION NO. 2009/0163

Countryside Council for Wales – CCW does not object to the proposal, but recommends that the modification and conditions outlined in the supporting statement are made a condition of any planning permission, in order to improve the impact of the scheme.

Rhossili Community Council – Rhossili Community Council has considered the above application and has no comments to make.

Head of Transportation and Engineering – The section of track to be replaced is relatively remote from the adopted highway and therefore there is unlikely to be any highway safety implication for the public at large. It is unclear from the submitted details whether the materials will need to be imported for constructing the replacement track. However, the applicant has indicated that there will be reuse of materials taken from the existing track and on that basis the need for additional materials that would need to be imported is likely to be reduced and on a small scale.

APPRAISAL

This application is reported to Committee for decision at the request of Councillor Richard Lewis.

Full planning permission is sought for the re-alignment of 110 metres of an existing track in Rhossili to improve visitor access by car to holiday accommodation at The Old Rectory.

Access to The Old Rectory is via a kilometre long private track from Rhossili. From the village, the track angles down towards the cliff edge before running along parallel to the cliff and then turning sharply inland, uphill to the Old Rectory. The track is surfaced with hard packed gravel. The track is also used by the Trust’s tenant farmer and where the track bends uphill towards the Old Rectory, the track carries on over the fields to the north. The Old Rectory is the Trust’s most popular holiday cottage in terms of occupancy level and advanced bookings. The house provides year round accommodation.

The track is unlit and visitors are advised to arrive in daylight so that they can negotiate the track more safely. The likelihood of a slip affecting the track is low but the Trust state that the consequences for visitors using the track would be serious and cannot be ignored.

Planning History

In terms of the planning history of this site, an application for the construction of a new track to the Old Rectory was submitted in March 2005 (2005/0765 refers).

The applicant was advised to reduce the section of replacement tract to a slight realignment of the existing track at the far northern corner as it curves to access the Old Rectory. This advice was given following careful consideration of the proposal on site, and responses to statutory consultation. Based on the information received at that time, there was no evidence of recent subsidence in the area and there was no overriding need to replace the track with the large section for which planning permission was being sought. The proposal was considered to have a visually detrimental effect on the coastal landscape and natural beauty of this part of the Gower AONB and a recommendation of refusal was being recommended. This application was WITHDRAWN by the applicant. AREA 2 DEVELOPMENT CONTROL COMMITTEE – 27TH OCTOBER 2009

ITEM 10 (CONT’D) APPLICATION NO. 2009/0163

The current application seeks the realignment of approximately 110 metres of the existing access track as compared to the 350 metres proposed in the previous application (2005/0765).

The main issues to be considered are the acceptability of the proposed new access at this location in terms of the impact of the proposed development on the character and appearance of the surrounding landscape at this location, having regard to national planning guidance and the prevailing Unitary Development Plan Policies relating to new development within the Gower Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty, the protected coastline, protected land (SAC, SSSI), and the open countryside. It is not considered that the provisions of the Human Rights Act raise any other overriding considerations.

Policy Context

In this case the site is not only located within the Gower AONB, but is within an area of protected heritage coastline, SSSI, SAC and adjacent to Common Land. Within AONBs, the primary objective of this designation is the conservation and enhancement of their natural beauty, whilst having regard to the social and economic well being of the area (PPW 5.3.5). The Council has a statutory duty to have regard to the AONB purposes (Countryside and Rights of Way Act 2000), and the landscape and scenic beauty must be afforded the highest status of protection from inappropriate developments. Great weight must therefore be given to conserving and enhancing the natural beauty, wildlife and cultural heritage of the AONB. TAN 14 (para. 8) outlines specific issues in relation to the coastal zone that the planning system should address; these are inter alia: (i) proposals for development (a) the potential need for remedial and defence works (d) any potentiaol visual impact from both land and sea. In line with this guidance, the following policies of the Unitary Development Plan apply:

Policy EV26 enforces the primary objective of the AONB designation and requires that development that would have a material adverse effect on the natural beauty, wildlife and cultural heritage of the AONB will not be permitted. This is supported by Policy EV22 that primarily seeks to conserve and enhance the countryside throughout the County for the sake of its natural heritage, natural resources, historic and cultural, environment and agricultural and recreational value through: (i) The control of development, and (ii) Practical management and improvement measures. The above policies are reinforced by Policy EV1 which requires new development to sensitively relate to existing development patterns and seeks to protect natural heritage and the historic and cultural environment, not only on-site, but in terms of potential impact on neighbouring areas of importance, Policy EV2 which requires new development to have regard to the physical character and topography of the site and its surroundings which includes interalia (ii) effectively integrating with the landscape, seascape or coastline… (iii) retaining important views into and out of the site. Policies EV25 and EV27 seek to ensure that development that significantly adversely affects the integrity of a European protected site (SAC) or SSSI, will not be permitted unless the need for the development is of such significance that it outweighs the national importance of the designation. Policy EV31 seeks to protect the undeveloped coast and priority is placed on the protection and enhancement of the natural heritage and historic environment and improvement of existing facilities. AREA 2 DEVELOPMENT CONTROL COMMITTEE – 27TH OCTOBER 2009

ITEM 10 (CONT’D) APPLICATION NO. 2009/0163

Policy EC17 sets out the criteria for proposals for tourism and recreation developments of an appropriate scale in locations which relate acceptably to the existing pattern of development and/or their surroundings in terms of the nature of the proposal concerned and permits development provided they are inter alia; in keeping with the character of the area; do not have significant adverse effects on landscape or nature conservation interests; do not create a significantly harmful level of visitor pressure at sensitive locations. Policy EC18 permits development that improves the range and quality of serviced accommodation. The amplification to this policy states that investment in key visitor attraction increases the appeal a destination and sufficient good quality accommodation helps create the package visitors expect. Development which adds significant visitor pressure at sensitive locations will not be permitted.

Under the Countryside and Rights of Way (CRoW) Act 2000 S.89 (2) the City and County of Swansea has a duty to prepare a management plan for the Gower AONB. In this respect, The Gower Management Plan 2006 expands on the vision for the AONB and the action needed to conserve and enhance the special qualities for which it has been designated.

Both the Countryside Council for Wales (CCW) and the Environment Agency (EA) have been consulted under Regulation 48 of the Habitat Regulations. CCW have noted that the proposal is unlikely to have a significant effect on the SAC, and the EA are satisfied that there is no risk to the features of the SAC/SSSI. The Authority’s Ecologist does not consider there are any ecological issues with the proposal and it is the Council’s opinion that an appropriate assessment is not therefore required (TAN 5, Annex 3).

The Impact of the Proposal on the Character and Appearance of the Gower AONB

In considering the effects of the proposed development the Local Planning Authority have considered the available baseline data to assess the current character of this site and inform appropriate decision making regarding the visual impact of the proposed alterations to the access track to The Old Rectory and fields beyond. In Wales, LANDMAP is the formally adopted methodology for landscape assessment, and is advocated by Planning Policy Wales, March 2002 as being an important information resource upon which Local Planning Authorities can draw in making landscape assessments to inform local policy, guidance and decision making in the field (Para. 5.3.13, PPW 2002). LANDMAP describes and evaluates aspects of landscape and provides the consistent Wales-wide approach to landscape assessment. This includes, for example, local distinctiveness, special landscape area, and design.

The relevant LANDMAP information for this area of Gower therefore offers a structured and consistent methodology, comprising five spatially related data sets, known as Geological Landscape, Landscape Habitats, Visual & Sensory, the Historic Landscape, and the Cultural Landscape, which are recognised as part of a nationally consistent data set. LANDMAP information in geographical areas relevant to this application was carried out in the part five years 2003 to 2007. AREA 2 DEVELOPMENT CONTROL COMMITTEE – 27TH OCTOBER 2009

ITEM 10 (CONT’D) APPLICATION NO. 2009/0163

An analysis of the Visual and Sensory data for South Gower concludes that the application site falls within the aspect area Rhossili Down – Upland/Hills, Lower Plateau & Scarp Slopes/Hill & Lower Plateau Grazing (Level 3) with the following ‘landscape receptors’: exposed rough grassland on prominent high hills ranging between 100m to 190mAOD, attractive view of coast significant contributor to sense of place, essentially upland areas with no detractors. There are attractive views both in and out (coastal view out). Key qualities and elements that should be conversed are defined as open coastal, open rough grassland. The Evaluation Criteria notes a high scenic quality (picturesque accessible views of coastal area), being largely unspoilt. This is reinforced by the Cultural Landscape data for Rhossili & Rhossili Bay which recognises its importance as an iconic destination for visitors.

The landscape, geological and historical layers of LANDMAP add to the above baseline data. The Geological Landscape evaluation data confirms that apart from being within the Gower AONB, the application site is within the following protected areas – Sites of Special Scientific Interest (SSSI) Rhossili Down, Whitford Burrows, Special Area of Conservation (SAC) Gower Commons, where there is overall outstanding landscape evaluation. The Principal management recommendations are to ensure that no significant features of geological or geomorphological significance are lost/damaged due to development, etc.

This baseline data highlights the landscape value, site characteristics and local landscape character of this protected area, and underlines that the application site is in an area of high scenic quality and character to be retained and conserved.

No substantial evidence has been submitted with the application to justify the re-alignment of the access track as proposed. To enable a full assessment of the visual impact on the coastal landscape and natural beauty of this part of the Gower AONB, the Trust were requested to provided further information, including a copy of the Ove Arup and Partners Ltd Engineering Inspection Report on which this current application is based, and an additional plan clearly showing the new agricultural access to the fields.

A copy of the Ove Arup report and the additional information has been provided by the Trust. It is noted that Section 5 – Recommendations for Further Work states;

“5.1 Risk of Slips and Rockfall onto Beach

The likelihood of harm from landslip or rockfall activity is considered to be generally low, and the risks identified are considered to be in accordance with what would normally be expected for a natural environment such as this…

5.2 Risk to the Old Rectory Track

Whilst the likelihood of landslips affecting the Old Rectory access track is considered to be low, the potential consequences of a vehicle leaving the track in the event of a slip are considered high. Relocation inland of the track away for the edge of the low cliff could be considered in order to prevent the risk of sudden failure of the track.

Informing users of the Old Rectory access track to be aware of the potential slip hazard should also be considered as a means of controlling and managing this risk. AREA 2 DEVELOPMENT CONTROL COMMITTEE – 27TH OCTOBER 2009

ITEM 10 (CONT’D) APPLICATION NO. 2009/0163

The installation of two or three shallow gravel filled trenches across the track in the region of the ‘Old Rectory Landslip’ at the bend of the Old Rectory track in the northernmost point of sub-are 1 could also be considered in the shorter term, to interrupt the channelling of water flows from the adjacent Rhossili Down, which should allow the water to soak away over a larger area of the adjacent grazing land.”

It is considered that there is no substantial evidence to demonstrate that there is recent subsidence in this area and there is no overriding need to re-align the section of track currently under consideration. The Ove Arup Engineering Report concludes that the likelihood of landslips affecting the Old Rectory access track is considered to be low. Whilst it is acknowledged that the potential consequences of a vehicle leaving the track in the event of a slip are considered high, there are alternative solutions which should be considered in the first instance as identified in the Recommendations Section of the Ove Arup Report.

The Goals and Policies of the Unitary Development Plan seek to protect the countryside from development that would cause material harm, particularly the undeveloped coastline and other areas of high landscape quality. The Gower Management Plan provides the practical management and initiatives for implementing the policy background. In this respect it is considered that the current proposal does not address the concerns raised in the previous application (2005/0765 refers), and it is not considered that there is sufficient justification to justify the re-alignment for the access as proposed and that there is no alterative solution that can explored. Moreover, the proposed re-alignment of the access road will be highly visible from the wider public vantage points, not only from Rhossili Downs but from the Car Park at Rhossili and the cliff top walks towards Worms Head. The Gower peninsula is an area of exceptional landscape quality and beauty which has been afforded AONB status to ensure that the landscape is protected from inappropriate developments. This unique quality is reinforced in the LANDMAP data sets for Rhossili & Rhossili Bay which recognises its importance as an iconic destination for visitors.

Highway Safety and Access

In terms of highway safety, the section of track to be replaced is relatively remote from the adopted highway and therefore there is unlikely to be any highway safety implication for the public at large. It is unclear form the submitted details whether the materials will need to be imported for constructing the replacement track. However, the applicant has indicated that there will be reuse of materials taken from the existing track and on that basis the need for additional materials that would need to be imported is likely to be reduced and on a small scale.

On balance, The Head of Transportation and Engineering has commented that it would be unlikely that this proposal would have any significant adverse impact on the adjoining highways during its construction and that following its construction there will be no adverse impact on highway safety. The Head of Transportation and Engineering recommends no highway objections are raised. AREA 2 DEVELOPMENT CONTROL COMMITTEE – 27TH OCTOBER 2009

ITEM 10 (CONT’D) APPLICATION NO. 2009/0163

Conclusion

Having regard to the above considerations, it is considered that the proposed re-alignment of 110 metres of the existing access track to improve visitor access by car to the holiday accommodation, represents an unjustified and visually intrusive form of development at this sensitive coastal location and protected landscape within the Gower AONB, contrary to Policies EV1, EV2, EV22, EV26, EC17 of the Swansea Unitary Development Plan, which seek to conserve and enhance the area’s natural beauty, and protect the sensitive coastal landscape from inappropriate development. Refusal is recommended.

RECOMMENDATION

REFUSE, for the following reason;

1 The proposed re-alignment of 110 metres of the existing access track to improve visitor access by car to the holiday accommodation by virtue of its siting, represents an unjustified and visually intrusive form of development at this sensitive coastal location and protected landscape within the Gower AONB, contrary to Policies EV1, EV2, EV22, EV26, EC17 of the Swansea Unitary Development Plan, which seek to conserve and enhance the areas natural beauty, and protect the sensitive coastal landscape from inappropriate development.

INFORMATIVES

1 The development plan covering the City and County of Swansea is the City and County of Swansea Unitary Development Plan. The following policies were relevant to the consideration of the application: Policies EV1, EV2, EV3, EV18, EV22, EV25, EV26 , EV27, EC17 and EC18 of the Swansea Unitary Development Plan.

PLANS

Drg. No. ORT1-site location plan 1/2500, ORT2-site location plan 1/1000, ORT3- existing layout, ORT4-proposed layout, ORT5- track cross section received 2nd February 2009

AREA 2 DEVELOPMENT CONTROL COMMITTEE – 27TH OCTOBER 2009

ITEM 11 APPLICATION NO. 2009/1200 WARD: Area 2 Oystermouth

Location: 28 Higher Lane Langland Swansea SA3 4NS Proposal: Front gable roof extension, single storey front extension, single storey rear/side extension with balcony above, two rear dormers and fenestration alterations Applicant: Mr Richards

BACKGROUND INFORMATION

This application was DEFERRED from the Area 2 Development Control Committee on the 6th October 2009 in order to consider the impact of the development upon the existing building and the street-scene. My report has been amended to include further consideration regarding the proposed privacy screen and the condition amended, however my recommendation of APPROVAL remains the same.

POLICIES

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

Policy HC7 Proposals for extensions and alterations to existing residential dwellings will be assess in terms of; relationship to the existing dwelling, impact on the character and appearance of the streetscene, effect on neighbouring properties, and impact on car parking. (City & County of Swansea Unitary Development Plan 2008)

SITE HISTORY

App No. Proposal 89/1173/03 DOMESTIC GARAGE AND SWIMMING POOL Decision: *HPS106 - PERMISSION SUBJ - S106 AGREEM. Decision Date: 16/05/1990

89/1170/01 ERECTION OF A DWELLING Decision: *HGPC - GRANT PERMISSION CONDITIONAL Decision Date: 16/05/1990

92/1162 ERECTION OF DWELLING HOUSE Decision: *HPS106 - PERMISSION SUBJ - S106 AGREEM. Decision Date: 09/08/1993

AREA 2 DEVELOPMENT CONTROL COMMITTEE – 27TH OCTOBER 2009

ITEM 11 (CONT’D) APPLICATION NO. 2009/1200

RESPONSE TO CONSULTATIONS

Neighbours: Four neighbouring dwellings were individually consulted and ONE LETTER OF OBJECTION was received which is summarised below:

1. Overdevelopment. 2. Unbalances the pair of semi-detached dwellings. 3. Overbearing. 4. Increase in floor area is double the size of the existing property. 5. Loss of privacy. 6. Unsympathetic design, size and scale. 7. Overlooking. 8. Pattern of fenestration.

Highways: The site is sufficiently large to accommodate adequate parking. I recommend that no highway objections are raised.

APPRAISAL

This application is reported to committee for decision at the request of Councillor Anthony Colburn.

Full planning permission is sought for a front gable roof extension, single storey front extension, single storey rear/side extension with balcony above, two rear dormers and fenestration alterations to a semi detached dwelling at No. 28 Higher Lane, Langland, Swansea.

The main issues for consideration during the determination of this planning application relate to the impact of the proposed extensions upon the character and appearance of the existing dwelling, the pair of semi-detached properties, the prevailing street-scene, the residential amenities of the neighbouring occupiers and highway safety having regard for the prevailing policies of the Swansea Unitary Development Plan and the Supplementary Planning Guidance document entitled a Design Guide for Householder Development.

In visual terms it is considered that the proposed extensions and alterations relate satisfactorily to the character and appearance of the existing dwelling. The extensions are considered proportionate to the size and scale of the existing dwelling and will, it is considered, represent positive additions to the aesthetic appearance of the property. Whilst it is acknowledged the application property forms part of a pair of dwellings, these properties are not symmetrical in visual terms and as such the proposed works will not, it is considered, unbalance the character and appearance of the pair or detract unacceptably from the street-scene. The dwelling is situated at a lower level than Higher Lane and as such will not prove dominant or overbearing when viewed from public vantage points. As such the proposal is in visual terms considered to comply with the principles of Policies HC7, EV1 and EV3 of the Swansea UDP and the Supplementary Planning Guidance document entitled A Design Guide for Householder Development. AREA 2 DEVELOPMENT CONTROL COMMITTEE – 27TH OCTOBER 2009

ITEM 11 (CONT’D) APPLICATION NO. 2009/1200

Turning to the impact of the proposed works on the residential amenities of the neighbouring properties the proposed works will be situated at a suitable distance from the neighbouring boundaries to ensure the proposal would not result in unacceptable overbearing or overshadowing impacts upon the residential amenities of the neighbouring properties. The rear extension complies with the principles of the 45-degree code highlighted within the Design Guide and as such is considered acceptable in this respect. With regard overlooking, the additional levels of fenestration will not, it is considered, result in additional overlooking over and above what is currently experienced and whilst the rear balcony is large, the erection of a obscurely glazed privacy screen on the northern boundary would overcome issues relating to overlooking whilst also allowing light to pass through into the private amenity space of the neighbouring occupier. As such, subject to condition the proposal would not have an unacceptable impact upon the residential amenities of the neighbouring occupiers and complies with the principles of Policies EV1 and HC7 of the Swansea UDP and the Design Guide.

Having consulted the Head of Transportation and Engineering there are no highway objections to the proposed works.

Notwithstanding the above one letter of objection was received raising concerns relating to the pattern of fenestration, overlooking, overbearing impact the size and scale of proposal and the impact upon the adjoining semi-detached dwelling. The issues pertaining to which have been addressed above.

In conclusion the proposal subject to condition is considered to respect the character and appearance of the existing dwelling, the pair of semi-detached properties and the wider streetscene whilst also ensuring the residential amenities of the neighbouring occupiers is not unacceptably compromised. Therefore the development is considered to comply with the principles of Policies EV1, EV3 and HC7 of the Swansea UDP and the Design Guide and is recommended for approval.

RECOMMENDATION

APPROVE, subject to the following conditions:

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

AREA 2 DEVELOPMENT CONTROL COMMITTEE – 27TH OCTOBER 2009

ITEM 11 (CONT’D) APPLICATION NO. 2009/1200

3 Before the development hereby permitted is first brought into beneficial use a 2m high obscurely glazed privacy screen shall be erected on the balcony along the north facing boundary facing No. 26 Higher Lane, in accordance with details to be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The boundary screening shall thereafter be maintained in the condition as approved unless otherwise agreed in writing by the Local Planning Authority. Reason: In the interest of residential amenity.

INFORMATIVES

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

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

PLANS

GA.101 Site location plan, existing plans and elevations, GA.102 block plan, proposed elevations and ground floor plan, GA.103 proposed first & second floor plans received 11th August, 2009

AREA 2 DEVELOPMENT CONTROL COMMITTEE – 27TH OCTOBER 2009

ITEM 12 APPLICATION NO. 2009/1085 WARD: Area 2 Dunvant Area 1

Location: Land adjacent to 8 Y Berllan Dunvant Swansea Proposal: Detached dwelling (outline) Applicant: Mr David Hewitt

BACKGROUND INFORMATION

This application was DEFERRED FOR A SITE VISIT at the Area 2 Development Control Committee on the 6th October 2009 to consider traffic and parking issues. My recommendation of approval remains unchanged.

POLICIES

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

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

SITE HISTORY

App No. Proposal 2005/2551 Single storey rear extension, two rear dormers, addition of pitched roof over existing two storey extension and rear fixed balastrade Decision: Grant Permission Conditional Decision Date: 26/04/2006

79/1701/11 STORAGE AND SOMETIMES CLEANING OF CARS Decision: *HRP - REFUSE PERMISSION Decision Date: 28/02/1980

AREA 2 DEVELOPMENT CONTROL COMMITTEE – 27TH OCTOBER 2009

ITEM 12 (CONT’D) APPLICATION NO. 2009/1085

RESPONSE TO CONSULTATIONS

The application was advertised on site and THREE LETTERS OF OBJECTION have been received, which are summarised as follows:

1. There are problems with the sewerage system and the mains drains runs through our garden through no.8. Will the intended dwelling have separate sewerage/drainage to us? 2. There is a major concern that the present sewerage system would not cope with the extra demand and throughput. 3. No.8 has prescriptive right of easement with the land that the garages occupy and are unsure as to whether this would be applicable to the proposed new dwelling. 4. The road at the entrance to the site is narrow and vehicles park opposite leaving space for just one lane of traffic causing hazardous traffic conditions and has been blighted by the parking of commercial vehicles. 5. There is a mature sycamore tree at no.113 Goetre Fawr Road, which will have to undergo radical surgery and will look ridiculous. 6. Loss of light. 7. There should be a metre distance between any brickwork structure. 8. No-one has consulted me about this proposal, even though the building will be at the bottom of my garden.

Dwr Cymru Welsh Water – No objections subject to standard conditions/informatives.

Highways Observations – This proposal is to replace two domestic garages with a new dwelling. The garages are not associated with any of the adjacent dwellings and therefore their replacement is not considered to result in parking displacement. Access to the garages is currently in existence directly from Y Berllan and the new dwelling will utilise this access albeit that slight modification may be necessary to ensure that the new drive aligns with the dropped kerbing.

The application is in outline form and includes an indicative layout of how a single dwelling could be accommodated within the site. The principle of this appears satisfactory and subject to details of access and parking within the site is acceptable.

I recommend no highway objection subject to satisfactory details of access and parking within the site.

APPRAISAL

This application is reported to Committee for decision at the request of Councillor John Newbury.

Outline planning permission is sought for the construction of a single detached dwelling on 0.028 Hectares of land adjacent to No. 8 Y Berllan, Dunvant. All matters are reserved for future detailed consideration, but the Design and Access Statement illustrates a proposal for a two storey house with lower ground floor garage, an access directly off Y Berllan as existing. The site would be enclosed by timber fencing. AREA 2 DEVELOPMENT CONTROL COMMITTEE – 27TH OCTOBER 2009

ITEM 12 (CONT’D) APPLICATION NO. 2009/1085

The site is located within a residential area characterised by a mixture of detached, semi detached and terraced dwellings of different styles and ages. The L-shaped plot has a highway frontage of 8.5m and extends approximately 24m in length to a 14m wide rear curtilage with neighbouring residential gardens, and is currently occupied in part by two garages and part of the rear gardens of No’s 115 and 117 Goetre Fawr Road.

Main Issues for Consideration

The main issues for consideration in this instance relate to the suitability of the site for a detached dwelling having regard to the size of the plot and the impact upon the amenities of neighbouring residential properties, the character and appearance of the surrounding area and highway safety, when considered against the provisions of Policies EV1, EV2 and HC2 of the Swansea Unitary Development Plan. There are, in this instance, considered to be no additional issues arising from the provision of the Human Rights Act.

Policy HC2 of the Unitary Development Plan presumes in favour of housing development within the urban area unless there are overriding planning objections. Policy EV1 seeks to ensure new development accords with the criteria of good design, in particular being appropriate to its local context in terms of scale, height, massing, elevational treatment, materials and detailing, layout, form, mix and density, whilst Policy EV2 relates to the siting and location of new development.

Visual Amenity

The plot is considered to be of sufficient size to accommodate a dwelling house and a two storey dwelling would, it is considered, be in keeping with the existing character and appearance of the street scene. The indicative elevations however, indicate a two storey dwelling with a basement garage which technically makes the proposed dwelling three storeys. Whilst it is appreciated that the maximum height of the dwelling would be akin to that of No.8 Y Berllan, it is considered that the design of the three storey dwelling would appear as a discordant feature within the street scene. Therefore, whilst it is considered that a dwelling could be accommodated on the site, without it appearing cramped or overdeveloped, it is not considered that the design proposed should be agreed at this stage. It should also be noted that the applicant has applied for outline planning permission only with all matters reserved. It is considered therefore that planning permission should be granted on this basis only with detailed consideration being provided at the reserved matters stage. An informative to this effect is however recommended.

Residential Amenity

It is considered that a sensitively designed dwelling could be accommodated on the plot without resulting in direct overlooking, loss of privacy overshadowing or overbearing physical impact as standard separation distances between dwellings could, it is considered, be satisfactorily achieved.

Access and Highway Safety

This proposal is to replace two domestic garages with a new dwelling. The garages are not associated with any of the adjacent dwellings and therefore their replacement is not considered to result in parking displacement. AREA 2 DEVELOPMENT CONTROL COMMITTEE – 27TH OCTOBER 2009

ITEM 12 (CONT’D) APPLICATION NO. 2009/1085

Access to the garages is currently in existence directly from Y Berllan and the new dwelling will utilise this access albeit that slight modification may be necessary to ensure that the new drive aligns with the dropped kerbing.

On this basis, the Head of Transportation and Engineering has no highway objection to the outline proposal, subject to satisfactory details of access and parking being accommodated within the site.

Other Material Considerations

Concerns have been raised in neighbour consultation regarding the impact of the proposal upon residential amenity, and this issue has been addressed above. The problem with car parking is noted but the Head of Transportation and Engineering is satisfied that the proposal can be acceptably accommodated, providing further details of parking and access are submitted for approval as part of any subsequent reserved matters applications. Dwr Cymru Welsh Water has commented on the scheme and have made no mention of sewerage problems or that a mains drain runs through the site. However, they have requested that standard conditions/informatives are imposed to protect the integrity of the sewerage system. The concern expressed regarding the impact upon an existing sycamore tree is also noted, but as this tree is not covered by a Tree Preservation Order nor does the site lie within a Conservation Area, the Local Planning Authority has no control over any works that may need to be carried out to it. With regards to the issue of right of easement, this is a private matter between the parties involved and is not a material planning consideration.

Conclusions

In conclusion, therefore, and having regard to all material considerations, including the Human Rights Act, the proposal is considered a satisfactory form of development that complies with the requirements of Policies EV1, EV2 and HC2 of the Unitary Development Plan and approval is recommended.

RECOMMENDATION

APPROVE, subject to the following conditions:

1 Details of the access, appearance, landscaping, layout, and scale, (hereinafter called "the reserved matters") shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the local planning authority before any development begins and the development shall be carried out as approved. Reason: To ensure that the development is carried out in an orderly and satisfactory manner.

AREA 2 DEVELOPMENT CONTROL COMMITTEE – 27TH OCTOBER 2009

ITEM 12 (CONT’D) APPLICATION NO. 2009/1085

2 Detailed plans and drawings with respect to the matters reserved in condition (01) shall be submitted for approval by the Local Planning Authority not later than the expiration of three years from the date of this permission. Reason: To comply with the provisions of Section 92 of the Town and Country Planning Act, 1990 and to ensure that the development is determined within a reasonable period.

3 The development to which this permission relates shall be begun either before the expiration of 5 years from the date of this outline permission, or before the expiration of 2 years from the date of approval of the last of the reserved matters to be approved, whichever is the later. Reason: To comply with the provisions of Section 92 of the Town and Country Planning Act, 1990 and to ensure that development is begun within a reasonable period.

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

5 A minimum of 2 car parking spaces shall be provided within the curtilage of the site and shall be used only for the purpose specified. Reason: To ensure that the proposed development does not prejudice the free flow of traffic or conditions of general safety along the neighbouring highway.

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

INFORMATIVES

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

3 To protect the integrity of the Public Sewerage System, foul water and surface water discharges shall be drained separately from the site. AREA 2 DEVELOPMENT CONTROL COMMITTEE – 27TH OCTOBER 2009

ITEM 12 (CONT’D) APPLICATION NO. 2009/1085

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

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

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

7 It is not considered that a dwelling incorporating three levels of accommodation would be acceptable at this location. The details submitted as part of the Design and Access Statement are not, therefore, regarded as acceptable. The applicant is, therefore, advised to seek pre application advice from the Local Planning Authority prior to the submission of any subsequent reserved matters application.

PLANS

Block plan received 23rd July 2009. Amended site location plan received 17th September, 2009

AREA 2 DEVELOPMENT CONTROL COMMITTEE – 27TH OCTOBER 2009

ITEM 13 APPLICATION NO. 2009/1016 WARD: Area 2 Penyrheol

Location: 219 Llwyn Du Pentre Road Grovesend Swansea SA4 8DD Proposal: Construction of a manège area Applicant: Mr Neil Burder

BACKGROUND INFORMATION

This application was DEFERRED from the Area 2 Development Control Committee on the 6th October 2009 to assess the impact of the development upon the immediate area. My recommendation of approval remains unchanged.

POLICIES

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

Policy HC27 Proposals for development of land and facilities for recreational equestrian activities will be permitted provided there is no adverse effect to the natural heritage and historic environment or likelihood of loss of the best ad most versatile agricultural land. (City & County of Swansea Unitary Development Plan 2008)

SITE HISTORY

App No. Proposal 98/0393 SINGLE STOREY SIDE EXTENSION INCORPORATING DOUBLE GARAGE Decision: *HGPC - GRANT PERMISSION CONDITIONAL Decision Date: 08/05/1998

99/1180 ERECTION OF BUILDING FOR ANIMAL SHELTER, HAY AND IMPLEMENT STORAGE Decision: *HRP - REFUSE PERMISSION Decision Date: 28/03/2000

98/0394 Retention of two stables and store Decision: Appeal Dismissed Decision Date: 01/02/1999

AREA 2 DEVELOPMENT CONTROL COMMITTEE – 27TH OCTOBER 2009

ITEM 13 (CONT’D) APPLICATION NO. 2009/1016

A00/0771 Erection of building for animal shelter, hay and implement storage Decision: Appeal Dismissed Decision Date: 24/01/2001

A00/0442 USE OF LAND AS RESIDENTIAL CURTILAGE (APPLICATION FOR A CERTIFICATE OF LAWFULNESS) Decision: *HWNL - WAS NOT LAWFUL Decision Date: 16/06/2000

LV/95/0069/03 DWELLING HOUSE Decision: *HGPC - GRANT PERMISSION CONDITIONAL Decision Date: 06/04/1995

RESPONSE TO CONSULTATIONS

Neighbours: The application was advertised on site in the form of a site notice and ONE LETTER OF OBJECTION was received which is summarised below:

1. Proposal will cause further flooding. 2. Lack of drainage. 3. What exactly is the proposed use of the ménage? 4. No justification for a ménage of this size. 5. Proposed site is overlooked from public vantage points.

Grovesend & Waungron Community Council: Object for the following reasons:

1. The application appears to be for either a current or future commercial use with reference being made to car parking facilities and disabled access. 2. The issue surrounding part of the building of property 219 Pentre Road being built on common land and subsequent correctional issues have still to be resolved by the Welsh Assembly and Swansea Planning Department. 3. It was Members opinion that no planning application should be considered, or approved until the formal investigation currently being undertaken by the Environment Agency into activity at this site is concluded.

Highways: As this proposal is for a private ménage area, there will be no additional traffic generated and therefore I recommend that no highway objections are raised.

Environment Agency: No objection

APPRAISAL

This application is reported to Committee at the request of Councillor D I E Jones.

This application seeks full planning permission for the construction of a manege area at 219 Llwyn Du Pentre Road, Grovesend. The manege will be sited in a field on the north- eastern side of the existing residence. The site measures approximately 1633m2. The land in question is already enclosed by a mixture of fence and hedgerow. AREA 2 DEVELOPMENT CONTROL COMMITTEE – 27TH OCTOBER 2009

ITEM 13 (CONT’D) APPLICATION NO. 2009/1016

The construction of the manege will include a base of hardcore approximately 800mm thick covered with 200mm of coarse sand with a layer of permeable stone and drainage beneath the stone. The application site lies to the north of the village of Grovesend to the rear of the existing dwelling. The applicant has confirmed that the manege is for personal use only and will not be used on a commercial basis. Whilst the site is surrounded by Common Land the land itself is not registered as Common Land and as such is not relevant in this instance.

The main issues for consideration relate to the visual impact of the proposed development in this rural location particularly in respect of the character and appearance of the area having regard for the provisions of the Swansea Unitary development Plan. There are no additional issues arising from the provisions of the Human Rights Act.

Policy HC27 of the Swansea UDP and the Council’s SPG entitled the Use of Land for Horses for Recreational Purposes and Associated Structures supports applications for recreational equestrian activities provided there is no significant adverse effect to the natural heritage and historic environment or likelihood of loss of the best and most versatile agricultural land. Policy EV1 and EV22 presume against new development which fails to conserve or enhance the character and appearance of the natural environment.

In terms of visual impact, the proposal is low lying within the wider landscape and will be shielded from the road by the existing dwelling. The ground will be excavated prior to the development of the manege and the proposal will not result in raised land levels. The field is currently enclosed by an existing hedge and timber fence and as such its impact upon visual amenity will be minimal and will be sited approximately 120m from the road. The proposal will not result in the loss of quality agricultural land and will not be prominent from wider public vantage points. As such the proposal is considered to comply with Policies EV1, EV22 and HC27 of the Swansea UDP.

With regard to impact upon residential amenity the manege is sited approximately 100 metres from the nearest dwelling to the north and will not be visible from it. It is considered that there will be no undue harm to residential amenity, especially as the proposal does not include floodlighting of the manege.

Having consulted the Head of Transportation and Engineering there are no highway objections to the proposed works.

Notwithstanding the above, two letters of objection were received raising concerns relating to the use of the ménage, impact upon the wider landscape, the justification of the ménage and the impact upon the Common Land. The issues pertaining to which have been addressed above.

Concern has been raised relating to drainage issues and the previous concerns from the Environment Agency, however on the basis of the submitted plans the application incorporates drainage facilities and having consulted the Environment Agency and the Council’s Ecologist there are no objections to the proposed application.

In addition to this there is concern in relation to the potential commercial use of the ménage, however the applicant has indicated that this is for personal use and would therefore require a further planning application should the site be intended to be used for commercial purposes which would be determined on the basis of its own individual merit. AREA 2 DEVELOPMENT CONTROL COMMITTEE – 27TH OCTOBER 2009

ITEM 13 (CONT’D) APPLICATION NO. 2009/1016

In conclusion, it is considered that the manege will respect the character and appearance of this rural area and will be assimilated into the existing residential unit. Additionally the creation of this ménage will not result in the loss of quality agricultural land, in compliance with Policy HC27 of the Swansea UDP. Finally the ménage is for the personal use of the occupiers of the dwelling and will not be used for commercial purposes. It light of the above it is considered that the proposal is acceptable and approval is recommended.

RECOMMENDATION

APPROVE, subject to the following conditions:

2 The proposed manege shall not be used for commercial purposes. Reason: The location of the manege in close proximity to residential purposes is not suitable for operation on a commercial basis.

3 No lighting shall be erected to serve the development hereby approved unless otherwise agreed in writing by the Local Planning Authority. Reason: In the interests of the visual amenities of the area.

4 No development shall take place without the prior written approval of the Local Planning Authority of a scheme for the landscaping of the site. The landscaping scheme shall be carried out within 12 months from the completion of the development. Any trees or shrubs planted in accordance with this condition which are removed, die, become seriously diseased within two years of planting shall be replaced by trees or shrubs of similar size and species to those originally required to be planted. Reason: In the interests of the visual amenities of the area.

5 No development or other operations shall take place except in accordance with the guide on "The Protection of Trees on Development Sites" attached to this planning permission. No trees, shrubs, or hedges shall be felled or cut back in any way, except where expressly authorised by the landscaping scheme as approved by the Local Planning Authority until two years after the completion of the development. Any trees, shrubs or hedges removed without such authorisation, or dying, or being seriously damaged or diseased before the end of that period shall be replaced by plants of a size and species as may be agreed with the Local Planning Authority. Reason: In the interests of the visual amenities of the area.

AREA 2 DEVELOPMENT CONTROL COMMITTEE – 27TH OCTOBER 2009

ITEM 13 (CONT’D) APPLICATION NO. 2009/1016

INFORMATIVES

1 Any culverting of a watercourse requires the prior written approval of the Local Authority under the terms of the Public Health Act 1936, and the prior written consent of the Environment Agency under the terms of the Land Drainage Act 1991/Water Resources Act 1991. The Environment Agency seeks to avoid culverting, and its consent for such works will not normally be granted except for access crossings. The Environment Agency has no knowledge of flooding in this vicinity. However, you are also advised to consult with your Engineers Department, who may hold records/additional information, prior to the granting of planning consent.

2 The Environment Agency and the Local Authority have permissive powers to maintain watercourses depending on the watercourse's definition as "Main River" or "Ordinary Watercourse". The responsibility for general maintenance of the river and its banks rests with the riparian owner. Any bankside trees or vegetation within 3 metres of the watercourse should be protected from development in order to promote conservation and preserve visual amenity.

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

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

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

6 Under the terms of the Water Resources Act 1991 and the Land Drainage Byelaws, the prior written consent of the Environment Agency is required for any proposed works or structures in, under over or within 7 metres of the top of a main river i.e. Nant-y-Fendrod & Nant Bran.

7 Any culverting of a watercourse requires the prior written approval of the Local Authority under the terms of the Public Health Act 1936, and the prior written consent of the Environment Agency under the terms of the Land Drainage Act 1991.

8 The development plan covering the City and County of Swansea is the City and County of Swansea Unitary Development Plan. The following policies were relevant to the consideration of the application: (Policies EV1, EV22 and HC27)

PLANS

Site location plan and section received 10th August 2009

AREA 2 DEVELOPMENT CONTROL COMMITTEE – 27TH OCTOBER 2009

ITEM 14 APPLICATION NO. 2009/1032 WARD: Area 2 Bishopston

Location: Campion Gardens Retirement Village, Clyne Common, Swansea, SA3 3JB Proposal: One double sided freestanding for sale sign for a temporary period of nine months Applicant: Mr S A Ramsay Williams

BACKGROUND INFORMATION

This application was DEFERRED from the Area 2 Development Control Committee Meeting on the 6th October 2009 to allow for further Officer consideration.

POLICIES

Policy Policy Description Policy EV26 Within the Gower AONB, the primary objective is the conservation and enhancement of the area's natural beauty. Development that would have a material adverse effect on the natural beauty, wildlife and cultural heritage of the AONB will not be permitted. (City & County of Swansea Unitary Development Plan 2008)

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

Policy EV14 The design of advisements should be appropriate to their surroundings, respect the architectural qualities of the building on which they are displayed, be appropriate to the location, and not harm road safety. (City & County of Swansea Unitary Development Plan 2008)

SITE HISTORY

App No. Proposal 2006/2350 Retention of double sided freestanding sign for a temporary period of nine months Decision: Grant Advertisement Consent (C) Decision Date: 05/01/2007

2006/1589 Retention of widening of and alterations to existing access and installation of lighting bollards Decision: Grant Permission Unconditional Decision Date: 20/10/2006

2007/2870 Retention of one non-illuminated freestanding sign for a temporary period of nine months Decision: Refuse Advertisement Consent Decision Date: 08/02/2008

AREA 2 DEVELOPMENT CONTROL COMMITTEE – 27TH OCTOBER 2009

ITEM 14 (CONT’D) APPLICATION NO. 2009/1032

2007/2850 Construction of a 3 storey block containing 30 assisted living apartments. Decision: Grant Permission Conditional Decision Date: 08/02/2008

2002/1513 Construction of a three storey block of 55 assisted-living apartments with communal facilities, administrative offices and 35 car parking spaces Decision: Perm Subj to S106 Agree Decision Date: 19/12/2003

2006/0201 Two storey side/rear extension to existing nursing home to provide 6 apartments, two storey rear extension to accommodate staircase and construction of a detached block of 18 apartments with leisure facility Decision: Grant Permission Conditional Decision Date: 01/08/2006

A00/0668 SINGLE STOREY FRONT EXTENSION Decision: *HGPC - GRANT PERMISSION CONDITIONAL Decision Date: 23/06/2000

A00/0669 SECOND FLOOR FRONT EXTENSION Decision: *HGPC - GRANT PERMISSION CONDITIONAL Decision Date: 05/09/2000

A00/0876 CONVERSION OF EXISTING DINING-ROOM, GUEST DINING-ROOM AND LOUNGE TO A RESTAURANT FACILITY (CLASS A3) IN ASSOCIATION WITH NURSING/RESIDENTIAL HOME Decision: *HGPC - GRANT PERMISSION CONDITIONAL Decision Date: 25/07/2000

2007/2445 Three storey block of 10 assisted-living apartments with communal facilities and ground floor swimming pool Decision: Grant Permission Conditional Decision Date: 27/03/2008

2007/2007 Fenestration alterations Decision: Grant Permission Conditional Decision Date: 18/10/2007

2008/1327 Alterations to apartments 2, 3, and 4 and alterations to the fenestration on the west elevation (amendment to planning permission 2007/2850 for construction of a 3 storey block containing 30 assisted living apartments granted 8th February 2008) Decision: Grant Permission Conditional Decision Date: 31/07/2008 AREA 2 DEVELOPMENT CONTROL COMMITTEE – 27TH OCTOBER 2009

ITEM 14 (CONT’D) APPLICATION NO. 2009/1032

2008/1330 Variation of condition 1 of planning permission 2007/2445 granted 27th March 2008 for three storey block of 10 assisted-living apartments with communal facilities and ground floor swimming pool to allow for minor amendments Decision: Approve Conditional (S73) Decision Date: 13/08/2008

2005/0845 First floor extension with dormers and rooflights to provide 20 additional bedrooms Decision: Grant Permission Conditional Decision Date: 15/07/2005

2004/0430 Construction of three storey extension block of 57 assisted-living apartments with communal facilities, office accommodation and 32 car parking spaces (amendment to planning permission 2002/1513 granted on 19th December 2003) Decision: Grant Permission Conditional Decision Date: 23/06/2004

2004/1609 Single storey front extension (renewal of planning permission A00/0668 dated 23rd June 2000) Decision: Approve Conditional (S73) Decision Date: 24/08/2004

2004/1608 Erection of a first floor side extension, second floor roof extension and external fire escape on side elevation (renewal of planning permission 99/0899 dated 23rd August 1999) Decision: Approve Conditional (S73) Decision Date: 24/08/2004

2004/1607 Second floor front extension (renewal of planning permission A00/0669 dated the 5th September 2000) Decision: Approve Conditional (S73) Decision Date: 24/08/2004

2009/0002 Three storey block of 15 assisted living apartments Decision: Grant Permission Conditional Decision Date: 08/04/2009

RESPONSE TO CONSULTATIONS

The application was advertised on site in the form a site notice and one neighbouring property was individually consulted. No letters of response were received.

Bishopston Community Council – Object. Such a sign should be smaller than the one proposed and relocated to be away from the sight line. AREA 2 DEVELOPMENT CONTROL COMMITTEE – 27TH OCTOBER 2009

ITEM 14 (CONT’D) APPLICATION NO. 2009/1032

Gower Society – The Society has already notified Enforcement about the appearance outside this site (adjacent to the road) of two large A-board signs plus an additional banner-type advert (these have since been removed prior to this application being submitted). These signs are large and intrusive; they are also proposed to be sited on what is common land.

The Society is mindful of previous advertising signs which were placed outside in a similar location; they were large and unsympathetic to this rural location, not in the interests of road safety, not compliant as they remained long after permission had ceased (in fact, they remained in place well over a year after their permission ended). The Society objects to yet more intrusive and unnecessary signage at this location.

Highways - The proposed sign is to be sited on the grass verge alongside the carriageway. Visibility at the site access must be maintained to a safe standard and I therefore recommend no highway objection subject to the sign being located at least 3 m back from the edge of carriageway.

APPRAISAL

This application is reported to Committee for decision at the request of Councillors Des Thomas and Keith Marsh.

Advertisement consent is sought for a double sided freestanding sign for a temporary period of 9 months. The sign is 3m high, and is sited in a prominent position on Common land, alongside the B4436 road. The site also lies immediately adjacent to the AONB (on the opposite side of Mayals Road). The sign advertises apartments for sale and is requested for a further period of 9 months.

In terms of planning history temporary advertisement consent for a sign was granted in January 2007 for a period of 9 months (Ref. 2006/2350). This consent was conditioned that following expiry on 21st September 2007, the sign be removed and the land reinstated to the satisfaction of the Local Planning Authority. In addition to this planning permission was refused for an additional 9 months (Ref: 2007/2870) as it was considered that the retention of the sign for an additional 9 months would result in an unacceptable impact upon the visual appearance of the street-scene and character of the area adjacent to the AONB. The applicant subsequently appealed to the Welsh Assembly Government however, this appeal was submitted outside the prescribed period (8 weeks) and as such the Inspectorate refused to entertain the appeal. The sign was subsequently removed from site following Enforcement Action.

The main issue for consideration with regard to this application relates to the impact the proposal has on the surrounding area having regard to Policies EV1 and EV14 of the Swansea Unitary Development Plan.

During the consideration of Ref: 2006/2350, whilst the scale and design of the sign was not considered ideal for a site adjoining the AONB, given that the sign was required for a temporary period and associated with the initial development of Willow Court it was not considered that a recommendation of refusal could be justified for a temporary period in that instance. However, following confirmation from the applicant that the new sign again relates specifically to the marketing of the Willow Court development, it is not considered that a further period of time can be justified. AREA 2 DEVELOPMENT CONTROL COMMITTEE – 27TH OCTOBER 2009

ITEM 14 (CONT’D) APPLICATION NO. 2009/1032

Whilst it is acknowledged the proposed sign is smaller from what was previously approved and the applicant has examined all other options for marketing, it is important that a precedent is not established that could lead to a permanent sign in such a sensitive location on the edge of the AONB.

Turning to residential amenity it is not considered that there are any residential amenity issues.

Having consulted the Head of Transportation and Engineering, subject to condition there are no highway objections.

In conclusion, and having regards to all material considerations, including the Human Rights Act, the erection of a double sided freestanding sign , whilst smaller than that previously refused, considered to have an unacceptable impact on the visual amenity of the area and adjoining Gower AONB. Approval of the application would also, it is considered, create a precedent for a permanent sign contrary to Policies EV1, EV26 and EV14 of the Swansea Unitary Development Plan. Refusal is therefore recommended.

RECOMMENDATION

REFUSE, for the following reason:

1 The proposed sign by virtue of its size and prominent siting would detract from the visual amenities of the area and adjacent Gower AONB, contrary to the provisions of Policies EV1, EV26 and EV14 of the Swansea Unitary Development Plan.

INFORMATIVES

PLANS

439.01A site plan and signage drawing received 13th July 2009

AREA 2 DEVELOPMENT CONTROL COMMITTEE – 27TH OCTOBER 2009

ITEM 15 APPLICATION NO. 2008/0598 WARD: Area 2 Gower

Location: St Nicholas Church, Penmaen, Gower Proposal: Change of use from agricultural land to provide extension to existing graveyard together with provision of splay, new wall and double pedestrian gates Applicant: Revd Pearce

BACKGROUND INFORMATION

POLICIES

Policy Policy Description Policy EV12 The character of lanes and public paths that contribute to the amenity, natural and historical qualities of an area will be protected. (City & County of Swansea Unitary Development Plan 2008)

Policy HC16 Land at Morriston, Oystermouth and Gorseinon is allocated for cemetery use. (City & County of Swansea Unitary Development Plan 2008)

Policy EV7 Extensions or alterations to a Listed Building will only be approved where they safeguard the character and historic form of the building. (City & County of Swansea Unitary Development Plan 2008)

Policy EV21 In the countryside non-residential development will only be permitted where it can be demonstrated that it is beneficial for the rural economy, or it meets overriding social or economic local needs, or it is appropriate development associated with farm diversification, sustainable tourism or nature conservation, or it provides an acceptable economic use for brown field land or existing buildings, or it is essential for communications, other utility services, minerals or renewable energy generation. (City & County of Swansea Unitary Development Plan 2008) AREA 2 DEVELOPMENT CONTROL COMMITTEE – 27TH OCTOBER 2009

ITEM 15 (CONT’D) APPLICATION NO. 2008/0598

Policy EC13 Development that would result in the loss of the best and most versatile agricultural land will not normally be permitted. (City & County of Swansea Unitary Development Plan 2008)

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

SITE HISTORY

None

RESPONSE TO CONSULTATIONS

The application was advertised on site and in the press as a Departure from the Development Plan and as a development that that might materially affect the setting of a Listed Building. No response.

The Gower Society – comments as follows:

1. The removal of the existing stone wall would be unacceptable and totally unnecessary. The wall is in good condition; we believe it to be older than the reconstructed church. As such it has important historical and archaeological interest. 2. A small pedestrian access can be made through the existing wall with a suitable vernacular gate. 3. We strongly recommend that rather than a wall, the new area be surrounded by a double stock-proof fence with an earth bank and thick mixed hedge planting. This would be much less expensive, and far more sympathetic to the church. 4. The existing tree at the end of the proposed lay-by must be protected.

We strongly object to the removal of the existing stone wall, but have no objection to the proposed lay-by, we ask that the above comments be taken very seriously.

Highway Observations - This proposal is for the extension of and existing graveyard in Penmaen. At present few parking facilities exist for visitors to the church and graveyard. The provision of a lay-by will seek to accommodate these visitors and reduce indiscriminate parking on the A4118. I recommend no highway objections subject to the Developer surfacing the recessed area to Highway Authority Satisfaction.

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

The Environment Agency, original observations (summarised) - Object as further information is required to assess the potential risks the development may have on controlled waters. AREA 2 DEVELOPMENT CONTROL COMMITTEE – 27TH OCTOBER 2009

ITEM 15 (CONT’D) APPLICATION NO. 2008/0598

The site is located on carboniferous limestone which has been classified as being a major aquifer under the policy and practice for the protection of groundwater. The developer must undertake a groundwater preliminary risk assessment and determine the appropriate level of risk assessment.

The Environment Agency, amended observations (summarised) - We have now received additional information with accompanying photographic evidence of the trial pits. Based on the information, we would like to remove our previous objection to this proposal. We however request that the following conditions are imposed in any planning permission granted:

Burials shall be: 250m minimum distance from a potable groundwater supple source; 50m minimum distance from a water course or spring; 10m minimum distance from field drains; There shall be no burials into standing water and the base of the grave must be above the local water table.

APPLICANT STATEMENT (summarised)

“In 2000, our Parochial Church Council decided that the unique setting of the outstanding church would be irreparably affected by the encroachment of modern gravestones which do not weather and blend in with the church. Furthermore the churchyard at Nicholaston has beautifully maintained grass terracing which enhances the setting and this would be lost if more of the existing area were to be taken up with graves. So the first point was one of conserving what was there; a matter of aesthetics.

The second reason is one of road safety as the church is situated on a fast stretch of road and it is difficult to park a car there for any length of time to allow people to be dropped off and picked up. It is necessary for people to walk from the lay-bys’ to the east and west with no footway or verge for escape. We have permission to walk through the field but this is only possible when the weather is dry and so a permanent solution is to provide a drop off point.

The third reason is that Penmaen graveyard is full, the last burial took place in 2006 and the land was bought for this purpose in 1970. Many people feel a connection with the area and it is important for them to be buried locally. There will be restriction imposed by the Parochial Church Council so it will not be possible to be buried unless people are local residents of Penmaen and Nicholaston, active worshippers at either church or relatives of those previously interred at Nicholaston.”

APPRAISAL

This application is called to Committee for decision at the request of Councillor Richard Lewis.

Full planning permission is sought for the change of use of a parcel of land to the east of St. Nicholas Church in Penmaen to provide an extension to the existing graveyard as well as providing a vision splay, new wall and pedestrian gates. The land measures approximately 13.5m in width and would have a depth of 30m to match the existing cemetery. AREA 2 DEVELOPMENT CONTROL COMMITTEE – 27TH OCTOBER 2009

ITEM 15 (CONT’D) APPLICATION NO. 2008/0598

The vision splay would involve the removal of a 14m section of wall and it being re- positioned and splayed back from the highway by a depth of 2.5m. A pair of central timber gates would be erected in the middle of the wall to a height of 1.37m to match that of the new wall. The wall would be constructed of natural stone with a cock and hen coping layer above.

The main issues for consideration are the impact of the proposal on the visual amenities of the AONB together with the impact of the cemetery extension and alterations to the wall on the setting of the adjacent Listed Building, having regard to the requirements of the prevailing Development plan. There are no residential amenity issues to consider in this instance given the detached nature of the site.

Policy EV1 requires all development to accord with the objectives of good design, and seeks to sensitively relate to existing development patterns and protect both natural heritage and the historic and cultural environment. Whilst the proposal is not being undertaken to the Listed Building itself, Policy EV7 refers to the extensions to Listed Buildings but in the amplification; it refers specifically to the setting of the Listed Building being an essential part of its character. St. Nicholas Church is located within the AONB and as such the overarching countryside polices apply. Policies EV22 and EV26 refer to the countryside being protected for its own sake with the natural heritage, resources, historical and cultural environment and agricultural value and natural beauty being conserved and enhanced. Policy EV12 seeks to protect the character of rural lanes and proposals that would result in a loss of character should be resisted. Policy EV21 refers to rural development and states that non-residential development will only be permitted where it can be demonstrated that it meets an overriding social need of the local community or the development needs to be located in the countryside rather than in a nearby settlement.

Policy EC13 states that development that would result in the loss of the best and most versatile agricultural land will not normally be permitted. Although Policy HC16 refers specifically to cemeteries at Morriston, Oystermouth and Gorseinon, the principle and aims of the policy can be applied to other cemeteries and in its amplification, refers to land being allocated for cemetery use and states that the most effective and efficient way of meeting demand for new plots is through the extension of existing cemeteries whenever possible. Policy EV3 is also relevant as it refers to new development being accessible and acceptable where it would not cause harm to the character of a building of architectural of historic significance.

Whilst it is acknowledged that the extension to the graveyard would involve the removal of a section of land that could be regarded as high quality agricultural land, the land is owned and controlled by the parish and does not form part of an agricultural unit nor is used for agricultural purposes at present. Therefore, it is considered that the use of this section of land as a graveyard would not unduly impact upon the amount of high quality agricultural land that is available in the immediate area. The land use proposed is considered appropriate for this rural area and with the use of sympathetic material for the new walls and paths would ensure that it would not unacceptably impact upon the sensitive landscape qualities of the surrounding AONB. AREA 2 DEVELOPMENT CONTROL COMMITTEE – 27TH OCTOBER 2009

ITEM 15 (CONT’D) APPLICATION NO. 2008/0598

The application was originally advertised as a departure to the Development Plan, however, it is considered that following further justification from the applicant an overriding social need for the development has been demonstrated so that the proposed development accords with Policy EV21 of the Unitary Development Plan. Similarly, it has been demonstrated that the principle of the development accords with other relevant policies of the Plan such that it does not constitute a departure.

The construction of the new boundary wall around the graveyard with materials that match the existing wall would dictate that it would blend in well with its surroundings. The new wall and gates to the north of the graveyard extension would again ensure that its overall appearance would be sympathetic to the visual amenities of the AONB and the setting of the adjoining Listed Building. The submitted plan indicates that the original wall to the east of the existing graveyard would be removed in its entirety and rebuilt as the new boundary wall to the graveyard extension. This aspect of the scheme caused concern at officer level with regards to the impact upon the setting of the Listed Building. However, after discussions, the applicant has agreed that only a small section of this wall would be removed to allow pedestrian access to the new graveyard to prevent any undue impact upon the character and setting of the Listed Building. A condition is therefore recommended to require the applicant to submit details of the exact size of the section of wall to be removed for approval before any works are commenced.

With regards to the impact upon highway safety, the Head of Transportation and Engineering raises no highway objection to the scheme as the provision of a lay-by will seek to accommodate visitors to the church and reduce indiscriminate parking on the A4118.

The Environment Agency initially objected to the scheme as there were concerns over the potential risks the development may have on controlled waters. However, the applicant undertook the digging of trial pits on the land to comply with the request of the Environment Agency and as such, subject to conditions, the Environment Agency now raises no objection to the scheme.

The concerns raised by the Gower Society have been addressed in the main body of the report.

In conclusion therefore and having regard to all material considerations, including the Human Rights Act, it is considered that the proposed cemetery extension is an acceptable form of development that would not unduly impact upon the character and appearance of the adjacent Listed Building nor the sensitive visual amenities of the surrounding AONB, whilst meeting an overriding need of the local community. The proposal therefore complies with the requirements of Policies EV1, EV2, EV7, EV12, EV21, EV22, EV26, HC16, EV3 and EC13 of the Swansea Unitary Development Plan 2008. Approval of planning permission is therefore recommended.

RECOMMENDATION

APPROVE, subject to the following conditions: AREA 2 DEVELOPMENT CONTROL COMMITTEE – 27TH OCTOBER 2009

ITEM 15 (CONT’D) APPLICATION NO. 2008/0598

2 Burials shall be a 250m minimum distance from a potable groundwater supply source, a 50m minimum distance from a water course or spring, and a 10m minimum distance from field drains. Reason: To protect groundwater quality in the area.

3 There shall be no burial into standing water and the base of any grave must be above the local water table. Reason: To protect groundwater quality in the area.

4 Notwithstanding the details on the approved plans, details of the new boundary walls, gates and the section of wall to be removed to gain access to the graveyard extension shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority before any work is commenced on site. The development shall be completed in accordance with the approved details. Reason: To ensure a satisfactory form of development and to safeguard the character and setting of the Listed Building.

5 A sample panel of the proposed brickwork for the walls shall be erected on site and agreed before any works commence on their construction. The development shall be completed in accordance with the approved details. Reason: To ensure a satisfactory form of development and to safeguard the character and setting of the Listed Building.

6 Notwithstanding the details submitted, the use of concrete for the new path is specifically excluded from this permission and details of a hogging path shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority before work on it is commenced. The development shall be completed in accordance with the approved details. Reason: To ensure a satisfactory form of development and to safeguard the character and setting of the Listed Building.

7 No development shall take place without the prior written approval of the Local Planning Authority of a scheme for the landscaping of the site. The landscaping scheme shall be carried out within 12 months from the completion of the development. Any trees or shrubs planted in accordance with this condition which are removed, die, become seriously diseased within two years of planting shall be replaced by trees or shrubs of similar size and species to those originally required to be planted. AREA 2 DEVELOPMENT CONTROL COMMITTEE – 27TH OCTOBER 2009

ITEM 15 (CONT’D) APPLICATION NO. 2008/0598

Reason: To ensure that the site is satisfactorily landscaped having regard to its location and the nature of the proposed development, and to accord with Section 197 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990.

INFORMATIVES

1 The development plan covering the City and County of Swansea is the City and County of Swansea Unitary Development Plan. The following policies were relevant to the consideration of the application: EV1. EV2, EV3, EV7, EV21, EV22, EV26, EC13, HC16, EV12.

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

3 All appropriate pollution control measures must be adopted during any works undertaken. Pollution prevention guidance notes are available from www.environment-agency.gov.uk

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

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

PLANS

Site location plan,182/05a Proposed access and lay-by,182/07 Proposed north elevation,LWA/182/03 Block plan : Received 20th March 2008

AREA 2 DEVELOPMENT CONTROL COMMITTEE – 27TH OCTOBER 2009

ITEM 16 APPLICATION NO. 2008/1882 WARD: Area 2 Gorseinon

Location: Land at Railway Terrace Gorseinon Swansea Proposal: Retention of use of land as a winter quarters for travelling fair Applicant: Mr P J Evans & Mr E Holmes

BACKGROUND INFORMATION

POLICIES

Policy Policy Description Policy EV36 New development, where considered appropriate, within flood risk areas will only be permitted where developers can demonstrate to the satisfaction of the Council that its location is justified and the consequences associated with flooding are acceptable. (City & County of Swansea Unitary Development Plan 2008)

SITE HISTORY

App No. Proposal 2005/1220 Use of land as a winter quarters for travelling fair for a further 3 year temporary period (renewal of temporary planning permission 2003/2593 dated 11th January 2005) Decision: Grant Temporary Permission Decision Date: 22/09/2005

2003/2593 Use of land as a winter quarters for travelling fair for a further 3 year temporary period (Council Development Regulation 4) Decision: Grant Temporary Permission Decision Date: 11/01/2005

99/0503 USE OF LAND FOR WINTER QUARTERS FOR TRAVELLING FAIR FOR A TEMPORARY PERIOD OF 5 YEARS (COUNCIL DEVELOPMENT REGULATION 4) Decision: *HGPCT - GRANT PERMISSION COND. (T) Decision Date: 22/06/1999

2008/2225 Construction of a retail food store (Class A1) with associated access, parking and landscaping Decision: Perm Subj to S106 Agree Decision Date: 27/08/2009

AREA 2 DEVELOPMENT CONTROL COMMITTEE – 27TH OCTOBER 2009

ITEM 16 (CONT’D) APPLICATION NO. 2008/1882

LV/76/0143/11 TO USE THE LAND AS EXTENSION OF EXISTING TRAVELLING SHOWMENS WINTER QUARTERS OCTOBER - MARCH ANNUALLY Decision: *HGPC - GRANT PERMISSION CONDITIONAL Decision Date: 21/09/1976

LV/90/0100/01 WINTER QUARTERS FOR TRAVELLING FAIR Decision: *HGPC - GRANT PERMISSION CONDITIONAL Decision Date: 26/04/1990

LV/90/0587/02 WINTER QUARTERS FOR TRAVELLING FAIR Decision: *HGPC - GRANT PERMISSION CONDITIONAL Decision Date: 18/10/1990

LV/91/0030/11 PARKING FOR 3 CARAVANS AND STORAGE OF LORRIES AND TRUCKS Decision: *HRP - REFUSE PERMISSION Decision Date: 14/03/1991

LV/91/0379/03 WINTER QUARTERS FOR TRAVELLING FAIR Decision: *HGPC - GRANT PERMISSION CONDITIONAL Decision Date: 12/09/1991

LV/92/0418/11 USE FOR THE PURPOSES OF A SHOWMANS WINTER QUARTERS Decision: *HGPC - GRANT PERMISSION CONDITIONAL Decision Date: 14/01/1993

RESPONSE TO CONSULTATIONS

The application was advertised on site. No Response.

Environment Agency 9th October 2008 –OBJECT pending the submission of a Flood Consequence Assessment (FCA) demonstrating that the total application site is outside of the extreme flood outline.

Environment Agency 26th February 2009 – we have now received the FCA undertaken by Craddy Pitchers Davidson (ref 8392w0002, dated 13/01/2009) and do not consider this to be acceptable. Further information is required in order to determine that the risk of flooding is acceptable

Environment Agency 16th September 2009 – confirm that the hydraulic model submitted shows that the site is not at risk flooding in the 1% flood event, but is at risk in the 0.1% flood event, albeit to within acceptable depth in line with Table A1.15 of TAN15 (July 2004)

The FCA demonstrates the potential flood depth to both the site and the access/egress. As mitigation, the FCA recommends that the earth berm between the north and south part of the site be removed to provide emergency evacuation to the whole of the site via Lime Street, which is not affected in a 100 year event. AREA 2 DEVELOPMENT CONTROL COMMITTEE – 27TH OCTOBER 2009

ITEM 16 (CONT’D) APPLICATION NO. 2008/1882

The east part of the site floods in the 0.1% event to acceptable levels in line with A1.15 of TAN15. It is suggested that due to the nature of the fairground machinery and height of caravan floor levels, that further mitigation is provided as they are raised even higher from the ground level. In consideration of the vulnerability status of the temporary development, should planning permission be granted, the Environment Agency would recommend that all caravans and equipment are placed on the part of the site demonstrated as being outside the 1000 year flood plain (0.1%).

On numerous occasions within the FCA, it is stated that the site will be evacuated in a short period of time when the flood waters start rising. The Environment Agency would like to highlight that there are no specific flood warnings issued for Gorseinon at present. As such, the submission of an emergency evacuation plan is required to be produced and submitted for approval by the Authority prior to approving this application.

Gorseinon Community Council – No response

Highway Observations – No highway objection to this renewal of temporary consent.

APPRAISAL

This application is reported to committee for determination at the request of Councillors Richard Lewis and Glyn Seabourne.

The application site comprises 0.47 hectares of land to the west of Railway Terrace, Gorseinon, on land that was formerly part of the railway line from Kingsbridge to Gorseinon. This application seeks a further planning permission to use the land for winter quarters for a travelling fair.

Previous temporary planning permissions for this use were originally granted in 1990 (Refs: LV/90/0100 and LV/90/0587 refer) and have subsequently been renewed for temporary periods with the land split into two parcels to accommodate two families with permissions in 1991 and 1993 (Refs: LV/91/0379 and LV/92/0418 refer). Further temporary permissions were granted in 1999 (Ref: 99/0503) for three years and in 2003 for a six month period expiring on the 10th June 2005. The most recent renewal of permission on the site was sought in 2005 and granted temporary consent (contrary to officer recommendation) for a period of 3 years expiring on the 22nd September 2008.

The determination of the application has been delayed significantly on the basis that the site falls within Zone C2 as identified on the Development Advice Maps under TAN 15 (2004). On this basis the applicants have been required to prepare a detailed Flood Consequence Assessment, which in turn has been the subject of extensive negotiation and testing by the Environment Agency Wales.

The main issues to be considered are the impact on the residential amenities of the area, the visual impact on the character and appearance of the surrounding area, the potential impact on the Kingsbridge to Gorseinon cycle track and the constraint to the development imposed by the flood risk threat within the area. It is not considered that the provisions of the Human Rights Act raise any other overriding considerations. AREA 2 DEVELOPMENT CONTROL COMMITTEE – 27TH OCTOBER 2009

ITEM 16 (CONT’D) APPLICATION NO. 2008/1882

Whilst the site is located within the built up area of Gorseinon, there have been no previous problems concerning the activity on this site. With a similar use on adjacent land to the east of Railway Terrace, it is considered that the principle of the use at this location has been well established. On this basis it is considered that there should be no loss of amenity to nearby residential properties as a result of this use continuing or any detrimental impact on the character and appearance of the area.

A current cycle route follows the disused railway line from Kingsbridge as far as the southern bank of the River Lliw south of the application site. After a short link along the river, the cycleway is routed along Railway Terrace to the traffic junction with High Street. On this basis, the route of this cycleway is not compromised by the continued use of the land. However, a more direct route for the cycleway could be provided through the application site by constructing a bridge over the river and establishing a permanent winter quartering use may prejudice this long term objective given that the site is owned by the Council. It is therefore considered that it would not be appropriate to grant permanent consent for the use, rather a further temporary consent would be more appropriate.

The Environment Agency objected to the development in the previous applications (App. Ref. 2003/2593 and 2005/1220) on the grounds that the site lay within the fluvial floodplain of the Afon Lliw, and considered the proposal to be contrary to the guidance within Planning Policy Wales and Technical Advice Note No.15 “Development and Flood Risk.” It was acknowledged that the use related to the siting of temporary structures only, however they considered that allowing the use to continue would increase the risk to human life and that additionally during the winter period there is a greater chance of floods occurring. The Environment Agency therefore recommended that the application should be refused. However, following negotiations, the Environment Agency agreed to remove their objection subject to the site being occupied for the Winter period 2004-2005 only and indicated that any further applications to extend the periods of occupation in the future would be strongly resisted. It was considered that this temporary permission allowed the applicant sufficient time to find an alternative site.

In consideration of previous proposals, reference was made to the residential redevelopment of the adjacent side of the former Bryngwyn Works. The outline planning permission granted for the former Bryngwyn Works (Ref: 2003/1241) was accompanied by a Flood Risk Assessment (FRA) to identify the potential for flooding of the site from the Afon Lliw. The FRA concluded that the 1 in 100 year flood level from the Afon Lliw adjacent to the site would result in the flooding of the whole of the current application site caused by the localised overspill of the western bank of the river with inundation depths estimated to be in the region of 0.3 to 0.5 metres. As a consequence, the outline planning permission, for the development of the former Bryngwyn works specifically excluded all land that was exposed to the 1:100 year flood risk.

Upon initial consultation with the Environment Agency an objection was raised to the current application and a recommendation made that this authority should refuse the application on flood risk grounds. However, if the authority was minded to go against the Agency’s recommendation then a Flood Consequence Assessment would need to be submitted demonstrating that the application site is outside of the extreme food outline. The initial FCA was submitted to the Environment Agency on the 9th February 2009, however the FCA was considered to be flawed and included a number of inaccuracies, and as such the Environment Agency recommended that the application be deferred pending the submission of the hydraulic model and amended FCA. AREA 2 DEVELOPMENT CONTROL COMMITTEE – 27TH OCTOBER 2009

ITEM 16 (CONT’D) APPLICATION NO. 2008/1882

This was received by the Environment Agency on the 1st September 2009. The revised FCA and associated Hydraulic Model show although including some contradictions, that the site is not at risk of flooding in the 1% flood event but is at risk on the 0.1% flood event, albeit it to within acceptable depths in line with Table A1.15 of TAN15 (July 2004).

The FCA demonstrated the potential flood depths to both the site and the access/egress. As mitigation the FCA recommends that the earth berm between the north and south part of the site be removed to provide emergency evacuation to the whole of the site via Lime Street, which is not affected in a 100 year event.

The east part of the site floods in the 0.1% event to acceptable levels in line with A1.15 of TAN15. It is suggested that due to the nature of the fairground machinery and height of caravan floor levels, that further mitigation is provided as they are raised higher from the ground level. In consideration of the vulnerability status of the development, in the event that planning permission be granted, the Agency recommend that all caravans and equipment are placed on the part of the site demonstrated as being outside the 1000 year flood plain (0.1%).

It is stated in the FCA that the site will be evacuated in a short period of time when the flood waters start rising. The Environment Agency have highlighted that there are no specific flood warnings issued for Gorseinon at present and as such recommend that an emergency evacuation plan is produced and approved, and then implemented as approved. Whilst they have recommended that this be provided up front, given the history of approvals on the site, it is considered reasonable that a condition is imposed requiring details within a specific period.

In conclusion, therefore and having regard to the threat to human life posed by the risk of flooding across the application site, the continued use of the site for the wintering quartering of caravans is considered to be acceptable, in accordance with guidance contained within TAN 15 and the advice provided by the Environment Agency. Furthermore, and as previously indicated it is not considered that the development would have any adverse impact on residential amenity, visual amenity or highway safety. The development complies with Policies EV2 and EV36 of the Unitary Development Plan and approval of planning permission for a further temporary period is recommended.

RECOMMENDATION

APPROVE, subject to the following conditions:

1 Notwithstanding the provisions of Section 91 of the Town and Country Planning Act 2990 and the Town and Country Planning (General Permitted Development) Order 1995, this permission is for a limited period of three years only, expiring on the 27th October 2012 when the use shall cease and all caravans and ancillary vehicles and equipment shall be removed from the site. Reason: The grant of permanent planning permission could prejudice the long term objective of using the land for future cycle path improvements.

AREA 2 DEVELOPMENT CONTROL COMMITTEE – 27TH OCTOBER 2009

ITEM 16 (CONT’D) APPLICATION NO. 2008/1882

2 Within 3 months of the date of this permission, the applicant shall prepare an emergency evacuation plan to be submitted to and agreed in writing with the Local Planning Authority. Reason: The site is at risk from possible flooding and an evacuation plan in the event of flooding is therefore necessary

3 All caravans and equipment shall be placed on the northern part of the site demonstrated as being outside the 1000 year flood plan (0.1%) Reason: In the interest of managing flood risk

4 Within 3 months of the date of this planning permission the earth berm between the north and south part of the site shall be removed to provide emergency evacuation to the whole of the site via Lime Street, which is not affected in a 100 year event. Reason: To accord with the recommendations set out in the Flood Consequence Assessment carried out by Craddy Pitchers Davidson.

INFORMATIVES

1 The development plan covering the City and County of Swansea is the City and County of Swansea Unitary Development Plan. The following policies were relevant to the consideration of the application: Policy EV2 and EV36 of the Swansea Unitary Development Plan.

PLANS

Site location plan received 12th September 2008

AREA 2 DEVELOPMENT CONTROL COMMITTEE – 27TH OCTOBER 2009

ITEM 17 APPLICATION NO. 2009/1143 WARD: Area 2 Sketty

Location: 7 Parklands View Sketty Swansea SA2 8LX Proposal: Front roof extension Applicant: Mr Gareth Hawkins

BACKGROUND INFORMATION

POLICIES

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

SITE HISTORY

None

RESPONSE TO CONSULTATIONS

FOUR neighbouring properties were consulted, no responses have been received.

Highway observations – No objection

APPRAISAL

This application is reported to Committee for decision at the request of Councillor Huw Rees.

Full planning permission is sought for a front roof extension to a semi-detached dwelling at No.7 Parklands View, Sketty. The property is located in an established residential neighbourhood. The street scene is characterised by semi-detached two storey properties on one side and bungalows on the other side.

The dormer is rectangular in form and would measure approximately 3.8m in width, having a height of approximately 1.4m and would project 1.9m beyond the existing roof plane. The dormer would be finished with a flat roof and will be set down from the ridge of the main property by approximately 1m and set up from the eaves of the property by approximately 1.5m. AREA 2 DEVELOPMENT CONTROL COMMITTEE – 27TH OCTOBER 2009

ITEM 17 (CONT’D) APPLICATION NO. 2009/1143

The main issues for consideration with regard to this application relate to the impact of the proposal upon visual and residential amenities and Policies EV1 and HC7 of the Unitary Development Plan and the Supplementary Planning Guidance document entitled A Design Guide for Householder Development. There are in this case considered to be no additional issues arising from the provisions of the Human Rights Act, nor are there any highway safety issues to consider.

In visual terms, the proposal would be clearly visible from Parklands View. It is therefore considered that the proposed dormer would not relate well to the roofscape in terms of its siting, size and proportions and as such would represent a dominant and visually incongruous feature which would upset the design and balance of the existing dwelling and the street scene to the detriment of the overall character and appearance of the area.

The roof extension’s siting to the front of the property is considered to be unacceptable and is discouraged in the Design Guide for Householder Development. It states in the Guide that this form of development will only be acceptable if it is considered to be a ‘local feature’. Whilst it is acknowledged that there are dormers located within the surrounding area there are not considered enough for this form of development to be classified as a ‘local feature’. According to our records one similar dormer has been granted consent in Parklands View, namely at No.15 Parklands View. However, this was approved in 1970 and since this date the Welsh Assembly place greater emphasis on design in the decision making process and as referred to previously the Design Guide for Householder Development is strict when referring to this form of development. There are a number of roof extensions attached to the side of the bungalows which run opposite to the application site, however, these are different styles of property to the application property and the dormers are situated on the side of the properties, therefore, it is not believed to be applicable to take these developments into account in this instance. The applicant was contacted regarding amending the proposal by relocated the dormer to the rear of the property, however, these amendments were not pursued by the applicant.

With regard to residential amenity, it is considered that the proposal would not result in unacceptable direct overlooking of the surrounding properties over and above that currently experienced. The form of development dictates that there would be no adverse overshadowing or overbearing impacts.

The Head of Transportation and Engineering Services has stated that there are no highway safety or parking implications as a result of the proposal and, therefore, no objections are raised to the proposal.

In conclusion, therefore and having regard to all material considerations including the Human Rights Act, it is considered that the proposed roof extension represents an unsatisfactory form of development, which would have an unacceptable impact upon the character of the existing dwelling and the visual amenities of the area. As such the proposal fails to meet the essential criteria of Policies EV1 and HC7 of the Swansea Unitary Development Plan and the Council’s Design Guide for Householder Development. Refusal is therefore recommended.

RECOMMENDATION

REFUSE, for the following reason: AREA 2 DEVELOPMENT CONTROL COMMITTEE – 27TH OCTOBER 2009

ITEM 17 (CONT’D) APPLICATION NO. 2009/1143

1 The proposed front roof extension by virtue of its size, design and siting would be out of keeping with and detract from the character and appearance of the existing dwelling and the visual amenities of the street scene and the surrounding area. The proposal is therefore contrary to Policies EV1 and HC7 of the City and County of Swansea Unitary Development Plan and the Council's Supplementary Planning Guidance document entitled 'A Design Guide for Householder Development'.

INFORMATIVES

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

PLANS

01 existing elevations and floor plans, 02 proposed elevations and floor plans 03 site and block plan, 04 proposed west elevation received 11th August 2009

AREA 2 DEVELOPMENT CONTROL COMMITTEE – 27TH OCTOBER 2009

ITEM 18 APPLICATION NO. 2009/0902 WARD: Area 2 Gorseinon

Location: 6 West Street Gorseinon Swansea SA4 4AA Proposal: Change of use from a cafe (Class A3) to offices (Class B1) with two storey rear extension above to provide 2 no. 1 bed flats and construction of detached two storey building to provide 2 no. 1 bed flats Applicant: Mr Jeffrey Benbow

BACKGROUND INFORMATION

POLICIES

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

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

Policy ECNR Proposals for non retail uses at ground floor level within shopping centres will be assessed against defined criteria, including their relationship to other existing or approved non retail uses; their effect upon the primary retail function of the centre; the proposed shop front and window display; the time the unit has been marketed for A1 uses, and its likelihood of continuing to be vacant; its location in relation to the primary shopping area; and its impact upon the vitality, viability and attractiveness of the centre. (City & County of Swansea Unitary Development Plan 2008)

Policy EC5 Development within designated district centres will be encouraged where it is of a type and scale that maintains or improves the range and quality of shopping facilities and meets other specified criteria. (City & County of Swansea Unitary Development Plan 2008)

SITE HISTORY

App No. Proposal A01/0211 Single storey rear extension to existing shop and erection of a three storey block of 3 self contained flats Decision: Withdrawn Decision Date: 28/03/2001

AREA 2 DEVELOPMENT CONTROL COMMITTEE – 27TH OCTOBER 2009

ITEM 18 (CONT’D) APPLICATION NO. 2009/0902

LV/81/0611/03 NEW SHOP FRONT Decision: *HGPCU - GRANT PERMISSION UNCONDITIONAL Decision Date: 10/02/1982

RESPONSE TO CONSULTATIONS

The application was advertised on site and in the press and the occupiers of twelve adjoining units and residential dwellings were individually consulted. NO RESPONSE.

Gorseinon Town Council – Members welcomed the redevelopment of this unsightly frontage in the Town Centre. However concerns were expressed that the scheme is overdevelopment of the site particularly at the rear of the site. It is noted that no car parking is being proposed for the residential elements within the site. This would create an unacceptable precedent for other adjoining sites in the Town Centre.

Highways & Transportation - This proposal is to change the use of the current Café and flat into an office with two flats above. The proposal also includes the erection of a new two story extension at the rear to accommodate a further 2 flats. Each of the flats will be 1 bedroom units and there is no parking within the site.

The application site is located at the traffic lights on West Street, Gorseinon and as such its frontage is protected with double yellow lines and this together with the regular build up of vehicles queuing at the lights prevents vehicles from parking along the frontage. The presence of the bus terminus a few metres away from the premises and the range of local facilities in the immediate area lend the development to being suitable for non car owning residents and clearly the lack of any on-site parking together with the absence of any suitably located on-street parking facilities render the residential aspect of the development suitable for non car owning residents only. There are public parking facilities within walking distance however these are unlikely to be considered suitable for over night parking by residents due to their remoteness and lack of overlooking for security purposes.

National guidance recommends that residential accommodation in areas where transport links and local amenities are good can be considered without parking facilities and on balance therefore I consider that for the reasons stated, the development is acceptable and conforms with National guidance.

I recommend that no highway objections are raised.

Note: An informative should be added to any consent reminding the applicant that prospective residents must be advised that the development is not suitable for those who own cars.

Dwr Cymru Welsh Water – No objection subject to standard conditions and advisory notes

Pollution Control Division – No comment or observations to make. AREA 2 DEVELOPMENT CONTROL COMMITTEE – 27TH OCTOBER 2009

ITEM 18 (CONT’D) APPLICATION NO. 2009/0902

APPRAISAL

This application is reported to Committee for decision at the request of Councillor Glyn Seabourne.

This application seeks full planning permission for the change of use of a café (Class A3) to offices (Class B1) with a two storey rear extension above to provide 2 No. 1 bed flats and the construction of a detached two storey building to provide 2 No. 1 bed flats at 6 West Street, Gorseinon. The application property falls within the Gorseinon District Shopping Centre, as defined by the adopted Unitary Development Plan. The application premises last traded as a café and is currently vacant after being damaged by a fire which resulted in the rear single storey section and front café needing significant rebuilding works and complete refurbishment.

The main issues for consideration with regard to this application relate to the acceptability of the change of use at this location, the impact of the proposal upon the character and appearance of the area, the effect upon residential amenity and the impact upon existing highway conditions having regard for prevailing Development Plan Policies as assessed with regard to the criteria within these Policies to determine the effect on the vitality, viability and attractiveness of Gorseinon District Shopping Centre. It is not considered that the provisions of the Human Rights Act raise any other overriding considerations.

National planning policy guidance on retailing and town centres is set out in the Ministerial Interim Planning Policy Statement (MIPPS) 02/2005, which replaces sections 10.1 to 10.3 of Planning Policy Wales, 2002 (PPW). The guidance makes clear that enhancing the vitality, viability and attractiveness of shopping centres is a key objective of national policy. It states at paragraph 10.2.4 that retailing should continue to underpin town, district, local and village centres. Shopping facilities are identified as one of a number of factors that contribute towards the wellbeing of a centre and, in that context, MIPPS 02/2005 encourages promoting a diversity of uses and mixed use developments where this helps to create lively centres and reduce the need to travel. The guidance goes on to emphasise that “primary frontages are best characterised by a high proportion of retail uses”, while secondary frontages are best placed for other commercial non-retail uses such as leisure facilities. Importantly it states that such “secondary uses should not be allowed to dominate primary shopping areas in a way that can undermine the retail function” (para. 10.2.7).

Policy ECNR of the Swansea Unitary Development Plan sets out seven criteria against which proposals for the introduction of non-retail uses should be assessed. These are as follows:

(i) The relationship of the proposal to other existing or approved non-retail uses within the centre. (ii) The affect upon the primary retail function of the centre, either individually or in combination with other non-retail uses, (iii) The nature of the shop front and window display that would be introduced, (iv) Whether and for what period of time, the premises has been genuinely marketed for retail use, (v) The likelihood of the unit remaining vacant for a significant period of time, (vi) The location of the site and/or unit relative to the established primary shopping area and important shop units, and AREA 2 DEVELOPMENT CONTROL COMMITTEE – 27TH OCTOBER 2009

ITEM 18 (CONT’D) APPLICATION NO. 2009/0902

(vii) The overall impact upon the vitality, viability and attractiveness of the centre.

Vitality and Viability of District Centre

Careful consideration needs to be given to the potential dilution effect of a further non retail use at this location, which must not be seen to threaten the predominantly shopping role of this precinct. The premises is located within the core shopping precinct that has a mix of uses, including supermarkets, retail, hairdressers, offices, public houses, hot food takeaways and restaurants. The application site is located just off High Street (the main shopping street) and is bounded by the HSBC bank and a three storey building comprising 2 commercial units with flats at first and second floor. In this respect, the Gorseinon District Centre is well served by existing A3 uses and given the location of the application premises on the periphery of the core shopping area, it is considered that proposal would not have a detrimental impact on the shopping role and character of the centre and would not adversely affect the vitality, viability or attractiveness of the centre.

Visual Amenities of the Street Scene and Surrounding Area

With regard to visual amenity, the application building has been fire damaged and is currently vacant. The office accommodation would retain a shop front and the main redevelopment of the building would be sited to the rear of the premises. The main frontage to West Street would retain a two storey element comprising the office unit with the existing residential flat above. The three storey element would be located to the rear middle section and would accommodate the office accommodation on the ground floor with 2 No. 1 bed flats at first and second floor level. The detached two storey building would be constructed bounding the rear access lane to provide 2 No. 1 bed flats.

In the context of the character of the immediate area and surrounding area, there are other three storey buildings within the vicinity, including the bank on the corner of West Street with Alexandra Road and High Street and the buildings opposite the application site. In particular, it is noted that the adjoining three storey block was built on the site of the former Old Lido Cinema and accommodates commercial units at ground floor and 8 self contained flats at first and second floor (A00/0863 refers). There are no changes proposed to the shop front. On this basis, it is considered that the overall scale and massing of the building comprising a two storey elevation to West Street, a three storey middle section and a detached two storey building to the rear access lane, would appear at odds with the character and appearance of the surrounding area. Furthermore, the existing building to the rear of the 6 West Street is single storey, and it is noted that the other garage/store buildings which are built on the boundary with the rear access lane are also predominantly single storey buildings. In this respect, given the constraints of the application site the overall scale, design and massing of the proposal represents overdevelopment of the site and would appear as an incongruous development to the detriment of the visual amenities of the area.

The impact of the proposal on residential amenity

The adjoining buildings are in commercial use with residential above. The occupiers of the residential flats already currently experience a degree of noise and disturbance from other commercial uses in the vicinity. It is considered that the change of use from a café (Class A3) to an Office (Class B1) would not give rise to any significant noise and disturbance over and above that currently experienced from the lawful use as a café. AREA 2 DEVELOPMENT CONTROL COMMITTEE – 27TH OCTOBER 2009

ITEM 18 (CONT’D) APPLICATION NO. 2009/0902

This application also proposes new development to create additional residential units and having regard to the impact of the proposal on the residential amenities of the occupiers of the existing flat at 6 West Street and the future occupiers of the proposed flats, it is noted that access to the middle (three storey element) would be gained from an entrance along side the shop front in West Street. The staircase would lead to a first floor landing which would provide access to the existing flat above the premises and access out onto the flat roof area above the proposed offices at ground floor level. The separation distance between the existing flat at first floor level and the proposed flats in the middle section would be approximately 5.3m. This area would be a communal space which would also provide the access route to the two flats proposed in this middle section. In this respect, the constraints of the application site would provide for a restricted outlook and potential for overlooking into habitable room windows for both the occupiers of the existing flat and any future occupiers of the two flats in the three storey middle section. In addition the outlook for any future occupiers of these middle section flats would be further restricted by the construction of the two storey element bounding the rear lane. There would appear to be storage space within the curtilage of the site for rubbish bins and bicycle storage, however, the layout of the site provides no private amenity space for the occupiers of any of the proposed flats. Regard must also be had to the three storey block of flats on the adjacent site and the impact of the proposal on these occupiers. The proposed two storey building adjoining the rear lane at 6 West Street would be sited on the boundary with these adjoining buildings (8 West Street), and would be a storey higher than the building that currently occupies this application site. Given the close proximity of the neighbouring residential flats which have habitable rooms with the main outlook being to the rear, the visual amenity of the occupiers of the nearest flats to the boundary would be significantly compromised. In light of the above analysis it is considered that the constraints of the application site, together with the overall scale and massing of the proposed buildings would have a significant detrimental impact on the residential amenities that the existing occupiers of the flat at 6 West Street and any future occupiers of the proposed flats, should reasonably expect to enjoy. As such the proposal is considered sufficiently harmful to warrant a recommendation of refusal in this instance. Furthermore, the massing and scale of the rear two storey building on the boundary with the adjoining residential flats, has the potential to introduce a significant degree of physical overbearance greater than currently experienced, which is considered detrimental to the residential amenities of the occupiers of the flats at No. 8 West Street.

Highway Safety and Access

Turning to access and highway issues, this proposal is to change the use of the current café and flat into an office with two flats above. The proposal also includes the erection of a new two story extension at the rear to accommodate a further 2 flats. Each of the flats will be 1 bedroom units and there is no parking within the site.

The application site is located at the traffic lights on West Street, Gorseinon and as such its frontage is protected with double yellow lines and this together with the regular build up of vehicles queuing at the lights prevents vehicles from parking along the frontage. The presence of the bus terminus a few metres away from the premises and the range of local facilities in the immediate area lend the development to being suitable for non car owning residents and clearly the lack of any on-site parking together with the absence of any suitably located on-street parking facilities render the residential aspect of the development suitable for non car owning residents only. AREA 2 DEVELOPMENT CONTROL COMMITTEE – 27TH OCTOBER 2009

ITEM 18 (CONT’D) APPLICATION NO. 2009/0902

There are public parking facilities within walking distance however these are unlikely to be considered suitable for over night parking by residents due to their remoteness and lack of overlooking for security purposes. National guidance recommends that residential accommodation in areas where transport links and local amenities are good can be considered without parking facilities and on balance therefore the Head of Transportation and Engineering considers that for the reasons stated, the development is acceptable and conforms with National guidance and no highway objections are raised.

Response to Consultation

The concerns raised by Gorseinon Town Council relate mainly to overdevelopment of the site and lack of car parking. The matters raised have been addressed above.

In conclusion, and having regard to all material considerations including the Human Rights Act, the proposal is considered to represent an unsatisfactory form of development which would have a detrimental impact on residential and visual amenity contrary to Policies EV1 and EV2 of the Unitary Development Plan. Refusal of planning permission is therefore recommended.

RECOMMENDATION

REFUSE, for the following reason;

1 The proposal by virtue of the constraints of the application site, together with the overall scale and massing of the development would provide for inadequate private amenity space, levels of privacy and outlook for the existing occupiers of the flat at 6 West Street and the future occupiers of the proposed flats to the detriment of their residential amenities contrary to the provisions of Policies EV1 and EV2 of the Swansea Unitary Development Plan (2008).

2 The proposed two storey building by virtue of its height and siting would have an unacceptable overbearing visual impact which would be detrimental to the residential amenities of the occupiers of No. 9 West Street contrary to the provisions of Policies EV1 and EV2 of the Swansea Unitary Development Plan (2008).

3 The proposal by virtue of its scale, design and massing is considered to represent overdevelopment of the application site and would appear as an incongruous development which would be detrimental to the visual amenities of the area contrary to the provisions of Policies EV1 and EV2 of the Swansea Unitary Development Plan (2008).

INFORMATIVES

1 The development plan covering the City and County of Swansea is the City and County of Swansea Unitary Development Plan. The following policies were relevant to the consideration of the application: Policies EV1, EV2, EV3, ECNR and EC5 of the Unitary Development Plan.

AREA 2 DEVELOPMENT CONTROL COMMITTEE – 27TH OCTOBER 2009

ITEM 18 (CONT’D) APPLICATION NO. 2009/0902

PLANS

Site location plan, block plan, WS/1/1 existing plans, WS/1/2 proposed plans received 13th July 2009

AREA 2 DEVELOPMENT CONTROL COMMITTEE – 27TH OCTOBER 2009

ITEM 19 APPLICATION NO. 2009/1294 WARD: Area 2 Gower

Location: Rock Cottage, Landimore, Swansea SA3 1HD Proposal: Retention of detached summer house Applicant: Dr A Jones

BACKGROUND INFORMATION

POLICIES

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

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

SITE HISTORY

App No. Proposal 2007/1344 Two storey side extension, single storey rear extension, three rear dormers and replacement porch Decision: Grant Permission Conditional Decision Date: 11/12/2007

90/0585/13 APPLICATION FOR CONSERVATION AREA CONSENT TO DEMOLISH PART OF BOUNDARY WALL TO GIVE ACCESS FOR MOTOR VEHICLE. Decision: *HGCC - GRANT CONSENT WITH CONDITIONS Decision Date: 31/07/1990

AREA 2 DEVELOPMENT CONTROL COMMITTEE – 27TH OCTOBER 2009

ITEM 19 (CONT’D) APPLICATION NO. 2009/1294

90/0858/13 CONSERVATION AREA CONSENT TO DEMOLISH SUB-STANDARD REAR LEAN-TO AND ALSO ATTACHED SHED FOR RE-RENDERING Decision: *HGCC - GRANT CONSENT WITH CONDITIONS Decision Date: 10/07/1990

2006/1139 Two storey side/front extension Decision: Withdrawn Decision Date: 04/09/2006

RESPONSE TO CONSULTATIONS

The application was advertised in the press and on site as a development within the Landimore Conservation Area and five individual properties were consulted. No response.

Glamorgan Gwent Archaeological Trust – No objection.

The Gower Society – Objects

1. The design is unsympathetic to its location. 2. This is a very large structure. 3. The Society considers that the materials proposed for the buildings are unsuitable and make it even more visually intrusive.

APPRAISAL

This application is called to Committee for decision at the request of Councillor Richard Lewis.

Full planning permission is sought for the retention of a detached summer house at Rock Cottage, Landimore. The property is sited within the Landimore Conservation Area.

The summer house is sited at the south western corner of the site, adjoining the north eastern boundary with Apple Tree Cottage. The summer house measures 6.7m x 3.3m with a maximum overall height of 2.5m with painted render walls, a grey mineral felt roof and white UPVC windows that span the whole width of its northern elevation.

The main issues to be considered in this case are the impact of the summer house on the character and appearance of the Landimore Conservation Area and the surrounding AONB, together with the impact upon the residential amenities of surrounding properties, having regards to the prevailing Development Plan policies.

Policy EV1 seeks to ensure high quality development that protects the natural heritage of the area and Policies EV22 and EV26 of the Unitary Development Plan primarily seek to protect the landscape of the Gower AONB for its own sake and to preserve it for future generations, with particular emphasis on preserving its natural beauty. Policy EV9 states that developments within conservation areas will only be permitted if it preserves or enhances its character, appearance or setting. AREA 2 DEVELOPMENT CONTROL COMMITTEE – 27TH OCTOBER 2009

ITEM 19 (CONT’D) APPLICATION NO. 2009/1294

With regards to residential amenity, the siting and design of the summer house ensures that it has no undue impact upon neighbouring occupiers through loss of light or privacy or overbearing physical impact.

The siting of the summer house together with its low lying roof and sympathetic external materials akin to those used on Rock Cottage dictates that it does not appear prominent or discordant in the street scene. It is considered therefore that the summer house preserves the character and appearance of the Landimore Conservation Area and does not detract from its overall visual amenities or those of the surrounding AONB.

Because of the nature of the development and its siting in the countryside and Gower AONB, it is recommended that a condition is imposed ensuring the building is used as an integral part of the existing dwelling and not used as a separate unit of accommodation.

The concerns raised by the Gower Society have been addressed above.

In conclusion therefore and having regard to all material considerations including the Human Rights Act, the retention of the summer house is an acceptable form of development and approval is recommended.

RECOMMENDATION

APPROVE, subject to the following condition:

1 The proposed development shall remain at all times an integral part of the existing dwelling and shall not be sold, let or otherwise occupied as a separate unit of accommodation. Reason: It is not considered that the property is suitable for the creation of separate units of accommodation.

INFORMATIVES

PLANS

0809/RC/01 site location and block plan, 0809/RC/02 floor plans and elevations received 26th August 2009

AREA 2 DEVELOPMENT CONTROL COMMITTEE – 27TH OCTOBER 2009

ITEM 20 APPLICATION NO. 2009/1375 WARD: Area 2 Gower

Location: Llanrhidian Primary School, Llanrhidian, Swansea, SA3 1EH Proposal: Single storey detached building to house sprinkler system (Council Development Regulation 3) Applicant: City and County of Swansea

BACKGROUND INFORMATION

POLICIES

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

SITE HISTORY

App No. Proposal 79/1459/08 EXTENSION AND REMODELLING OF EXISTING SCHOOL Decision: *HNO - NO OBJECTION Decision Date: 29/11/1979

79/0115/08 REMODELING AND EXTENSION OF EXISTING SCHOOL Decision: *HNO - NO OBJECTION Decision Date: 29/03/1979

2009/0713 Single storey extension to north elevation, detached toy store, amendments to parking area and landscaping (Council Development Regulation 3) Decision: Grant Permission Conditional Decision Date: 25/06/2009

RESPONSE TO CONSULTATIONS

A site notice was placed adjacent to the school grounds and the adjoining neighbours were individually consulted. No correspondence has been received in respect of this proposal.

Highways and Transportation - There are no highway safety or parking implications with this proposal. I recommend no highway objection.

Pollution Control- No observations AREA 2 DEVELOPMENT CONTROL COMMITTEE – 27TH OCTOBER 2009

ITEM 20 (CONT’D) APPLICATION NO. 2009/1375

APPRAISAL

This application is reported to committee for decision at the request of Councillor Richard Lewis.

Full planning permission is sought for the construction of a sprinkler housing unit in the grounds of Llanrhidian Primary School. The proposed building would be single storey, have a maximum height of 4.00 metres to the ridge and the main building would have a footprint of approximately 70 square metres. Located in the centre of the south facing elevation is a covered entrance that projects a further 2.7 metres from the main building. Bothe the principle building and the entrance way will be finished to a hipped roof.

The main issues for consideration with regard to this application relate to the impact of the proposal upon visual and residential amenities having regard to Policies EV1 and EV26 of the Unitary Development Plan. There are in this case considered to be no additional issues arising from the provisions of the Human Rights Act.

It is considered that the scale, design and external appearance of the proposed single storey detached building is in keeping with the character and appearance of the existing school buildings with which it is associated. Materials proposed will match those of the existing buildings on the site and as such it is not considered that the proposal will have an adverse visual impact on the character of the buildings to which it relates or the wider context of the AONB given that it will be viewed against the background provided by existing dwellings.

With regard to residential amenity, the distance and relationship to the existing surrounding properties is considered sufficient to safeguard residential amenity. The proposal will be located a minimum of 2.5 metres off the common boundaries with the nearest residential properties comprising Sunnytopps and Llahrhidian School House. There are no windows in the proposed unit and it would not exceed 4.0 metres in height with a hipped roof. It is not therefore considered that the proposed extension would have an unacceptable overlooking, overshadowing or overbearing impact on the neighbouring properties.

The Head of Transportation and Engineering raises no highway objection to the proposal.

In conclusion, having regard to all material considerations including the Human Rights Act, the proposal is considered to represent a satisfactory form of development which complies with Policies EV26 and EV1 of the City and County of Swansea Unitary Development Plan. Approval is therefore recommended.

RECOMMENDATION

APPROVE, subject to the following condition:

ITEM 20 (CONT’D) APPLICATION NO. 2009/1375

Reason: To comply with the provisions of Section 91 of the Town and Country Planning Act, 1990 and to ensure that the development is completed in accordance with the plans approved by the City and County of Swansea, and so avoid any detriment to amenity or public safety by works remaining uncompleted.

INFORMATIVES

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

PLANS

S A284_001 site location plan, S A284_015 block plan, S A284_003 site layout, S A284_020 proposed elevations and floor plans, design and access statement 17th September 2009

AREA 2 DEVELOPMENT CONTROL COMMITTEE – 27TH OCTOBER 2009

ITEM 21 APPLICATION NO. 2009/1381 WARD: Area 2 Gower

Location: Field 7376, Pilton Moor Stables, Pitton Cross, Rhossili, Swansea Proposal: Use of land for the siting of 5 touring caravans from Good Friday or 1st April (whichever is the earlier) to 31st October during the 2010/2011 seasons Applicant: J & M Tucker

BACKGROUND INFORMATION

POLICIES

Policy Policy Description Policy EC22 Control of camping and touring caravans on farms and storage of touring caravans. (City & County of Swansea Unitary Development Plan 2008)

SITE HISTORY

App No. Proposal 2007/2188 Use of land for the siting of 5 touring caravans from Good Friday or 1st April (whichever is the earlier) to 31st October during the 2008/2009 seasons Decision: Grant Temporary Permission Decision Date: 31/10/2007

2002/0010 Use of land for the siting of 5 touring caravans from Good Friday or 1st April (whichever is the earlier) to 31st October during the 2002/2003 seasons. Decision: Grant Temporary Permission Decision Date: 03/04/2002

AREA 2 DEVELOPMENT CONTROL COMMITTEE – 27TH OCTOBER 2009

ITEM 21 (CONT’D) APPLICATION NO. 2009/1381

2003/0362 Use of land for the siting of 5 touring caravans from Good Friday or 1st April (whichever is the earlier) to 31st October during the 2004/2005 seasons Decision: Grant Temporary Permission Decision Date: 24/04/2003

2003/1725 Continuation of use of two caravans for residential purposes (Application for Certificate of Lawfulness) Decision: Was Lawful Decision Date: 08/04/2004

2003/1771 Use of land for caravan rally for approximately 45 units from May 14th- 16th 2004 (inclusive) Decision: Refuse Decision Date: 04/05/2004

2004/2347 Provision of outdoor menage, enclosed by 1.2 metre high fencing Decision: Grant Permission Conditional Decision Date: 10/12/2004

2005/2478 Use of land for the siting of 5 touring caravans from Good Friday or 1st April (whichever is the earlier) to 31st October during the 2006/2007 seasons Decision: Grant Permission Conditional Decision Date: 19/01/2006

2006/2235 Replacement of residential mobile home (application for a Certificate of Proposed Lawful Development) Decision: Is Lawful Decision Date: 15/03/2007

RESPONSE TO CONSULTATIONS

The application was advertised on site. No response.

The Gower Society – two letters have been received, summarised as follows:

1. In carrying out caravan site surveys over the years, this site has been noted for its persistent breaches of permission. 2. As a condition of any given permission, we suggest that there should be a warning that the site should adhere to the permitted number of caravans on site. 3. Most of the 5 vans in this field are what is known as static tourers i.e. they are present all season and for two years, they were now removed for the winter period – although they were last year. AREA 2 DEVELOPMENT CONTROL COMMITTEE – 27TH OCTOBER 2009

ITEM 21 (CONT’D) APPLICATION NO. 2009/1381

4. We would also point out that we have drawn your attention to a shepherd’s hut that is in a different field and advertised on the web for self catering accommodation. In fact a further shepherd’s hut is now in field 7376 – in a space recently occupied by a touring van. This site has been reported in the past as exceeding its 5 van limit. That is why we feel that thus site requires careful watching.

Highways Observations – No objection to this renewal of temporary consent for 5 touring caravans.

APPRAISAL

This application is reported to Committee for decision at the request of Councillor Richard Lewis.

Temporary planning permission is sought for the use of land for the siting of 5 touring caravans at field 7376, Pilton Moor Stables, Pitton Cross from Good Friday or the 1st April whichever is the earlier to 31st October for the 2010 and 2011 seasons.

The main issue for consideration in this instance is the effect of the proposal on the character and appearance of the area, having regard to prevailing Development Plan policies. It is not considered that the provisions of the Human Rights Act raise any other overriding considerations.

This site is well established and has been used for this purpose throughout recent years. There are no policy objections and the site will not as a result of its temporary nature detract significantly from the visual amenities of the AONB.

Turning to highway safety issues, The Head of Transportation and Engineering has raised no highway objection.

Turning to the comments made by the Gower Society, these are noted and their concern with the alleged unauthorised buildings has been passed to the Enforcement team for investigation. The issue of the touring vans remaining on site during the winter months is also noted and will be monitored to ensure compliance with the planning permission given. An informative is also recommended reminding the applicant that all caravans must be removed outside of the dates given under this permission.

In conclusion therefore and having regard to all material planning considerations, including the Human Rights Act, the proposal is considered to constitute an acceptable form of development which would not have a detrimental effect on the character, appearance or natural beauty of this part of the Gower AONB and approval is therefore recommended.

RECOMMENDATION:

APPROVE, subject to the following conditions:

1 This permission relates to the siting of a maximum of 5 touring caravans from Good Friday or 1st April (whichever is the earlier) to the 31st October during the 2010 and 2011 seasons. Reason: To enable the Local Planning Authority to review the situation at the end of that period and to ensure the proper monitoring of the use. AREA 2 DEVELOPMENT CONTROL COMMITTEE – 27TH OCTOBER 2009

ITEM 21 (CONT’D) APPLICATION NO. 2009/1381

INFORMATIVES

2 The applicant shall comply with the requirements of the Head of Environmental Health Services of the City and County of Swansea.

3 The applicant is reminded that no caravans shall remain on site during the closed seasons.

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

PLANS

Site location plan received 14th September 2009

AREA 2 DEVELOPMENT CONTROL COMMITTEE – 27TH OCTOBER 2009

ITEM 22 APPLICATION NO. 2009/0224 WARD: Area 2 Gower

Location: Dolphin and Hillcrest Cottages, Stonesfield, North Hill Lane, Penmaen SA3 2HD Proposal: Two replacement single storey oak framed detached chalets Applicant: Mr C. Stone

BACKGROUND INFORMATION

This application was DEFERRED from the Area 2 Development Control Committee on the 7th April 2009 following a request from the applicants agent for deferral until a more suitable siting for Dolphin Cottage could be found.

POLICIES

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

Policy EV19 Replacement dwellings in the countryside, including residential chalets, will only be permitted where the residential use has been abandoned, the proposed new dwelling is similar in terms of siting, scale, design and character and compliments the character of the surrounding area. (City & County of Swansea Unitary Development Plan 2008)

SITE HISTORY

None

AREA 2 DEVELOPMENT CONTROL COMMITTEE – 27TH OCTOBER 2009

RESPONSE TO CONSULTATIONS

Neighbours: The application was advertised on site in the form of a site notice and 25 neighbouring properties were individually consulted. No letters of objection were received.

Ilston Community Council: No objection.

Gower Society: Object on the following grounds:

1. This site lies within the AONB and in one of the most attractive coastal areas on Gower. 2. The design looks very good an vernacular on paper, it is essential that if approved it is rigorously followed. 3. A full check must be made on the actual footprint and heights of the original structures to ensure that there is no significant increase. 4. The moving of the rear property to the adjacent position is strongly questioned. This amounts to a new development in the open countryside in the quest for a view by the developer. We object to this aspect of the application. 5. If allowed this development would set a dangerous precedent for the location and the AONB.

The Gower Society is very concerned about point 4 this development, we ask that you take all of the above points into consideration when making your decision or recommendation to the Planning Committee.

Highways: As this proposal is to replace two existing buildings, there is no increase in traffic and parking demand to consider. Difficulties are likely to be encountered during the construction phase due to the remoteness of the site, however, this is a temporary issue and cannot form the basis of a sustainable objection. The same restrictions apply also for the routine maintenance of all buildings in remote locations.

I recommend that no highway objections are raised.

Following concerns expressed from the Local Planning Authority regarding the siting of Dolphin Cottage, amended plans were submitted and all previous objectors/commentators and neighbouring properties were individually consulted and the application was advertised on site in the form of a site notice. The following responses were received:

Ilston Community Council: No objection.

Gower Society: We have the following comments to make:

1. The letter written to Planning on 25th February 2009 contained observations re this application. 2. Those comments should remain on file. 3. However, the revised position of the chalet has been noted, therefore, the Society would wish to withdraw comment 4 from the original letter.

Highways: Amended Plans - No further comments to make. AREA 2 DEVELOPMENT CONTROL COMMITTEE – 27TH OCTOBER 2009

ITEM 22 (CONT’D) APPLICATION NO. 2009/0224

APPRAISAL

This application is reported to Committee for decision at the request of Councillor Richard Lewis.

Full planning permission is sought for two replacement single storey oak framed detached chalets at Stonesfield, North Hills Lane, Penmaen. The site is located overlooking Three Cliffs Bay, in a prominent location on the headland. The application site is occupied by two chalets forming part of a group of chalets scattered on the headland, some of which have been altered and extended overtime. Members may recall that this application was deferred from Committee on the 7th April 2009 in order to allow for the submission of amended plans in order to overcome concerns relating to the siting of Dolphin Cottage.

The main issues for consideration during the determination of this application are the impact of the proposal upon the visual amenity of the immediate and the wider area, the impact upon the Gower AONB and views from the protected coastline, the residential amenities of the neighbouring occupiers and highways safety, having regard for the provisions of both Planning Policy Wales (PPW) and the prevailing Development Plan. It is not considered the provisions of the Human Rights Act or the content of the submitted Access Statement raise any additional issues.

When considering applications within the highly protected Gower AONB regard must be had for Policies EV22 and EV26 of the Swansea UDP, which, seek to ensure first and foremost, development proposals conserve and enhance the area’s natural beauty. Proposals which fail to do this will not be permitted.

Policy EV19 of the UDP specifically relates to replacement dwellings/chalets in the countryside (which this site clearly is) and clearly identifies set criteria which proposals must comply with. Development will only be supported where:

(i) The residential use has not been abandoned. (ii) The proposed new dwelling is similar in terms of siting, scale, design and character with the dwelling it is to replace. (iii)The development complements the character of the surrounding area.

Policy EV19’s objective is to avoid the replacement of rural dwellings with inappropriate new development that detracts from the character of the countryside to which it relates. Whilst any proposal for the increase in the number of chalets is viewed as unacceptable intensification, replacement chalets is supported in principle providing it complies with the aforementioned criteria.

When determining applications of this kind regard must also be had for the provisions of Policies EV1 and EV2 of the Swansea UDP which add further weight to the aforementioned policies with regard to Siting and Design of the proposal and its impact upon visual and residential amenity in particular.

Following an officer site visit it is clear that the chalets have been used relatively recently and therefore it is not considered that they have been abandoned and as such are considered to satisfy criteria (i) of Policy EV19 of the UDP. In terms of the design and aesthetic appearance it is considered that the proposed chalets are of a high quality design and will replace two non-descript chalets which are of no architectural merit. AREA 2 DEVELOPMENT CONTROL COMMITTEE – 27TH OCTOBER 2009

ITEM 22 (CONT’D) APPLICATION NO. 2009/0224

The height of the existing chalets is approximately 3.2m and the proposed new chalets will measure approximately 4m in height although both will be on a lower ground level than the existing chalets. In terms of footprint, the existing chalets measure approximately 46m2 for Dolphin Cottage and Hillcrest (including outbuilding) approximately 35m2. The new chalets will measure approximately 48.5m2 and therefore in terms of their size and scale it is considered that they are comparable with the existing chalets and due to their design and pallet of materials will undoubtedly complement the character and appearance of the surrounding area.

Currently Hill Crest Cottage is concealed behind Dolphin Cottage and is not prominent or highly visible when viewed from public vantage points or the wider Gower AONB. Following concerns regarding the siting of the proposed replacement cottages amended plans were submitted in order to try and address the Local Planning Authorities concerns. Hillcrest Cottage will be sited further back in the plot, in a similar location to that of the existing chalet and the resiting of Dolphin Cottage will be in a similar location albeit at a lower level. As such it is considered, the proposed resiting of the chalets is an acceptable form of development which complies with the principles of Policy EV19 of the UDP and given their quality design and aesthetic appearance will have a positive impact upon the character and appearance of this part of the Gower AONB, in compliance with Policies EV1, EV2, EV19, EV22 and EV26 of the Swansea UDP.

Given the siting of the proposed replacement chalets it is unlikely that the proposal would have an unacceptable impact upon the residential amenities of neighbouring properties over and above that of the existing chalets.

Having consulted the Head of Transportation and Engineering it is considered that as this proposal is to replace two existing buildings, there is no increase in traffic and parking demand to consider. Difficulties are likely to be encountered during the construction phase due to the remoteness of the site, however, this is a temporary issue and cannot form the basis of a sustainable objection. The same restrictions apply also for the routine maintenance of all buildings in remote locations and as such no highway objections are raised.

Having consulted the Councils Ecologist in relation to the submitted protected species survey submitted by the applicant it is acknowledged that Dolphin Cottage is a recognised roost, however it is considered a condition is sufficient controlling its demolition until a license is agreed with the Welsh Assembly Government.

Notwithstanding the above, one letter of objection was received from the Gower Society raising concerns in relation to the impact upon the Gower AONB, the footprint in relation to the existing buildings, siting and precedent. The issues pertaining to which have been addressed above.

In conclusion it is considered that the revised siting of the chalets would result in the introduction of an acceptable form of development which complies with the Unitary Development Plan Replacement Dwellings policy (Policy EV19) and fundamentally conserves and enhances the character and appearance of the Gower AONB. Furthermore subject to a condition controlling the chalets demolition, to protect the protected species identified within the survey and as such the proposal is considered to comply with the objectives of Policies EV1, EV2, EV19, EV22 and EV26 of the Swansea Unitary Development Plan. Approval of planning permission is therefore recommended. AREA 2 DEVELOPMENT CONTROL COMMITTEE – 27TH OCTOBER 2009

ITEM 22 (CONT’D) APPLICATION NO. 2009/0224

RECOMMENDATION

APPROVE, subject to the following conditions:

2 Where any species listed under Schedule 2 and 4 of the Conservation (Natural Habitats) Regulations 1994 is present on the site (or other identified part) in respect of which this permission is hereby granted, no works of site clearance, demolition or construction shall take place in pursuance of this permission unless a license to disturb any such species has been granted in accordance with the aforementioned Regulations and a copy thereof has been produced to the Local Planning Authority. Reason: In the interest of protecting species listed under Schedule 2 and 4 of the Conservation (Natural Habitats) Regulation 1994.

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

INFORMATIVES

1 The development plan covering the City and County of Swansea is the City and County of Swansea Unitary Development Plan. The following policies were relevant to the consideration of the application: (Policies EV1, EV2, EV19, EV22 and EV26 of the Swansea UDP).

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

AREA 2 DEVELOPMENT CONTROL COMMITTEE – 27TH OCTOBER 2009

ITEM 22 (CONT’D) APPLICATION NO. 2009/0224

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

PLANS

Drwg No. Stone/2/100 Site location plan, Stone/2/102 Proposed floor plan, elevation and section(Dolphin Cottage), Stone/2/103 Proposed floor plans, elevation and section (Hillcrest), Topography site plan, Photos, Design and Access Statement : Received 12th February 2009 and Stone/2/104 Rev A dated on 26th May 2009 and Stone/2/101 Rev C dated 20th May 2009.

AREA 2 DEVELOPMENT CONTROL COMMITTEE – 27TH OCTOBER 2009

ITEM 23 APPLICATION NO. 2009/1001 WARD: Area 2 Gower

Location: 1 Higher Pitton Cottage, Rhossili, Swansea SA3 1PH Proposal: Two storey rear extension, single storey front extension and new entrance gates Applicant: Mr and Mrs M Provis

BACKGROUND INFORMATION

POLICIES

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

SITE HISTORY

App No. Proposal 2006/1867 Two storey and single storey front extensions, single storey side extension and rear staircase Decision: Refuse Decision Date: 05/10/2006

92/1450 TWO STOREY SIDE EXTENSION Decision: *HGPC - GRANT PERMISSION CONDITIONAL Decision Date: 29/01/1993

AREA 2 DEVELOPMENT CONTROL COMMITTEE – 27TH OCTOBER 2009

ITEM 23 (CONT’D) APPLICATION NO. 2009/1001

RESPONSE TO CONSULTATIONS

Two individual properties were consulted. ONE LETTER OF COMMENT has been received, which is summarised as follows:

1. The gateway is quite unique and the building to which it is attached was the old smithy and the current gateway is representative of that fact. 2. I believe that its demolition would be detrimental to both the visual amenity and heritage of Pitton. 3. The land edged in blue and labelled section 3 is within my boundary and is currently unregistered land to which I am seeking to gain possessory title. 4. I realise that the proposed extension has already been agreed to and therefore assume I am unable to comment.

Glamorgan Gwent Archaeological Trust – There are no recorded archaeological features within the application area. It is unlikely, therefore, that any archaeological material would be disturbed by the proposed development.

Highway Observations – Adequate parking is available within the curtilage of the site. No highway objection.

APPRAISAL

This application is reported to Committee for decision at the request of Councillor Richard Lewis.

Full planning permission is sought for a two storey rear extension, single storey front extension and the provision of new entrance gates at 1 Higher Pitton Cottage, Rhossili. The original red line plan submitted indicated the inclusion of land that was outside the residential curtilage of Higher Pitton Cottage but this has now been amended. In addition, the proposed site layout plan has also been amended to reflect this change.

The two storey extension would measure 3.8m in depth, 14.7m in width to match the existing dwelling, have an eaves height of 3m and an overall triple gable roof height of 6m, matching the roof line of the host dwelling. The single storey front extension involves an extension to the existing front porch and measures 3.3m in width, 1.5m in depth and has an overall gable roof height of 3.1m. The alterations to the front access would involve the removal of the existing roof and supporting structure at the entrance to the property and “handing” the existing vehicular and pedestrian access arrangements.

The main issues to be considered are the impact of the proposal on the visual amenities of the host dwelling and the surrounding AONB and the residential amenities of the neighbouring properties having regard to the prevailing Development Plan Policies.

Policy EV1 requires development to have regard to the objectives of good design. Policy HC7 refers to criteria upon which extension to dwellings should be assessed and refers to the impact upon the character and appearance of the street scene as well as any impact upon residential amenity in terms of physical impact, over shadowing and loss of privacy. Policies EV22 and EV26 of the Unitary Development Plan primarily seek to protect the landscape of the Gower AONB for its own sake and to preserve it for future generations, with particular emphasis on preserving its natural beauty. AREA 2 DEVELOPMENT CONTROL COMMITTEE – 27TH OCTOBER 2009

ITEM 23 (CONT’D) APPLICATION NO. 2009/1001

In terms of residential amenity, the siting, scale and design of the proposed extensions dictate that they would not unduly impact upon the neighbouring occupiers through loss of privacy or direct overlooking. Whilst there is a roof light in the side elevation facing the adjoining cottage, this is positioned high in the roof and would not lead to an unacceptable loss of privacy. It is also considered that the limited depth of the rear extension and the existing boundary treatment would mean that there would be no unacceptable physical impact. The application site is located to the south west of the adjoining property at no.2, which may result in some loss of light to that property. However, given the existing boundary treatment, the shallow depth of the rear garden area and the existing shed that is located on the common boundary, it is not considered that any overshadowing would be significantly over and above that which is currently experienced and so unacceptable as to warrant a recommendation of refusal on this issue alone.

With regards to visual amenity, the proposed extensions would relate well to the overall appearance of the dwelling house, and is considered to blend in with the character and appearance of the dwelling and its surroundings. The use of matching materials will also ensure that the proposal would not appear overly prominent or discordant in the street scene to its visual detriment thus not unduly impacting upon the character and appearance of the AONB.

The Head of Transportation and Engineering raises no highway objection.

In terms of the letter of concern received, the issues raised about visual impact have been addressed above. However the comment made with regards to the land in blue is noted but is not considered relevant as it does not form part of the application site. The comments made with regards to the extension being approved is not correct as although the applicant contacted the department for pre-application advice, it is only through the submission of a proposal that a planning application can be determined. The comment made with regards to the removal of the roof above the existing vehicular and pedestrian access is again noted, but as this is not a listed structure and the site does not lie within a Conservation Area, its removal does not require the express grant of planning permission.

In conclusion therefore and having regard to all materials considerations, it is considered that on balance the proposal is an acceptable form of development at this location that would not significantly impact upon the character and appearance of the host dwelling, the street scene or the AONB whilst protecting the residential amenities of the neighbouring property. Approval is therefore recommended.

RECOMMENDATION

APPROVE, subject to the following conditions:

AREA 2 DEVELOPMENT CONTROL COMMITTEE – 27TH OCTOBER 2009

ITEM 23 (CONT’D) APPLICATION NO. 2009/1001

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

INFORMATIVES

1 The relocation of the existing shed will require the express grant of planning permission and has not been considered as part of this planning application.

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

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

PLANS

02 existing block plan, 03 existing ground floor plan, 04 existing first floor, 05A existing elevations, 11 proposed ground floor plan, 12 proposed first floor, 13A proposed elevations, 14 proposed entrance gates received 16th July 2009. Amended plans 1A site location plan, 10B proposed layout plan received 19th October 2009

AREA 2 DEVELOPMENT CONTROL COMMITTEE – 27TH OCTOBER 2009

ITEM 24 APPLICATION NO. 2009/1252 WARD: Area 2 Penllergaer

Location: Land east of Pontarddulais Road, Penllergaer, Swansea Proposal: Construction of 106 no. two and three storey dwellings and garages/parking, landscaping and associated works - amended house types (amendment to planning permission 2006/1487 granted on 13th November 2006) Applicant: Bellway Homes South Wales

BACKGROUND INFORMATION: a. Relevant Planning Policies

Swansea Unitary Development Plan

Policy HC1(124)Land east of Pontarddulais Road is allocated for residential development

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

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

Policy EV3 Accessibility criteria for new development.

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

Supplementary Planning Guidance:

Interim Housing Land Policy Statement (IHLPS)

National Planning Guidance

TAN 1 Joint Housing Land Availability Studies (Oct 1997) b. Relevant Planning History

2005/0599 Residential Development (Outline) Planning Permission 27th June, 2006 subject to a Section 106 Obligation: i) The provision of an equipped play area and improvements to existing play facilities/community facilities in the area, and an appropriate commuted sum for the future maintenance of the new play area. AREA 2 DEVELOPMENT CONTROL COMMITTEE – 27TH OCTOBER 2009

ITEM 24 (CONT’D) APPLICATION NO. 2009/1252

ii) Commuted sums for the future maintenance of all areas of public open space.

iii) A financial contribution per dwelling in respect of local education facilities.

2006/1487 Erection of 228 No. Units (192 dwellings and 36 apartments in 3 three storey blocks) (details of the siting design, external appearance, means of access and landscaping pursuant to outline planning permission 2005/0599 granted on 27th June 2006) Reserved Matters Approval November, 2006

2008/1180 Revision to plots 224-228 and 229 and relocation of bin store to plots 212-223 Reserved Matters Approval August, 2008.

2008/1893 Construction of 27 dwellings on plots 1-34 (omission of plots 28-34) (revised layout to reserved matters approval 2006/1487 pursuant to outline planning permission 2005/0599 granted 27th June 2006) Planning Permission 13 November, 2008 c. Response to Consultations

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

Penllergaer Community Council – No response

Highway Observations – The revised plot layout is acceptable and no highway objections are raised.

APPRAISAL

The application has been called to Committee at the request of the Ward Member, Councillor Wendy Fitzgerald.

Outline planning permission for the residential development of this site was granted on 27 June, 2006 following the completion of a Section 106 Agreement (Ref: 2005/0599) and was subject to a planning condition (condition 20) restricting the maximum number of dwelling units within the approved development not exceed 230 units in order to conform to the number specified within the Interim Housing Land Policy Statement and having regard to the impact on the local highway network.

Reserved matters approval for the detailed residential layout of 228 residential units, consisting of 192 dwellings and 36 residential apartments was approved November, 2006 (Ref:2006/1487). The layout was amended under Ref:2008/1180 which resulted in 1 additional dwelling. The approved layout was further amended on plots 1 – 34 under Ref: 2008/1893 for the construction of 27 dwellings (Ref: 2008/1893) which would result in the loss of 7 units. The obligations within the Section 106 Agreement remain in place on the development. AREA 2 DEVELOPMENT CONTROL COMMITTEE – 27TH OCTOBER 2009

ITEM 24 (CONT’D) APPLICATION NO. 2009/1252

This amended proposal would substantially retain the approved road layout but would involve a slightly modified re-plan with plot substitution / amended house types relating to 106 dwellings within the approved layout. This would result in a further 4 dwellings over the approved layout resulting in an overall density of 226 units within the site which would accord with the 230 units restriction under the outline planning permission.

The dwellings would consist predominantly of two storey two, three and four bedroomed dwellings within a layout consisting of detached, semi-detached and short - terraced properties with a proportion of two and a half storey dwellings (‘Dyffryn’ – i.e. accommodation within the roof space. The proposed house types have largely previously been approved within the development, with the exception of the ‘Hawthorn’ and ‘Pembroke’ which have replaced the ‘Hadleigh’ and ‘Elm’ house types respectively. The vehicular access would still be obtained from Pontarddulais Road with the construction of a new entrance and mini-roundabout in accordance with the Outline Planning Permission.

Main Issues The principal of the development was established under the outline planning permission and is now allocated for residential development under Policy HC1 (124) of the Unitary Development Plan. The main issues for consideration in this instance relate to the whether the proposal is an acceptable form of residential development in terms of the layout, design and visual impact of the proposal. In addition, consideration is given to the impact of the proposed development on the character, appearance and relationship to the surrounding area of Penllergaer. There are in this instance no additional overriding issues for consideration under the provisions of the Human Rights Act.

Layout and Design The amended layout is generally consistent with the approved layout in terms of house type design and character, and as indicated above the amended house types have either previously been approved within the development whilst the replacement house types are similar in appearance. Car parking provision will substantially take the form of driveway / garaging with some areas of hardstandings in front of the terraced / linked properties and also small grouped parking courts. The applicant has submitted a plan indicating the disposition of roof and facing materials within the development and the intention is for a mix of brick-faced housing, rendered housing and some stone faced dwellings. The external finishes throughout the overall development have previously been approved and the indicated finishes and disposition of finishes indicated on this amended layout would be largely consistent with those already approved. Frontage gardens are generally kept to a minimum to create townscape interest and avoid car parking dominating the streetscene. The amended layout is consistent with this concept and the proposed layout incorporates the use of frontage boundary treatments throughout the development consisting of low 900mm high railings and low walls with railings which will help to secure a consistent high quality streetscene whilst providing a clear definition of public and private space.

Overall, it is considered that the proposed development would incorporate many of the objectives of a well designed place to live, comprising a legible and distinctive character creating a sense of place whilst retaining the existing natural features. The housing layout reflects good continuity with a well-connected layout and well-overlooked streets and well- located public open spaces that add character and create a sense of community. AREA 2 DEVELOPMENT CONTROL COMMITTEE – 27TH OCTOBER 2009

ITEM 24 (CONT’D) APPLICATION NO. 2009/1252

Residential Amenity The nearest residential properties are located approx. 45 metres away on Pontarddulais Road and having regard to the separation distances within the layout would not raise any residential amenity issues in terms of potential for overlooking or physical / visual impact.

Traffic and Pedestrian Impact Vehicular access to the proposed residential development will be obtained by the formation of a new access off Pontarddulais Road, with the formation of a mini roundabout at the site entrance and remains unchanged from the approved layout. Similarly, the alignment of the internal road layout remains substantially unchanged. The Head of Transportation raises no highway objections to the proposal.

Noise The outline application was supported by a noise assessment in relation to the noise levels from passing road traffic on surrounding roads including the adjacent M4 Motorway. The M4 is contained within a steep cutting with the application site elevated approx. 12 to 14 metres above the motorway with the top of the cutting being densely vegetated with shrubs, trees, brambles and bushes which delineates the northern boundary of the site and which helps to ameliorate the noise impact from the motorway. The Noise Report indicates that the majority of the site falls within the guidelines from daytime and nightime noise as contained within Planning Policy Guidance Note (PPG) 24:1994 ‘Planning and Noise’ (TAN 11 – Noise – Wales). However, the properties nearest to the motorway would exceed these levels, and acoustic attenuation measures are required to provide a level of protection against noise for the future occupants. The report recommends the construction of a 3 metre high noise barrier on the northern site boundary (Condition 8 of the Outline Permission) and that by increasing the separation distance of the proposed dwellings by 14 metres into the site from the northern boundary, would be sufficient to provide a noise reduction to meet an acceptable daytime noise level. Condition 9 of the Outline Permission requires that all dwellings are positioned to ensure that all dwelling facades with habitable room windows are sited a minimum of 14 metres from the northern boundary of the site. The proposed amended residential layout accords with this condition.

Conclusions The principal of the development was established under the outline planning permission (Ref: 2005/0599) and is now an allocated residential development site under the Unitary Development Plan. The issues regarding Development Plan Policy, transport implications of the proposal, noise, affordable housing, ecology and trees, and the issues concerning the future maintenance of the areas of public open and the provision of playground / community facilities together with the educational impact are addressed in the planning conditions and Section 106 Obligation on the outline planning permission and those conditions and obligations remain in place on the development. Overall, it is considered that the detailed amended residential layout would incorporate many of the objectives of a well designed place to live, comprising a legible and distinctive character creating a sense of place whilst retaining the existing natural features. The housing layout reflects good connectivity within a well-connected layout providing well-overlooked streets and appropriately located public open space / playground facilities that will add character and create a sense of community.

Approval is therefore recommended. AREA 2 DEVELOPMENT CONTROL COMMITTEE – 27TH OCTOBER 2009

ITEM 24 (CONT’D) APPLICATION NO. 2009/1252

RECOMMENDATION

APPROVE, subject to the following conditions;

2 The external finishes to the development shall be completed in accordance with Drg. No. 9943/FIN 02 unless otherwise agreed by the Local Planning Authority. Reason: In the interests of visual amenity.

3 Notwithstanding the submitted plans no dwelling unit in the development shall be occupied until the means of enclosure to the respective individual curtilages have been completed in accordance with details to be submitted to and approved by the Local Planning Authority unless otherwise agreed by the Local Planning Authority. Reason: In the interests of visual amenity and general amenity.

4 The northern boundary of the application site shall incorporate a 3 metre high acoustic fence and the respective individual dwellings shall not be occupied until the acoustic fencing affecting those plots has been completed. Reason: In the interests of the residential amenities of the future occupiers of the proposed development.

5 No part of the development hereby approved shall be occupied until the off-site roadworks have been implemented to the satisfaction of the Local Planning Authority, which shall include: i) the 30 mph speed limit on Pontarddulais Road being extended to a point to be agreed north of the bridge crossing the M4; ii) the mini-roundabout junction on Pontarddulais Road; iii) the provision of footway links along the new highway works. Reason: In the interests of highway and pedestrian safety.

6 No dwelling unit within the development shall be occupied until the adoptable roads linking that unit to the existing adopted road network have been constructed to base course level and provided with street lighting in accordance with details to be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. Reason: To ensure that the development is completed in accordance with the plans approved by the Council, and so avoid any detriment to amenity or public safety by works remaining uncompleted.

AREA 2 DEVELOPMENT CONTROL COMMITTEE – 27TH OCTOBER 2009

ITEM 24 (CONT’D) APPLICATION NO. 2009/1252

7 No part of the development hereby approved shall be occupied until a foul drainage scheme has been implemented in accordance with details to be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The approved scheme must ensure that the foul drainage from all individual dwellings is connected to the main foul public sewerage system. Reason: To ensure that a satisfactory comprehensive means of foul drainage is achieved in order to prevent the hydraulic overloading of the public sewerage system.

8 Foul water and surface water discharges must be drained separately from the site and no surface water shall be allowed to connect, either directly or indirectly, to the public sewerage system. No land drainage run-off will be permitted, either directly or indirectly, to discharge into the public sewerage system. Reason: To prevent the hydraulic overloading of the public sewerage system and pollution of the environment.

INFORMATIVES

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

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

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

AREA 2 DEVELOPMENT CONTROL COMMITTEE – 27TH OCTOBER 2009

ITEM 24 (CONT’D) APPLICATION NO. 2009/1252

5 All on and off-site roadworks will be subject to legal agreement. The Developer must contact the Network Manager City and County of Swansea, Highways Division, Players Industrial Estate, Clydach, Swansea, SA6 5BJ. Tel 01792 841601 before carrying out any work.

6 The developer is reminded that the Outline Planning Permission for the residential development granted on 27 June, 2006 (Ref:2005/0599) is subject to a Section 106 Agreement in respect of:

i. To pay an educational contribution of £340,000 to be paid in two stages i.e. £170,000 after 75 units are completed with the second payment triggered by the completion of the 150th unit.

ii. To pay a contribution of £50,000 towards agreed local/ play community facilities to be paid in two stages i.e. £25,000 after 75 units are completed and the remainder when 150 units are completed.

iii. To provide an equipped play area to LEAP standard within the development and to pay a commuted sum of £75,000 for its future maintenance by the Council; the LEAP to be provide on completion of the 100th unit.

iv. Should any public open spaces be identified in the detailed design stage of the Planning Permission, to construct the same to adoptable standard and to pay to the Council a commuted sum, for future maintenance thereof such sum to be agreed between the party making payment of the same and the Council.

These obligations remain in place on the development.

PLANS

9816/LC01A site location plan, 9816/PL02 site layout plan, 9816/FIN02 finishing layout, 349.01E landscaping 1of6, 349.02E landscaping 2of6, 349.03E landscaping 3of6, 349.04E landscaping 4of6, 349.05E landscaping 5of6, 349.06E landscaping 6of6, Winscombe plans x 3, Winchester plans x 3, Wilton plans x 5, Warwick plans x 2, Pembroke plans x 4, Lara plans x 4, Hawthorne plans x 3, Duffryn plans x 4, Buckingham plans x 4, Brockweir plans x 2, Beaufort plans x 5, garage plans x 2, E1 fence details, E7(1) wall details, E7(2) wall details, E11 railing details, E13 railings and wall details, 06066/601-01P preliminary drainage layout, 06066/601-02F preliminary drainage layout, 06066/601-03H preliminary drainage layout received 20th August 2009

AREA 2 DEVELOPMENT CONTROL COMMITTEE (37)

Councillors:

Swansea Administration Councillors: V A Bates-Hughes P M Meara A M Day W K Morgan E W Fitzgerald J Newbury N A Holley (Non Voting) C L Philpott J W Jones D Price Mary H Jones T H Rees S M Jones R J Stanton J B Kelleher N J Tregoning R D Lewis (Chair) D P Tucker (Vice Chair) K E Marsh S M Waller Thomas P N May

Labour Councillors: J E Burtonshaw E T Kirchner M C Child P M Matthews W Evans J T Miles R Francis-Davies D Phillips D H James J C Richards W (Billy) E A Jones D W W Thomas D I E Jones P B Smith

Conservative Councillors: A (Tony) C S Colburn R H Kinzett (Non Voting) P R Hood-Williams (Non Voting) M Smith

Non Aligned Councillors: G Seabourne