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, GUILDHALL, SWANSEA

On: Tuesday 4th May 2010

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 Committee held on 13th April and Site Visits held on 20th April 2010.

FOR DECISION

4. Town and Country Planning - Planning Applications. (a) Items for deferral/withdrawal. (b) Requests for site visits. (c) Determination of Planning Applications.

5. Exclusion of the Public The Proper Officer has determined in preparing item 6 that paragraph 18 should apply. His view on the public interest test was that the authority’s statutory powers could be rendered ineffective or less effective were there to be advance knowledge of it’s intention/ the proper exercise of the Council’s statutory power could be prejudiced by public discussion or speculation on the matter to the detriment of the authority and the inhabitants of the area. On that basis he felt that the public interest in maintaining the exemption outweighs the public interest in disclosing the information. Members are asked to consider this factor when determining the public interest test, which they must decide when considering excluding the public.

6. Enforcement Progress Report.

Rod Jones Acting Head of Legal & Democratic Services 26th April 2010 Contact: Jane Tinker 01792 636820

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

Disclosures of Personal Interest from Members

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

CITY AND COUNTY OF SWANSEA

MINUTES OF THE AREA 2 DEVELOPMENT CONTROL COMMITTEE

HELD AT THE CIVIC CENTRE, SWANSEA ON TUESDAY 13TH APRIL 2010 AT 2.00 P.M.

PRESENT: Councillor R D Lewis (Chairman) presided

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

V A Bates-Hughes J W Jones T H Rees J E Burtonshaw M H Jones G Seabourne A C S Colburn J B Kelleher R J Stanton W Evans K E Marsh M Smith E W Fitzgerald P M Matthews P B Smith R Francis-Davies P M Meara D W W Thomas D H James J Newbury D P Tucker D I E Jones C L Philpott

Non-voting Members:

Councillor P R Hood-Williams

230. APOLOGIES

Apologies for absence were received from Councillors M C Child, A M Day, M E Gibbs, S M Jones, E T Kirchner, J T Miles, D Price, R L Smith and S M Waller Thomas.

231. DECLARATION OF INTEREST

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

Councillor R D Lewis - Planning Application No. 2009/1666 (Item 6) - personal and prejudicial and vacated the chair and left during discussion thereof.

232. MINUTES

RESOLVED that the Minutes of the Area 2 Development Control Committee held on 16th March 2010 and the site visits held on 23rd March 2010 be agreed as correct records.

Minutes of the Area 2 Development Control Committee (13.04.10) Cont’d

233. PROPOSED MODIFICATION OF FOOTPATH NO. 6 - COMMUNITY OF LLANRHIDIAN LOWER

The Head of Legal and Democratic Services presented a report which outlined the application to consider whether to make a Modification Order to amend the route of Footpath No. 6 shown in the Definitive Map to correspond with the Definitive Statement.

The background history of the application as detailed, as well as the evidence submitted and the list of those people consulted on the matter was provided.

RESOLVED that Cabinet be recommended to make a Modification Order to amend Footpath No. 6 on the Definitive Map to reflect the Definitive Statement.

234. ALLEGED PUBLIC FOOTPATH FROM EVERSLEY ROAD, SKETTY TO GOWER ROAD - COMMUNITY OF SKETTY

The Head of Legal and Democratic Services presented a report which outlined the application to consider whether to recognise the alleged public footpath from Eversley Road to Gower Road in the community of Sketty as a public right of way.

The background history of the application as detailed as well as the evidence submitted and the list of those people consulted on the matter.

RESOLVED that Cabinet be recommended that no Modification Order be made.

235. ITEMS FOR DEFERRAL/WITHDRAWAL

RESOLVED that:

(1) the undermentioned planning applications BE DEFERRED for the reasons outlined below:

(Item 2) Application No. 2009/1731

Increase in ridge height to provide first floor accommodation with front and side dormers and retention of alterations to parking and access at The Laurels, 34a West Cross Lane, West Cross, Swansea.

Reason

To enable the submission of accurate plans.

Minutes of the Area 2 Development Control Committee (13.04.10) Cont’d

(Item 3) Application No. 2010/0092

Detached dwelling with integral garage at Plot 1, Plenty Farm, Llangennith, Swansea.

Reason

To enable photographs of the area to be displayed.

(Item 4) Application No. 2009/1599

Extend the period of temporary permitted use for marquee and associated overspill car park to include the period commencing 1st November 2009 and ceasing on 31st March 2011, and alterations to colour of marquee at land at Oxwich Bay Hotel, Oxwich, Swansea.

Reason

To enable the submission of additional information.

(Item 5) Application No. 2010/0049

Retention of drainage ditch diversion works at Stavelhager Farm, Llanrhidian, Swansea.

Reason

To give adequate notice to applicant/objector of opportunity to speak at Committee due to late petition of objection received.

(Item 8) Application No. 2009/0607

Detached dwelling and garage at land adjacent to Robins Rest, Horton, Swansea.

Reason

To allow more time for further consultation.

(2) the undermentioned planning applications BE WITHDRAWN:

(Item 9) Application No. 2009/1264

Detached bungalow at land to the rear of 175 Newton Road, Newton, Swansea.

Minutes of the Area 2 Development Control Committee (13.04.10) Cont’d

236. ITEM DEFERRED FOR SITE VISIT

RESOLVED that the undermentioned planning application BE DEFERRED for a SITE VISIT for the reason outlined below.

(Item 7) Application No. 2009/0892

Three storey front extension, front roof extension with two front dormers, two storey rear extension and rear dormer at Bloomfield Nursing Home, 129 Gower Road, Sketty, Swansea.

Reason

To assess the impact of the development given its proximity to neighbouring residents.

237. 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) the undermentioned planning applications BE REFUSED subject to the conditions in the report and/or indicated below:

(Item 1) Application No. 2009/0175

Detached dwelling and detached garage at land adjacent to Long Elms, 118 Bishopston Road, Bishopston, Swansea.

(NOTE: Two further late letters raising concerns and questions about the impact on the protected trees and vehicle movements).

(NOTE: Mr Tribe addressed the Committee on behalf of the petitioners. Mr Bollom as applicant responded accordingly).

Minutes of the Area 2 Development Control Committee (13.04.10) Cont’d

Reasons

01. The proposed development, by virtue of its excessive scale and inappropriate siting and design, would detract from the character and appearance of the area and the natural beauty of the Gower Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty at this locality, contrary to Policies EV1, EV2, EV17 and EV26 of the City and County of Swansea Unitary Development Plan 2008.

02. The applicant had failed to demonstrate that the proposed development could be effectively served by a non-mains sewerage system without having an adverse effect on the environment, amenity and public health, and is therefore contrary to Policy EV33 of the City and County of Swansea Unitary Development Plan 2008.

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

(Item 6) Application No. 2009/1666

Side conservatory at The Dingle, Horton, Swansea.

(NOTE: Councillor D P Tucker presided for this item)

# (Item 10) Application No. 2009/1346

Conversion of detached garage into living accommodation (variation of Condition 04. of planning permission 2002/1302 granted 2nd January 2003) at 32 East Cliff, Pennard, Swansea.

Amended Condition

Amend Condition 03. to require the south facing first floor window to be obscure glazed by including the words, “and south facing first floor window” after the word “roof lights”.

Minutes of the Area 2 Development Control Committee (13.04.10) Cont’d

(NOTE: Letter of objection received from Pennard Community Council on the basis that there was a likelihood that the property would become separate accommodation for a different family and/or rented out on a commercial basis and allowing this would subject East Cliff to an intensification of development which was contrary to the UDP).

(Item 11) Application No. 2009/1549

Replacement detached dwelling house with integral garage at The Bungalow, Old Walls, Swansea.

(Item 12) Application No. 2009/1832

Conversion of existing Police Station House to create separate residential dwelling and Police Station with single storey side extension to Police Station and provision of two parking spaces for use by Police Station at Reynoldston Police Station, Reynoldston, Swansea.

(Item 13) Application No. 2009/1896

Addition of front and rear porches and an increase in height to an existing shed at Baytree House, Mill Lane, Llanrhidian, Swansea.

(Item 14) Application No. 2010/0046

Two storey rear extension at Ashcroft, Oxwich, Swansea.

(Item 15) Application No. 2010/0134

Two storey part single storey side extension and side conservatory at Little Cilibion, Cilibion, Swansea.

(Item 16) Application No. 2010/0148

Change of use from retail/post office (Class A1) to residential dwelling (Class C3), two single storey rear extensions, rear decked area and alterations to the pattern of fenestration at Brooke House Stores, Port Eynon, Swansea.

Minutes of the Area 2 Development Control Committee (13.04.10) Cont’d

(Item 17) Application No. 2010/0209

Construction of decking area with fencing at Plot 53, Whiteford Bay Leisure Park, Swansea.

(Item 18) Application No. 2010/0251

Single storey rear extension at Southridge, Reynoldston, Swansea.

The meeting ended at 3.20 p.m.

CHAIRMAN

S: Area 2 Development Control Committee - 13 April 2010 (JEP/KL)

Item No.3b

CITY AND COUNTY OF SWANSEA

MINUTES OF THE AREA 2 DEVELOPMENT CONTROL COMMITTEE SITE VISITS

HELD ON SITE ON TUESDAY 20TH APRIL 2010 AT 2.00 PM

PRESENT: Councillor R D Lewis (Chairman) presided

Councillor(s): Councillor(s): Councillor(s): V a Bates-Hughes D H James C L Philpott A C S Colburn K Marsh R J Stanton W Evans J Newbury D P Tucker

1. APOLOGIES

Apologies for absence were received from Councillors A M Day, M H Jones, S M Jones, E T Kirchner, P Matthews, P M Meara, P B Smith, and R L Smith.

2. TOWN AND COUNTRY PLANNING SITE VISITS

Following deferment for a site visit at the meeting of the Area 2 Development Control Committee held on Tuesday 13th April 2010 Members visited the undermentioned site prior to it’s determination at the Committee scheduled for Tuesday 4th May 2010.

a) Planning Application No. 2009/0892 Bloomfield Nursing Home - 129 Gower Road Sketty, Swansea SA2 9HU. Three storey front extension, front roof extension with two front dormers, two storey rear extension and rear dormer.

The meeting ended at 3.00 pm.

CHAIRMAN 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 Chair and Members of the Area 2 Development 9. GORSEINON Control Committee 10. GOWER 11. GOWERTON 12. KILLAY NORTH DATE: 4th MAY 2010 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 2010/0049 Stavelhager Farm Llanrhidian APPROVE Swansea SA3 1ER Retention of drainage ditch diversion works

2 2009/1731 The Laurels, 34A West Cross Lane, West Cross, APPROVE Swansea, SA3 5LS Increase in ridge height to provide first floor accommodation with front and side dormers and retention of alterations to parking and access

3 2010/0092 Plot 1, Plenty Farm, Llangennith, Swansea REFUSE Detached dwelling with integral garage

4 2009/0892 Bloomfield Nursing Home, 129 Gower Road, Sketty, APPROVE Swansea SA2 9HU Three storey front extension, front roof extension with two front dormers, two storey rear extension and rear dormer

5 2009/1599 Land at Oxwich Bay Hotel, Oxwich, Swansea, SA3 1LS REFUSE Extend the period of temporary permitted use for marquee and associated overspill car park to include the period commencing 1st November 2009 and ceasing on 31st March 2011 including alterations to colour of marquee between the beginning of December and end of February within this period

6 2009/1087 Barham Centre, Mount Pisgah Chapel, Mill Buildings, APPROVE Parkmill, Swansea SA3 2EH Retention and completion of lay-by, access ramp, landscaping and associated works

7 2008/2092 The Lodge, 11 Caswell Road, Langland, Swansea, SA3 APPROVE 4RA Two storey side extension, two storey part single storey rear extension, detached garage, boundary wall up to 2.3 metres in height, trellis structure and chimney

AREA 2 DEVELOPMENT CONTROL COMMITTEE – 4TH MAY 2010

ITEM APP. NO. SITE LOCATION OFFICER REC.

8 2010/0253 The Boat House, Rhossili, Swansea APPROVE Installation of 1.1m high handrail and gate and improvement works to footpath

9 2009/1842 Gors Green, Reynoldston, Swansea, SA3 1AE APPROVE Detached dwelling house with detached garage (details of the siting, design, external appearance and landscaping pursuant to condition 1 of outline planning permission 2008/0560 granted on appeal on 27th January 2009)

10 2010/0065 Swallow Barn, Cwm Ivy, Llanmadoc, Swansea SA3 1DJ APPROVE Retention of garden shed and use for the sale of arts and crafts for no more than 28 days a year

11 2010/0186 "Sea Shells", Llanrhidian, Gower, Swansea APPROVE Completion and retention of one rear dormer

12 2010/0366 Caravan 43 Whitford Bay Leisure Park Llanmadoc APPROVE Swansea SA3 1DE Construction of decked area

13 2010/0339 Plot 8 Greenways Caravan Park Oxwich Swansea APPROVE Construction of decked area

AREA 2 DEVELOPMENT CONTROL COMMITTEE – 4TH MAY 2010 AREA 2 DEVELOPMENT CONTROL COMMITTEE – 4 MAY 2010

ITEM 1 APPLICATION NO. 2010/0049 WARD: Gower Area 2

Location: Stavelhager Farm Llanrhidian Swansea SA3 1ER Proposal: Retention of drainage ditch diversion works Applicant: Mr Simon Cogger

BACKGROUND INFORMATION

This application was DEFERRED at the Area 2 Development Control Committee on 13th April 2010 to give adequate notice to the Applicant/Objector of opportunity to speak at Committee due to a late petition of objection with 31 signatures being received. 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 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 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 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

89/1436/03 Change of use from 2 joined caravans to one domestic unit. Permission granted 17th November 1989.

91/0058/04 Renewal of consent 89/1437 for use of cottage as bottling unit. Permission granted 8th April 1991.

2002/1271 Change of use from a bottling unit to residential use. Conservation Area consent granted 27th September 2002.

AREA 2 DEVELOPMENT CONTROL COMMITTEE – 4 MAY 2010

ITEM 1 (CONT’D) APPLICATION NO. 2010/0049

2003/2053 Increase of existing ridge height by approximately 1.15m, and a single storey extension on each side and a two storey extension to the rear. Approved 3rd August 2004.

2005/0790 Demolition of existing dwelling and erection of one detached dwelling. Approved 8th November 2005.

2006/0604 Erection of a detached garage. Withdrawn.

2006/0923 Detached dwelling house (Amendment to planning permission 2005/0790 granted 8th November 2005). Withdrawn.

2006/1856 Replacement dwelling (including part retention of works already carried out amendment to planning permission 2005/0790 granted on 8th November 2005). Permission granted 24th October 2006.

2006/2588 Detached garage. Permission granted 20th February 2007.

2007/2362 Retention of re-routing of watercourse. Grant Permission Conditional 26th June 2009.

RESPONSE TO CONSULTATIONS

The application was advertised on site and two individual consultations were carried out. ONE LETTER HAS BEEN RECEIVED on behalf of the occupiers of the adjoining dwelling and a PETITION of objection with 31 signatures has been received. The full letter is available on file and the contents of which are summarised as follows:

1. You will know the very great level of concern felt by my clients regarding the unauthorised engineering works.

2. Would refer you again to the evidence already supplied to you in the form of photographs, video and expert report.

3. The urgent need for the implementation of protective measures was highlighted only 3 weeks after the original grant of permission when the watercourse was once again in full flood. Photographs attached.

4. The water also washed down a significant amount of stone which was then deposited on my client’s land.

5. There is no reason to question the measures now proposed on the submitted drawings.

6. Great care will needed when installing these gabions to ensure that the adjoining building is not damaged or undermined.

7. Important to ensure that protection measures are installed in accordance with the plans and without delay.

8. The scheme is acceptable as submitted but will only continue to be satisfactory into the future if the monthly checks on site are meticulously and continuously carried out. AREA 2 DEVELOPMENT CONTROL COMMITTEE – 4 MAY 2010

ITEM 1 (CONT’D) APPLICATION NO. 2010/0049

9. The protection of my clients’ property and amenity will thus be dependant on the appropriateness of any planning conditions/legal agreements that you may impose and the willingness of your enforcement section to robustly enforce the applicant to comply with the requirements.

The Gower Society – We have the following comments to make:

1. We have expressed our concerns about the activities on this site for a considerable length of time. 2. We have the utmost sympathy with the owners of the adjacent property who have made repeated complaints about these works and we are told have suffered damage from flooding caused by them. 3. It is essential that all works are completed as expediently as possible and to ensure that NO further damage is possible to the adjacent property. 4. It is our opinion that the ditch should never have been diverted in the first place as this was for the convenience of the owners, with total disregard for the adjacent owners’ property.

We urge you to put as much pressure as you are able on this applicant; unless the works are carried out, it is suggested that you impose a condition to revert to the original stream’s route.

Environment Agency – Environment Agency Wales have no objection to the retention of the drainage ditch diversion works. We note that this is a retrospective application and the work to reroute the watercourse has already been carried out. The landowner is entitled to reroute the watercourse within the curtilage of their property providing that the entry and exit points remain unchanged, thereby not affecting the right to water that landowners both upstream and downstream have. Furthermore, please note a Flood Defence Consent from the Environment Agency is not required in this instance.

APPRAISAL

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

The application seeks full planning permission for the retention of works undertaken to re- route the watercourse at Stavelhager Farm, Llanrhidian located within the Gower AONB. The application site is a secluded location with limited visibility from a public right of way that also serves as the access road to the property.

In terms of the most recent planning history, members will recall that planning permission was granted for the retention of the watercourse (2007/2362 refers) on 26th June 2009, subject to the following condition:

Condition 1: The development shall be completed within 3 months from the date of this planning permission in accordance with the approved plans and additional engineering details of the construction of the proposed gabions and weirs (including the interface with the adjoining land) and a management scheme for the future maintenance of the protection measures and the diverted watercourse, which shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority.

AREA 2 DEVELOPMENT CONTROL COMMITTEE – 4 MAY 2010

ITEM 1 (CONT’D) APPLICATION NO. 2010/0049

The applicant failed to submit the relevant plans and details for approval to the Local Planning Authority within the 3 month period. This application is for the retention of the watercourse and includes the submission of the additional engineering details for the construction of the proposed gabions and weirs, and a management plan for the future maintenance of the protection measures, and seeks the retention of the watercourse.

The main issues for consideration in this instance are the acceptability of the engineering details and management plan submitted, having regard to the impact of the proposal upon the Gower AONB, the character and appearance of the area, and residential amenity. There are considered to be no additional issues arising from the provisions of the Human Rights Act.

The watercourse is within land owned by the applicant, and works have been undertaken to divert the watercourse from the original route to a new alignment. Historically the original watercourse ran approximately parallel with the Farm access track, and continues on to discharge into Llanrhidian Marsh. The watercourse retains its original position for the first part (the route through Stavelhager Farm), and has then been diverted for a distance of approximately 60metres before being re-aligned further east towards the boundary with ‘The Cottage’ and ‘The Mill’.

During the consideration of the previous application (2007/2362 refers), the Council’s Ecologist visited the site and considered that any minor damage will be repaired through natural regeneration and that there would be no ecological benefit to the stream being returned to its original route, and it was not considered that the proposal detracts from the character and appearance of the existing dwelling or will result in any unacceptable detriment to the natural beauty or ecology of the surrounding area.

With regard to residential amenity and in response to the concerns raised in respect of the increase in flood risk and damage and erosion to the neighbouring property and land, the Environment Agency was consulted and raised no objection to the proposal. Furthermore, following further consultation with the Authority’s Drainage Division, the applicant was informed of the urgent need to protect against the erosion of both banks and bed of the watercourse. The applicant was advised of the extent of the requirements and this information was subsequently submitted to the Authority’s Drainage Division by the consultants commissioned by the applicant. Notwithstanding this, to ensure the completion of the works within a reasonable time fame, Condition 1 of planning permission 2007/2362 required the submission of engineering details and completion of works within 3 months of the date of permission.

The applicant failed to complete the works within the 3 month period and therefore cannot comply with Condition 1. This application has been submitted to extend the time frame for the completion of the protection works. Full details of the proposed works have been submitted to support this application together with a management scheme for future maintenance. A further site visit has been undertaken accompanied by the Authority’s Drainage Engineer. The submitted details are considered acceptable and an appropriate condition is recommended to ensure that these works are completed in accordance with the details provided.

Notwithstanding the above, concern has been raised relating to increased flood risk and damage to the neighbouring property. The objector has commented in detail on the proposed protection measures in the letter received. AREA 2 DEVELOPMENT CONTROL COMMITTEE – 4 MAY 2010

ITEM 1 (CONT’D) APPLICATION NO. 2010/0049

The concerns have been noted and an appropriate condition is recommended to ensure that the works are implemented in accordance with the details and management scheme submitted.

In conclusion and having regard to all material considerations, including the Human Rights Act, on the basis of the above considerations the proposal is considered a satisfactory form of development that would accord with Policy Policies EV1, EV2, EV26 and EV36 of the City and County of Swansea Unitary Development Plan. Approval is therefore recommended.

RECOMMENDATION

APPROVE subject to the following conditions:

1 The development shall be completed within 3 months from the date of this planning permission in accordance with the approved plans and additional engineering details for the construction of the proposed gabions and wiers (including the interface with the adjoining land), unless agreed otherwise in writing by the Local Planning Authority. Reason: To protect against the erosion of both banks and bed of the watercourse and to safeguard the residential amenities of the occupiers of the neighbouring dwelling.

2 Unless agreed otherwise in writing by the Local Planning Authority, the development shall be maintained and managed in accordance with the details outlined in the 'Management Scheme for the Future Maintenance of the Watercourse at Stavel Hager Farm, Llanrhidian", dated September 2009 and received by the Local Planning Authority on 12th January 2010. The owner shall ensure that an up to date monthly maintenance schedule is maintained and made available at all reasonable times for inspection by the Local Planning Authority. Reason: To protect against the erosion of both banks and bed of the watercourse and to ensure the future maintenance and management of the watercourse and to safeguard the residential amenities of the occupiers of the neighbouring dwelling.

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, EV26 and EV36 of the City and County of Swansea Unitary Development Plan.

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

3 The developer's attention is drawn to the need for the installation of the gabions to have due regard to the neighbouring landowner's rights and the need for due diligence in the undertaking of the operations.

AREA 2 DEVELOPMENT CONTROL COMMITTEE – 4 MAY 2010

ITEM 1 (CONT’D) APPLICATION NO. 2010/0049

PLANS

7 site location plan, 8 existing part site plan, 9 proposed part site plan, 5962/1 Rev A watercourse details, 5962/1 Rev B watercourse details, 5962/2 watercourse section details, 5962/3 watercourse diversion weir details received 12th January 2010. The Management Scheme for the Future Maintenance of the Watercourse dated September 2009 and received on 12th January 2010.

AREA 2 DEVELOPMENT CONTROL COMMITTEE – 4 MAY 2010

ITEM 2 APPLICATION NO. 2009/1731 WARD: West Cross Area 2

Location: The Laurels, 34A West Cross Lane, West Cross, Swansea, SA3 5LS Proposal: Increase in ridge height to provide first floor accommodation with front and side dormers and retention of alterations to parking and access Applicant: Mr Paul Davison

BACKGROUND INFORMATION

This application was deferred for a site visit by the Area 2 Development Control Committee on the 16th March 2010 to consider the impact of the development upon the character of the area and the amenities of neighbouring properties.

The application was further deferred by the Area 2 Development Control Committee on the 13th April 2010 given that the plans submitted were inaccurate. A consultation exercise has been undertaken in respect of the amended plans and any further comments will need to be reported at Committee. 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 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 2009/0359 Increase in ridge height and addition of first floor to create two storey dwelling Decision: Refuse Decision Date: 25/06/2009

85/0007/10 SECTION 60 APPLICATION TO RAISE CROWNS OF 2 YEWS COVERED BY TPO 134. Decision: *HGPC - GRANT PERMISSION CONDITIONAL Decision Date: 28/02/1985

86/0040/03 ERECTION OF A BUNGALOW. Decision: *HGPC - GRANT PERMISSION CONDITIONAL Decision Date: 24/04/1986 AREA 2 DEVELOPMENT CONTROL COMMITTEE – 4 MAY 2010

ITEM 2 (CONT’D) APPLICATION NO. 2009/1731

85/0863/10 SECTION 60 APPLICATION TO FELL CEDAR COVERED BY TPO 134. Decision: *HGPC - GRANT PERMISSION CONDITIONAL Decision Date: 25/07/1985

85/0525/01 ONE LUXURY DETACHED HOUSE OR BUNGALOW. Decision: *HGPC - GRANT PERMISSION CONDITIONAL Decision Date: 27/06/1985

RESPONSE TO CONSULTATIONS

Original Plans The neighbouring properties were consulted THREE LETTERS OF OBJECTION have been received in respect of the original proposal and a PETITION numbering FIFTY SIX signatories. The content of the correspondence is summarised below:

1. We will lose all privacy as three bedroom windows (proposed) will be overlooking two of our bedrooms, kitchen, lounge and garden, the bungalow was built very close to our boundary.

2. The present bungalow foundations are already about 6-7ft above our garden, this would make the proposed house about 30-35ft high overlooking our house and garden.

3. The proposed increase in ridge height will have a detrimental visual impact on the area

4. The height would also affect the amount of light entering our house and garden, we would be in deep shadow of the proposed modifications as we are already in the shadow of the bungalow.

5. The plans submitted do not blend well with neighbouring houses which were built around 1930.

6. The increase by a complete storey is unacceptable it would raise the roof well above the general roof line of the houses downhill from No34a

7. The bedroom windows will overlook our garden and main habitable rooms.

8. The rear wall of the proposed development is 1.0 metres away from our common boundary

9. The proposed house is totally out of character with neighbouring 1930’s properties.

10. The existing bungalow is well screened.

11. You have granted outline planning permission for infill development on the land behind us

AREA 2 DEVELOPMENT CONTROL COMMITTEE – 4 MAY 2010

ITEM 2 (CONT’D) APPLICATION NO. 2009/1731

12. The council awarded itself planning permission for a school that is not in keeping with the overall character of the area.

13. The retaining works between the application site and No.1 Grange Road are cracking and in need of repair.

14. The proposal will reduce light levels to my hall and side living room window.

The signatories to the petition signed in respect of the following statement.

“We the under signed wish to object to the proposal on the grounds on its adverse visual impact on the area, loss of privacy to surrounding properties and requires the removal of mature trees and shrubs.”

Amended Plans

Further to the receipt of amended plans a re-consultation exercise was undertaken and the following comments were received from the three previous objectors

1. Our observations remain the same and the petition still stands. 2. The only material change is that the ridge height is slightly lower and the dormer windows are now skylights. 3. The proposed development would have a detrimental visual impact on the area. 4. We notified you that the developer was removing a hedge and trees in spite of a planning Condition. We are extremely disappointed by your department’s failure to act or check the facts. 5. The elevation facing my garden would be a large rectangle of artificial slate and skylights for 45% of my boundary. 6. My previous objections stand in respect of the proposed scheme. 7. The development of the house from my back garden will be unacceptably overbearing and will still result in a loss of privacy. 8. My property will be in ever increasing shadow. 9. The modest alterations to the proposal do not alter the fact that the new property will still be significantly visible from West Cross Lane. 10. It was previously determined that the residential impact would be significant and unacceptably overbearing and have an overshadowing impact on neighbours. The amendments do not remove these objections and the changes are not radical enough. 11. Any increase in ridge height will have a seriously detrimental effect on the quality of life for me and my family. 12. The matter has been handled in an unsatisfactory way leading to the developer applying for retrospective permission for the access. Mature hedge was removed contrary to condition applied for the bungalow. To restore the hedge is impossible and the TPO tree has had its roots exposed and may have caused permanent damage. 13. The condition was imposed to preserve the visual amenity of the area and the effect was that the house could not be seen from the road. If the extension is approved it will then be visible from the road and compared to existing properties the new house would be much larger, modern and have unsympathetic materials. AREA 2 DEVELOPMENT CONTROL COMMITTEE – 4 MAY 2010

ITEM 2 (CONT’D) APPLICATION NO. 2009/1731

In addition a further letter has been submitted by a Planning Consultant, acting on behalf of the objectors and including a Tree Report, and making the following points:-

1. The proposed access would adversely affect the protected tree as the unauthorised driveway does not correspond with the proposed plan. 2. If the proposed plans are to be complied with the protected tree would need to be felled. 3. Even if the drive is left in situ but with a splay required by highways then the disruption to the root system will place the tree in jeopardy as it is delicate and vulnerable.

Mumbles Community Council: OBJECTS on the following grounds

• Out of keeping with existing houses and visual aspect.

Highways & Transportation (original plans) – This proposed extension will add additional bedrooms to the property. Access is to be relocated from the eastern end to the western end of the site leading to a new drive and turning area together with a garage facility. There is room for at least 3 cars on the drive and a 4th car in the garage, therefore more than adequate parking will be available.

No highway objection subject to:

1. The construction of a vehicular crossing to Highway Authority Specification. 2. The removal of the old access and reinstatement of the footway.

Further Amended Plans

Further to the receipt of an amended plan in respect of the access layout a re- consultation exercise was undertaken. No additional comments have been received from interested parties at the time of writing.

Highways & Transportation - Further to the receipt of amended plans dated 15th April 2010 the following revised comments were received:

The amended plans are submitted to reflect the actual position of the new drive position. This is slightly different from that originally proposed however in terms of its acceptability no issues arise from the new position. The width as constructed is sufficient for use by a single dwelling and visibility at the access is little different from that available at the original access, albeit that this can be improved if vegetation which overhangs the footway is trimmed back.

My original report referred to the access relocation but erroneously mentioned relocation from west to east whereas access has been altered from east to west side of the frontage. My earlier recommendation still stands but I would like to add a condition to trim back overhanging vegetation to improve visibility in accordance with details to be submitted.

AREA 2 DEVELOPMENT CONTROL COMMITTEE – 4 MAY 2010

ITEM 2 (CONT’D) APPLICATION NO. 2009/1731

APPRAISAL

This application is reported to Committee for decision at the request of Councillor Mark Child.

Full planning permission is sought for an increase in the ridge height to provide first floor accommodation with front and side dormers at 34a The Laurels, West Cross with retention of alterations to the parking and access. The application property is a detached bungalow set in a relatively well screened and elevated plot close to the junction of West Cross Avenue and Grange Road. The streetscene is characterised by properties with a varied design and character however the more dominant property type may be described as substantial detached properties set in large plots.

Outline planning permission was granted under application Ref: 85/0525/01 for the construction of a “Luxury house or bungalow” at this location on the 27th June 1985. A subsequent reserved matters application Ref: 86/0040/03 was granted on 24th April 1986 allowing the erection of a bungalow. The two bedroom bungalow subsequently erected was constructed on an ‘L’ shaped footprint with the east facing elevation adjacent to the common boundary with No.34 measuring approximately 18.0 metres in length. The overall footprint of the bungalow as existing is approximately 234.8 square metres with a maximum height to the eaves of 2.4 metres and to the ridge of 4.8 metres. This permission was subject to a range of conditions one of which related to the retention of the hedge and trees that served to form the boundary treatment of the site at that time.

The scheme currently being considered will not result in an increase in eaves height which will remain at approximately 2.4 metres. The proposal will see an increase in ridge height from 4.8 metres to approximately 6.7 metres. The wing currently incorporating a garage will see an increase in ridge height from 4.5 metres to approximately 6.7 metres.

The alterations to the access and parking arrangements that have been undertaken on site give rise to a breach of condition in respect of the original application Ref: 86/0040/03. However, it is considered expedient to consider the merits of this application and determine it accordingly prior to instigating any enforcement proceedings.

Discussions have taken place between Officers for the Local Planning Authority and the applicant with a view to reducing the scale of the scheme and amended plans seeking to address the concerns raised have been forthcoming.

In respect of visual amenity looking west from the junction of Grange Road and West Cross Lane towards the application site the bungalow is largely hidden from view and does not detract from the character of the surrounding area. The increase in height proposed under this scheme is approximately 1.8 metres lower at the ridge than that previously refused under application Ref: 2009/0359 and the proposed alterations to the garage wing running east to west will see the eaves height remaining as is and the alterations to the roof forming a full hip. This element of the proposal will see the ridge height increased to 6.7 metres, approximately 1.2 metres less than the previous proposal.

It is considered that given the change in levels, the boundary treatment and the alterations proposed that the scheme would be sensitive to the character and appearance of the street scene as viewed from West Cross Lane. AREA 2 DEVELOPMENT CONTROL COMMITTEE – 4 MAY 2010

ITEM 2 (CONT’D) APPLICATION NO. 2009/1731

The retention of the existing eaves height would ensure that the resultant development would be sufficiently low lying as not to present the same visual impact as that originally proposed under application Ref: 2009/0359.

The original vehicular access located in the south east corner of the site has been blocked and a new access has been created to the south west corner of the site. Whilst concerns have been raised in respect of the Tree Preservation Order relating to the Strawberry Tree at this location, the Councils Tree Officer has confirmed by way of a site visit that the tree would not be significantly affected by the works as constructed. Revised plans have been forthcoming that detail the correct location of the driveway to the east of the Strawberry Tree and in addition to this a retaining wall will be constructed and backfilled requiring no further excavation in a westerly direction. It is recommended that a suitable condition be imposed requiring further details of this to be submitted.

The councils Tree Preservation Officer has reviewed the Tree Report undertaken by the Consultant in conjunction with the revised plans and is satisfied that the Strawberry Tree would be sufficiently protected.

The plants and shrubs removed from the south west boundary of the site were transplanted to the previous opening and replanted at this location providing a range of mature vegetation to the boundary. Visually the works to the boundary are considered acceptable subject to the block work wall enclosing the original opening being clad in stone to match the adjoining wall sections at this location.

Turning to the impact upon residential amenity, it was considered under the previous proposal that given the location of the existing property approximately 1.0 Metres off the common boundary with No.34 West Cross Lane, approximately 2.0 metres off the common boundary with No.18 West Cross Lane at its closest point and approximately 2.0 metres off the common boundary with No.1 Grange Road that the increase in height of the property in question, would give rise to a harmful overbearing impact upon these properties. The present scheme has, however, been amended in such a way as to overcome these concerns.

In terms of the impact upon No. 18 West Cross Lane whilst the ridge height of the dwelling adjacent to this dwelling will increase, the effect of this would be offset by the hipping of the roof at this point so that the existing gable facing this property would be removed. As such it is not considered that the proposal will give rise to any significant increase in overbearing or overshadowing impacts upon this property. No additional fenestration is proposed to this elevation of the scheme and as such there are no additional overlooking impacts to consider in respect of this aspect of the proposal. The three dormer additions on the east facing roof plane, orientated towards the side amenity area of No.18 West Cross Lane, will not it is considered, given the nature of use of this area, the steep change in levels and the separation distance of approximately 16.0 metres to the boundary and approximately 21.0 meters to the side elevation of No.18, give rise to any additional unacceptable overlooking impacts. AREA 2 DEVELOPMENT CONTROL COMMITTEE – 4 MAY 2010

ITEM 2 (CONT’D) APPLICATION NO. 2009/1731

In respect of No.34 West Cross Lane, whilst the separation distance is limited it is not considered that any significant residential impacts will arise. The extant footprint of the bungalow would remain as is and the principle issue for consideration is whether the proposed increase in ridge height introduces significant additional overbearing or overshadowing impacts such that a recommendation of refusal may be warranted. Given the more elevated position of No.34 West Cross Lane relative to the application site and the path of the sun it is not considered that any significant overshadowing or overbearing impacts will arise.

The roof lights on the western roof plane would serve a bathroom and two bedrooms. However, they would be positioned high in the roof to ensure no overlooking and subject to the imposition of a condition requiring them to be positioned a minimum of 1.8 metres above internal floor levels no harmful overlooking would occur.

In terms of No.1 Grange Road, whilst the proposed scheme would be visible from the plot associated with this dwelling, particularly an elevated area of rear amenity space, it is considered that the topography of the site, separation distance and orientation of the dwelling would be sufficient to ensure that no significant impacts would be experienced that would prove detrimental to the residential amenity of the occupiers of this dwelling by virtue of overshadowing or overbearing effects. Similarly there are no additional windows that could overlook this property.

There are not considered to be any residential impacts arising from the alterations of the access and parking arrangements and the Head of Transportation and Engineering offers no objections subject to the construction of a vehicular crossing to Highway Authority Specification and the removal of the old access and reinstatement of the footway and the trimming back of overhanging vegetation to assist visibility.

In respect of the third party concerns raised those issues that are material to the determination of the application have been considered in the main body of the report above. Issues relating to the condition of retaining walls forming the boundary are covered by different legislation and an informative is recommended advising of responsibilities under the Party Wall Act.

CONCLUSION In light of the above considerations the proposal is considered to be acceptable in respect of its impact upon the character and appearance of the existing property and will not, it is considered detract from the visual amenities of the streetscene to which it relates. The scheme will not, on balance, have an unacceptable impact upon the residential amenities of neighbouring properties and the proposed development will therefore, it is considered comply with the requirements of Policies EV1 and HC7 of the City and County of Swansea Unitary Development Plan 2008 and the Council’s Design Guide for Householder Development. It is not considered that the provisions of the Human Rights Act raise any further material planning considerations, and approval is, therefore, recommended. AREA 2 DEVELOPMENT CONTROL COMMITTEE – 4 MAY 2010

ITEM 2 (CONT’D) APPLICATION NO. 2009/1731

RECOMMENDATION

APPROVE, subject to the following conditions

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

2 Within 3 months of the date of this permission the boundary wall fronting West Cross Lane shall be finished with stone to match the adjoining sections of wall. Reason: In the interest of visual amenity

3 Notwithstanding the plans hereby approved the rooflight windows in the west facing elevation orientated toward No.34 West Cross Lane shall be set a minimum of 1.8 metres above the internal floor level of the proposed accommodation in the roof space. Reason: In the interest of residential amenity and pivacy protection

4 Within 1 month of the date of this planning permission a scheme detailing the works for the retaining of the banks either side of the access shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The scheme shall be implemented in accordance with the approved details within 3 months of the date of this planning permission and thereafter retained as such. No further excavations shall be carried out to the west of the access drive. Reason: In order to safeguard the protected tree on site in the interest of visual amenity.

5 Within 1 month of the date of this planning permission a scheme for the trimming back and future maintenance of existing vegetation in the vicinity of the new access in order to improve visibility shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The scheme shall be implemented in accordance with the approved details within 3 months of the date of this planning permission. Reason: In order to improve visibility 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: EV1, HC7

2 The Developer must contact the Team Leader - Highways Management, City and County of Swansea (Highways), Players Industrial Estate, Clydach, Swansea. SA6 5BJ (Tel 01792 841601) before carrying out any work. AREA 2 DEVELOPMENT CONTROL COMMITTEE – 4 MAY 2010

ITEM 2 (CONT’D) APPLICATION NO. 2009/1731

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

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

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

6 PARTY WALL ETC ACT 1996

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

PLANS

34aWX/01 existing floor plans and elevations received 23rd November 2009. Amended plans 34aWX/03 Rev A block plan and proposed elevations received 8th February 2010

34aWX/01 existing floor plans and elevations received 23rd November 2009. Amended plans 34aWX/02 Rev B site location plan, proposed floor plan, roof plan and sections 34aWX/03 Rev B block plan and proposed elevations received 15th April 2010

AREA 2 DEVELOPMENT CONTROL COMMITTEE – 4 MAY 2010

ITEM 3 APPLICATION NO. 2010/0092 WARD: Gower Area 2

Location: Plot 1, Plenty Farm Llangennith Swansea Proposal: Detached dwelling with integral garage Applicant: Mr Gareth Howells

BACKGROUND INFORMATION

This application was DEFERRED at the Area 2 Development Control Committee on 13th April 2010 to enable photographs of the area to be displayed. My recommendation of refusal 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 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)

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)

SITE HISTORY

App No. Proposal 2007/0331 Detached dwelling with detached garage Decision: Grant Permission Conditional Decision Date: 24/04/2007

2004/0119 Erection of two dwellings Decision: Grant Permission Conditional Decision Date: 14/09/2004

AREA 2 DEVELOPMENT CONTROL COMMITTEE – 4 MAY 2010

ITEM 3 (CONT’D) APPLICATION NO. 2010/0092

2005/0529 Detached dwelling with detached garage (amendment to planning permission 2004/0119 granted on 14th August 2004) Decision: Refuse Decision Date: 28/06/2005

RESPONSE TO CONSULTATIONS

The application was advertised on site and in the press as a development within the Llangennith Conservation Area and which may affect the setting of a Listed Building. No response. ONE LETTER OF OBJECTION has been received, which is summarised as follows:

1. I do not object to the principle of a house on Plot 1 nor object to the design but question whether or not it is appropriate in a Conservation Area. 2. I do not agree with its positioning squashed into the corner of the plot and this will have a detrimental effect on the garden of my property and the house to the north west. 3. I would suggest a better siting would be more centrally located as per the original consent. 4. I am concerned as when I attempted to change the design on Plot 2, I was advised that the scheme as originally designed should not be changed dramatically and the distances to the boundary adhered to. 5. I thought hat Members would agree that consistency in design and planning issues would be vitally important to creating a cohesive and thoughtful environment, especially within a Conservation Area.

The Gower Society – Comments as follows:

1. This application shows a design which appears to be inappropriate for its location. 2. Plenty Farm has suffered from over-development of its site. 3. The original design was preferable to this latest design.

The Society still retains its grave concerns regarding this development and wishes its comments to be taken into account when a decision is reached.

Llangennith, Llanmadoc and Cheriton Community Council – The Community Council objects on the grounds that the proposed dwelling is too large for the size of plot and the design is out of keeping with the surrounding area (especially the listed part of Plenty Farm).

Highways Observations - The amended plot layout and revised access position is acceptable. I recommend no highway objections.

APPLICANT STATEMENT (summarised)

1. The house on plot 1 is not a traditional double fronted cottage but an executive style double fronted house. 2. How does the cottage on plot 2 relate to Plenty farm? Plenty Farm itself, whether Listed or not, has evolved with modern accommodation units, a restaurant and a car park replacing the former corrugated clad outbuildings and farmyard. AREA 2 DEVELOPMENT CONTROL COMMITTEE – 4 MAY 2010

ITEM 3 (CONT’D) APPLICATION NO. 2010/0092

3. The house previously approved on plot 1 hardly meets criteria for high design standards and the architect on this project has been the winner of the Lord Mayor’s Design Awards on 2 occasions. 4. There is no real traditional or local design distinctiveness in this part of the conservation area. 5. Does our proposal create any real differences in terms of it being unacceptably overbearing. It can always be sited a further from the boundary fence but will a few feet make any difference? 6. The main issues with regards to siting were to reduce the impact of the development on Rosedene who stood to lose much if its current outlook and the visual impact upon Cock Street will be reduced. These considerations should balance the concerns of additional overbearance. The revised design also takes away the detached garage on the boundary line. 7. The footprint of the previously approved scheme was larger. 8. Plot 2 has a larger footprint. 9. There are many diverse designs in this part of the conservation area so what character? 10. The report implies that the previously approved scheme was sensitively designed and the occupiers of those most affected thought the new scheme better thought out and better suited to the plot.

APPRAISAL

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

Full planning permission is sought for the erection of a detached dwelling with an integral garage on plot 1, on land adjoining Plenty Farm, Llangennith within the Llangennith Conservation Area. Outline planning permission was previously granted for two single dwellings with a detached garage on Plots 1 and 2 under application ref. 2004/0119. Details of siting, design, and external appearance for the dwellings were previously considered and granted planning permission at this outline stage. Members will recall that Plot 2 has already been approved and built under planning permission 2007/0331 granted in April 2007, albeit amended from that originally considered.

As outline permission has been granted for a house on this land, although now lapsed, it is considered that the principle of development has been established.

The main issues for consideration are the impact of the proposal on the setting of the Grade II Listed “Plenty Farm”, the impact on the character and appearance of the Llangennith Conservation Area and this part of the Gower Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty, it’s impact on the residential amenities of the occupiers of neighbouring dwellings, and on highway safety, having regard to the prevailing policies of the Development Plan, and recent national planning policy guidance provided by Planning Policy Wales 2002. It is not considered that the Human Rights Act raises any additional material considerations in this case.

AREA 2 DEVELOPMENT CONTROL COMMITTEE – 4 MAY 2010

ITEM 3 (CONT’D) APPLICATION NO. 2010/0092

Plot 1 currently comprises an area of rough land located between Plenty Farm and the dwelling to the east known as Rosedene. As previously considered the site has a highway frontage of approximately 35 metres and has a maximum depth of approximately 40m along the eastern boundary whilst having a maximum depth of approximately 18m along its western boundary with Plenty Farm.

The proposed dwelling would be set into the north western corner of the site, set back between 17-20m from the front boundary, approximately 2m from the western boundary with Rosedene, 2m from the common boundary with the new dwelling on Plot 2 and approximately 20m from the boundary with Plenty Farm. The two storey design comprises of a series of distinct components resulting in an irregular angular footprint. External features include a front dormer window to the southern elevation and a first floor balcony to the eastern elevation. The integral garage would be located within the southern elevation. The maximum width and depth of the dwelling would be approximately 12m, with varied eaves height and a maximum overall height of 7.4m. The proposed materials would comprise of rendered walls, slate roof and timber effect or white Upvc windows and doors.

The proposed access into the site would be inserted alongside the common boundary with Rosedene, essentially handed from that previously approved, and to this the Head of Transportation and Engineering raises no highway objection.

The original design comprised a traditionally designed double fronted cottage sited centrally within the plot with a detached garage to the west of the front elevation. This design was akin to that proposed on the adjacent Plot 2 and together these designs were considered to be acceptable and not adversely impact upon the Llangennith Conservation Area or the setting of the Listed Building at Plenty Farm.

Within the Gower AONB the primary objective of this designation is the preservation of the natural beauty of this area. The Council wishes to foster high standards of design in all new development, and this is reinforced by Planning Policy Wales 2002, which states that within AONBs, the primary objective of this designation is the preservation of the natural beauty of this area, and development control decisions affecting the AONB should respect this by considering the importance of traditional and local distinctiveness.

The principal relevant development plan policies are Policies EV1 and EV16 of the Unitary Development Plan 2008. Policy EV9 requires development proposals within Conservation Areas to preserve and enhance the character and appearance of the Conservation Area in terms of their design, scale, massing, materials and relationship to existing buildings and spaces. Policy EV16 lists similar criteria for new development within small Gower villages, and Policy EV1 seeks to preserve the setting of Listed Buildings.

In addition, Policy EV1 require that the design and layout of new development proposals should respect and be sympathetic to the character and amenity of the site and its immediate surroundings, and protect the amenity currently enjoyed by neighbouring residents. As such proposals need to be carefully assimilated into the existing environment through the use of appropriate scale and detailing of buildings and use of good quality materials, and ensure that there is no unacceptable visual impact, loss of light or privacy, increased activity and traffic movements or car parking problems.

AREA 2 DEVELOPMENT CONTROL COMMITTEE – 4 MAY 2010

ITEM 3 (CONT’D) APPLICATION NO. 2010/0092

In terms of residential amenity, the siting of the dwelling in close proximity to the boundary with Plot 2 would result in some overshadowing of their rear amenity space, albeit to the western most section. However, the plot in question is elevated above plot 2 and it is considered that as it’s siting within 2m of the common boundary, it would appear unacceptably overbearing when viewed from Plot 2. With regards to direct overlooking, a first floor bedroom window would directly look into the rear garden area of Plot 2, but this could be obscure glazed to protect their privacy. The balcony on the south-eastern elevation, which would also cause unacceptable loss of privacy, could also have a screen inserted along its northern boundary to prevent direct overlooking to these occupiers.

The distance to the boundary with Plenty Farm would be approximately 20m and as such it is not considered that the proposed balcony would result in unacceptable loss of privacy to the occupiers. There are two first floor windows that would directly overlook the amenity space of Rosedene, but as one would serve an en-suite bathroom and one would be a secondary bedroom window, these again could be obscure glazed to prevent loss of privacy. It is considered also the height of the dwelling and its siting in relation to Rosedene would dictate that it would not give rise to unacceptable physical overbearance.

The revised design and layout of the proposed dwelling would not increase the overall footprint significantly of that previously approved due to its eclectic design and the removal of the detached garage, but whilst the original two storey house was considered acceptable in the context of the neighbouring cottage and listed farmhouse, the current application proposes an unacceptable design which will introduce a large suburban style house that dominates the site, and will seriously detract from the character and appearance of the surrounding more modest buildings. This design and layout is considered alien in the immediate context of this site, and would seriously depart from the established character, form, and density of development in this sensitive setting to the detriment of the character of the Llangennith Conservation area. It is not considered that this scheme has been sensitively designed to take account of the prominent location of this site and the resultant visual impact on the immediate environs and the surrounding context of the Llangennith Conservation Area. In addition, the dwelling would be elevated above the highway by approximately 1.75m and as a result, the new development would be a visually prominent building in this landscape, unsympathetic to the character and appearance of this part of the Llangennith Conservation Area, which is to a large extent typified by more modest cottage style properties.

On this basis, the proposed development of this land at Plot 1 would result in a visually dominant and obtrusive form of infill development, which would not positively enhance the character and appearance of Llangennith Conservation Area, thus detracting from the natural beauty of this part of the Gower AONB, contrary to Policies EV1, EV9, EV16 and EV26. The comments made by the objectors have been addressed above in the main body of the report.

In conclusion, having regard to the above considerations including the Human Rights Act, it is considered that the proposed amendments to the previously approved house at Plot 2 are not acceptable, and would result in a visually obtrusive and insensitive ‘suburban style’ of house development that has not been designed carefully to either preserve or enhance the character and appearance of the Llangennith Conservation Area, and the natural beauty of this part of the Gower AONB, and would result in unacceptable harm to the amenities currently enjoyed by neighbouring residents. AREA 2 DEVELOPMENT CONTROL COMMITTEE – 4 MAY 2010

ITEM 3 (CONT’D) APPLICATION NO. 2010/0092

As such the proposal is not considered a satisfactory form of infill development in this Gower Village, and is therefore contrary to Policies EV1, EV9, EV16 and EV26 of the Unitary Development Plan 2008 and refusal is recommended.

RECOMMENDATION

REFUSE, for the following reasons:

1 The proposed dwelling house, by virtue of its prominent siting and inappropriate design would fail to preserve or enhance the character and appearance of the Llangennith Conservation Area, to the detriment of the natural beauty of this part of the Gower AONB contrary to Policies EV1, EV9, EV16 and EV26 of the Unitary Development Plan 2008.

2 The proposed dwelling by virtue of its scale and siting so close to the boundary with Plot 2 would result in a harmful physical overbearing impact that would be detrimental to the amenities currently enjoyed by the occupiers of this property contrary to Policies EV1 and EV16 of the 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: EV1, EV9, EV16, EV26

PLANS

Design and access statement, site location plan, DWG No DD.00- site layout plan as approved, DD.01- site layout plan (as proposed), DD.02- ground floor plan and first floor plan 1:100, DD.03- proposed north & north east elevation and west elevation, DD.04- east & north east elevation and, DD.05- proposed ground floor plan 1:50, DD.06- proposed first floor plan 1:50 received 20th January 2010

AREA 2 DEVELOPMENT CONTROL COMMITTEE – 4 MAY 2010

ITEM 4 APPLICATION NO. 2009/0892 WARD: Sketty Area 2

Location: Bloomfield Nursing Home 129 Gower Road Sketty Swansea SA2 9HU Proposal: Three storey front extension, front roof extension with two front dormers, two storey rear extension and rear dormer Applicant: JJL Care Ltd

The application was DEFERRED FOR A SITE VISIT at the Area 2 Development Control Committee on 13th April 2010 to assess the impact of the height of the development given its proximity to neighbouring residents. My recommendation of approval remains unchanged.

BACKGROUND INFORMATION

POLICIES

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

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

SITE HISTORY

App No. Proposal 2002/0252 Erection of a detached dwelling house and garage Decision: Grant Permission Conditional Decision Date: 14/05/2002

2002/2199 Rear dormer roof extension Decision: Refuse Decision Date: 04/03/2003

2007/1357 Replacement single storey side extension Decision: Grant Permission Conditional Decision Date: 09/08/2007

2009/0857 Single storey rear extension Decision: Grant Permission Conditional Decision Date: 07/08/2009 AREA 2 DEVELOPMENT CONTROL COMMITTEE – 4 MAY 2010

ITEM 4 (CONT’D) APPLICATION NO. 2009/0892

A01/0196 Erection of 2 detached dwelling houses (outline) (amendment to outline planning permission 98/1426 granted on 5 September 2000) Decision: Grant Permission Conditional Decision Date: 22/05/2001

2003/2364 Rear conservatory Decision: Grant Permission Conditional Decision Date: 19/01/2004

98/1426 ERECTION OF 2 No DETACHED DWELLING HOUSES (OUTLINE) Decision: *HGPC - GRANT PERMISSION CONDITIONAL Decision Date: 05/09/2000

74/1084/03 RESIDENTIAL - 6 FLATS Decision: *HGPC - GRANT PERMISSION CONDITIONAL Decision Date: 16/05/1975

2004/1858 External lift shaft and porch on front elevation, single storey rear extension and erection of four canopies Decision: Grant Permission Conditional Decision Date: 22/10/2004

RESPONSE TO CONSULTATIONS

ORIGINAL SCHEME

The application was advertised on site and fourteen individual properties were consulted. THREE LETTERS OF OBJECTION and a PETITION OF OBJECTION with 24 signatures have been received, which are summarised as follows:

1. Gower Road is a road that is too busy to take more heavy traffic with daily deliveries, visitors and workers at the Nursing Home. 2. Lorries and vans park on the pavement outside Bloomfield and does not help with the flow of traffic with children having to cross the other side of the road and pushchairs cannot pass. 3. The entrance to Bloomfield is too small and when traffic comes out the drivers cannot see any pedestrians coming up and down the pavement. 4. The proposal will block my sunshine and would invade my privacy from the rear. 5. The extension will be very close to my boundary and being a three storey building with dormers I will be overlooked very closely on both sides. 6. There will be a lot more noise from tenants and staff.

Highways Observations – “This proposed extension will result in an additional 5 bedrooms totalling of 31 bedrooms. Parking is indicated at 19 spaces whereas guidelines recommend a need for 8 visitor spaces and one space per 3 members of staff. AREA 2 DEVELOPMENT CONTROL COMMITTEE – 4 MAY 2010

ITEM 4 (CONT’D) APPLICATION NO. 2009/0892

Details submitted with the application confirm that there will be 23 full time and 10 part time staff and therefore sufficient parking will be available to cover this number, however, it is unlikely that all staff will be present at the same time as shift working is normally undertaken at such establishments. I am satisfied that adequate parking is being provided and recommend that no highway objections are raised.”

AMENDED PLANS (where a rear window has been relocated and the external materials changed).

Fifteen individual properties were consulted. No response to date.

APPRAISAL

This application is reported to Committee for decision at the request of Councillor June Stanton.

Full planning permission is sought for a three storey front extension, a front roof extension with two front dormers, a rear dormer and a two storey rear extension at Bloomfield Nursing Home, 129, Gower Road, Sketty. The proposal would provide six bedrooms and two bathrooms within the rear extension with the rear dormer providing an additional bathroom window, the front extension providing an elevator shaft (and the removal of one second floor bedroom to provide access to it on this floor) with the two front dormers facilitating an increase in size of two first floor bedrooms.

The front extension would measure approximately 2.8m in width, 9m in depth with a maximum overall height of 8.9m. The two first floor front dormers would each measure approximately 1.9m in width, 2.5m in depth and have a maximum height of 2.3m. The two storey rear extension would measure approximately 9m in width, 9.5m in depth with an eaves height and overall hipped roof height matching that of the existing building. The rear second floor dormer would measure approximately 1.4m in width, 2m in depth with a height of 1.5m. Both the front and rear extensions would be externally clad in painted render and no external materials are specified for the dormers, but this could be controlled by condition in order to ensure that they do not detract from the character and appearance of the area.

The main issues to be considered are the impact of the proposal upon the visual amenities of the existing building and the street scene together with its impact upon the residential amenities of surrounding occupiers and highway safety having regard to the prevailing Development Plan.

In terms of visual amenity, it is recognised that both the front and rear extensions have a substantial depth. However, when these extensions are viewed in the context of the Nursing Home itself which is made up of buildings of varying size scale and massing, it is not considered that they will appear unacceptably prominent or as discordant features upon the host buildings. The materials proposed would dictate that they would relate well to the overall appearance of the existing buildings and blend in with the variety of materials previously used which combine both red brick and painted render. The dormers by virtue of their limited scale and appropriate design would be acceptable in visual terms.

AREA 2 DEVELOPMENT CONTROL COMMITTEE – 4 MAY 2010

ITEM 4 (CONT’D) APPLICATION NO. 2009/0892

The rear extension is sited closer to the properties at 137 and 139 Gower Road, where loss of privacy could be an issue from the first floor windows. However, amended plans have been submitted where one of the first floor windows has been relocated to the side elevation. It is acknowledged that one first floor window will still be sited in the rear elevation, but the distance between the window and the common boundary with no.137 Gower Road is in the region of 9m to 10m, which together with the existence of a 3.2m high wall at the boundary would prevent any unacceptable direct overlooking of their garden area. There are two bedroom windows in the side elevation of no.137, facing towards the nursing home but the distance to the new window in the rear extension of the Nursing home is between 18m and 20m and the angles between the windows would dictate that no significant loss of privacy would be occur. In addition, the wall between the two properties from the ground level of the nursing home measures in excess of 3.2m, with additional tree growth behind it and as such, these factors are sufficient to mitigate any harmful impact. As no windows are proposed in the side elevation facing the western boundary of the nursing home, no direct overlooking would occur here.

The Nursing home is located to the south of the properties in Gower Road and to the east of the properties in Glan Yr Afon Gardens therefore it is not considered that the rear extension would result in any overshadowing or loss of light significantly over and above that which is currently experienced.

All of the other elements of the development are considered to be far enough away from adjoining properties so as not to cause any harmful effects from any overbearing, overshadowing and overlooking. In terms of highway safety, the Head of Transportation and Engineering raises no highway objection as it is considered that adequate parking is being provided.

Turning to the objection letters received and the comments made with regards to loss of light, privacy, and traffic implications, these issues have been addressed above.

In conclusion therefore it is considered that, on balance, the proposal is an acceptable form of development at this location that complies with the requirements of Policies EV1 and EV2 of the Unitary Development Plan 2008 and approval is recommended.

RECOMMENDATION

APPROVE, subject to the following conditions:

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

2 Notwithstanding the details on the plans hereby approved, the front and rear dormers shall be clad in tile hanging to match the existing roof. Reason: In the interests of visual amenity. AREA 2 DEVELOPMENT CONTROL COMMITTEE – 4 MAY 2010

ITEM 4 (CONT’D) APPLICATION NO. 2009/0892

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

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

3 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.

4 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.

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).

6 Birds may be present in this building and grounds. 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.

7 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, Drawing No: F20.BNH.D1- Rev A- existing elevations, F20.BNH.D2 Rev A- existing floor plans received 5thy August 2009. Amended plans - F20.BNH.D3 Rev F - proposed elevations, F20.BNH.D4 Rev D - proposed lower ground & ground floor plans, F20.BNH.D5 Rev D - proposed first & second floor plans, F20.BNH.D6 Rev E - proposed block plan received 19th February 2010.

AREA 2 DEVELOPMENT CONTROL COMMITTEE – 4 MAY 2010

ITEM 5 APPLICATION NO. 2009/1599 WARD: Gower Area 2

Location: Land at Oxwich Bay Hotel, Oxwich, Swansea, SA3 1LS Proposal: Extend the period of temporary permitted use for marquee and associated overspill car park to include the period commencing 1st November 2009 and ceasing on 31st March 2011 including alterations to colour of marquee between the beginning of December and end of February within this period Applicant: Mr I Williams

BACKGROUND INFORMATION

This application was DEFERRED FOR A SITE VISIT at Area 2 Development Control Committee on 16th March 2010 to assess the impact of the development given that the structure is already in situ.

The application was further DEFERRED at the Area 2 Development Control Committee on 13th April 2010 to enable the submission of additional information.

The report has been updated further following correspondence received from the agent on behalf of the applicant requesting an amendment to the proposal as follows:

“We therefore formally propose that the marquee continue unchanged in colour for the months of November and March, with an olive roof to be affixed for the months of December to February. None of these revisions will affect our original position that the whole assembly is demountable and not a permanent structure. Retention of the white colour for the extended summer months will also enhance the lightness within the marquee and prevent excessive solar gain. It is also proposed that the colour of the oriental entrance remain unchanged throughout the year. We consider that this proposal will meet your aesthetic concerns and will also provide support for the local tourist economy at this time of recession.”

The application description has been amended to reflect the proposed change in the colour of the marquee and the report has been updated accordingly. The recommendation of refusal 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 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).

AREA 2 DEVELOPMENT CONTROL COMMITTEE – 4 MAY 2010

ITEM 5 (CONT’D) APPLICATION NO. 2009/1599

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 EV11 Development will not be permitted that would harm the character or setting of a registered Historic Park or Garden or the character of an Historic Landscape. (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)

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)

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. (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 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 EV31 Along the undeveloped coastline development proposals for the provision of visitor and recreation facilities and services to complement existing facilities will be permitted at specified coastal locations. (City & County of Swansea Unitary Development Plan 2008)

AREA 2 DEVELOPMENT CONTROL COMMITTEE – 4 MAY 2010

ITEM 5 (CONT’D) APPLICATION NO. 2009/1599

Policy EV40 Development proposals will not be permitted that would cause or result in significant harm to health, local amenity, natural heritage, the historic environment or landscape character because of significant levels of air, noise or light pollution. (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 pattern 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)

SITE HISTORY

App No. Proposal 2008/2185 Temporary siting of marquee and associated overspill car park from 1 February 2009 to 31 October 2009 Decision: Grant Temporary Permission Decision Date: 15/01/2009

98/0565 ENGINEERING OPERATIONS TO REPROFILE OPEN MEADOW TO FORM A PLATEAU FOR THE TEMPORARY SITING OF A MARQUEE WITH ASSOCIATED ACCESS WAY AND LAND DRAINAGE WORKS Decision: *HRP - REFUSE PERMISSION Decision Date: 14/07/1998

98/1207 RETENTION OF LAND DRAINAGE WORKS, ALTERATIONS TO FIELD ACCESS AND REPROFILING OF PLATEAU AREA Decision: *HGPC - GRANT PERMISSION CONDITIONAL Decision Date: 09/03/1999

2004/1741 Siting of temporary marquee April to September inclusive and December, and associated overspill car park Decision: Grant Temporary Permission Decision Date: 11/08/2005

2005/2635 Submission of details for conditions 3 and 5 of planning permission 2004/1741 granted on 11th April 2005 to show new hedge and background lighting for the marquee and overspill car park Decision: Withdrawn Decision Date: 28/03/2008

AREA 2 DEVELOPMENT CONTROL COMMITTEE – 4 MAY 2010

ITEM 5 (CONT’D) APPLICATION NO. 2009/1599

2006/2781 Temporary siting of marquee from April to September 2007 and December 2007, associated overspill car park and landscaping. Decision: Grant Temporary Permission Decision Date: 15/05/2007

2008/0064 Temporary siting of marquee and associated overspill car park from April to September 2008 and December 2008 Decision: Grant Temporary Permission Decision Date: 04/03/2008

81/0794/01 ERECTION OF A HOTEL Decision: *HRP - REFUSE PERMISSION Decision Date: 30/07/1981

77/0087/03 ERECTION OF A LOUNGE BAR AMD LOUNGE Decision: *HRP - REFUSE PERMISSION Decision Date: 31/03/1977

84/1288/03 ADDITION OF NEW ENTRANCE PORCHES,BAY WINDOWS,EXTRA TOILET ACCOMMODATION AND GENERAL ALTERATIONS AND IMPROVEMENTS. Decision: *HGPCU - GRANT PERMISSION UNCONDITIONAL Decision Date: 29/11/1984

84/1600/12 RELAXATION OF CONDITION (B) ON PREVIOUS APPROVAL 82/1383/11 REFERRING TO NO COACHES OR CHARABANCS BEING ALLOWED TO ENTER SITE. Decision: *HGPC - GRANT PERMISSION CONDITIONAL Decision Date: 31/01/1985

79/0923/01 ERECTION OF A DETACHED BUNGALOW AND EXTENSION OF CARAVAN SITE Decision: *HRP - REFUSE PERMISSION Decision Date: 30/08/1979

74/0476/03 CHANGE OF USE FROM BAR TO RESTAURANT AND ERECTION OF TOILETS Decision: *HGPCU - GRANT PERMISSION UNCONDITIONAL Decision Date: 26/09/1974

74/0500/01 ERECTION OF A CLUBHOUSE Decision: *HRP - REFUSE PERMISSION Decision Date: 26/09/1974

AREA 2 DEVELOPMENT CONTROL COMMITTEE – 4 MAY 2010

ITEM 5 (CONT’D) APPLICATION NO. 2009/1599

85/0812/12 RELAXATION OF CONDITION 'C' ON PREVIOUS CONSENT RELATING TO USE FOR MUSIC DANCING AND OUTSIDE FUNCTIONS SUCH AS WEDDING RECEPTIONS. Decision: *HGPC - GRANT PERMISSION CONDITIONAL Decision Date: 25/07/1985

86/0082/12 RELAXATION OF CONDITION 'E' ON CONSENT FOR MUSIC AND DANCING + OUTSIDE FUNCTIONS, (2/1/85/0812/12). Decision: Withdraw Decision Date: 18/03/1986

86/0359/03 USE OF BUILDING (HOTEL) FOR MUSIC AND DANCING IN CONNECTION WITH PRIVATE FUNCTIONS. Decision: *HGPC - GRANT PERMISSION CONDITIONAL Decision Date: 26/06/1986

86/1566/03 EXTENSION TO EXISTING KITCHENS. Decision: *HGPC - GRANT PERMISSION CONDITIONAL Decision Date: 29/01/1987

75/1329/03 ENLARGEMENT OF EXISTING BAR AND CONSTRUCTION OF BEER CELLAR. ADDITION OF RECEPTION AREA AND NEW DRAINAGE SYSTEM Decision: *HGPC - GRANT PERMISSION CONDITIONAL Decision Date: 25/03/1976

89/1470/03 ALTERATIONS AND EXTENSIONS TO HOTEL PREMISES. Decision: *HGPC - GRANT PERMISSION CONDITIONAL Decision Date: 15/12/1989

90/0500/03 SITING OF PORTAKABIN AND FLOODLIGHTS Decision: Withdraw Decision Date: 25/03/1996

90/1260/03 ERECTION OF GARAGE, CAR PORT + SCREENING TO SERVICE AREA, HUT AND BARRIER TO EXISTING CAR PARK, HEIGHTENING OF ROOF STORE + PROVISION OF ACCESS. Decision: DEFERRAL AT AREA PLANNING CMTE Decision Date: 13/11/1990

91/0088/03 ERECTION OF WALL Decision: *HGPC - GRANT PERMISSION CONDITIONAL Decision Date: 29/04/1991

AREA 2 DEVELOPMENT CONTROL COMMITTEE – 4 MAY 2010

ITEM 5 (CONT’D) APPLICATION NO. 2009/1599

91/1506 ERECTION OF STORM PORCH WITH FIRST FLOOR CONSERVATORY Decision: *HGPC - GRANT PERMISSION CONDITIONAL Decision Date: 25/02/1992

96/0906 FIRST FLOOR EXTENSION INCORPORATING NEW BALCONY, SINGLE STOREY CONSERVATORY EXTENSION AND NEW PORCH AND BALCONY ON FRONT (EAST) ELEVATION, ALTERATIONS TO ELEVATIONS, EXTENSION TO ROOF AND CONSTRUCTION OF FIRST Decision: *HGPC - GRANT PERMISSION CONDITIONAL Decision Date: 13/01/1998

94/1316 EXTENSION OF EXISTING PORCH, ERECTION OF NEW STAIRWELL AND FORMATION OF RAISED GARDEN Decision: *HGPC - GRANT PERMISSION CONDITIONAL Decision Date: 07/02/1995

96/0724 ALTERATION TO EXISTING ACCESS AND FORMATION OF NEW CAR PARKING AREA Decision: *HGPC - GRANT PERMISSION CONDITIONAL Decision Date: 21/01/1998

RESPONSE TO CONSULTATIONS

The application was advertised on site and in the press as a Departure from the Development Plan and a development within a Conservation Area and four neighbouring properties were individually consulted. NO RESPONSE.

The Gower Society: We object to this application as it stands.

We refer to the above application that we have examined, and also visited the site. We now have the following comments to make:

1. This latest application is very late in its submission; we note planning application 2008/2185 which expressly gave permission for the siting of the marquee from 1 April – 31 October until 2011. The date of the approval letter was 15th January 2009. 2. We accept that the Hotel is a popular venue and that the marquee adds to the local economy. However, it is extremely conspicuous addition in the landscape. 3. The facility has been allowed on a more or less 6 monthly basis since about 2001; the application if allowed, would put this structure in danger of becoming a fixed and permanent addition to the hotel. 4. We strongly suspect that as the main wedding season is not during the winter period, that this application may be angled at reduction the cost of removal and re- erection when complying with the existing planning permission. 5. The use of such a facility over the winter months poses many questions – in particular, the ones of sustainability relating to winter heating. AREA 2 DEVELOPMENT CONTROL COMMITTEE – 4 MAY 2010

ITEM 5 (CONT’D) APPLICATION NO. 2009/1599

6. We have repeatedly commented on the conspicuous nature of this marquee and we note the applicant’s statements regarding a more suitable colour for a prominent feature in an AONB. 7. We reiterate these views – any extension of the existing permission adds to the visual impact on the AONB, where it can be seen from Cefn Bryn, Penmaen and Pennard. 8. We fully appreciate the contribution that the Hotel makes to tourism and the local economy, but these factors should not overrule planning legislation meant to protect the AONB. The owners could consider, for instance, relocating the marquee to the rear of the hotel (or further toward the village) where its visual impact would be greatly reduced.

Environment Agency – No objection to the proposed development. Standard informatives should be taken into consideration.

Countryside Council for Wales – The proposal is within or may affect the Gower Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty (AONB). We remind you of your Council’s duty under Section 85 of the Countryside and Rights of Way Act 2000 which requires Local Authorities to have regard to the purposes of conserving and enhancing the natural beauty of the AONB. The statutory purposes of Areas of Outstanding Natural Beauty are conservation and enhancement of natural beauty.

Highways Observations - The application is for the extension of temporary consent to site a marquee and associated overspill car parking. There have been no reported issues as a result of the temporary permission and the temporary overspill parking area is considered to be beneficial when events are being held at the site. This ensures that no extraneous parking takes place within the village.

I recommend no highway objections be raised.

Supporting Statement from applicant Mr Ian Williams, Proprietor, Oxwich Bay Hotel

In support of our planning application that is due to be placed before the planning committee I would like to bring you up to date with the present operating position.

The Marquee Venue as well as the supporting services reflect a considerable investment. This has been made out of our finances and borrowed fund, with there being no introduction of grant monies from any source either local or national.

This investment will lead to increasing number of patrons that could easily approach ten thousand people visiting the facilities from all over the world in the next twelve months. At the same time in the region of forty eight staff will be required to provide the attendant services as well as make a substantial contribution approaching £1m (one million) being injected into the local economy.

The additional generation of business is leading to up grading and modernisation of facilities in the main area of the hotel. This also has been funded without grant aid and secures twenty six jobs, creates six new jobs and three specialist posts.

AREA 2 DEVELOPMENT CONTROL COMMITTEE – 4 MAY 2010

ITEM 5 (CONT’D) APPLICATION NO. 2009/1599

Current economic pressures are making trade difficult. Evidence would suggest that it has never been easy with some twenty hotels having ceased to operate in the South Gower / Mumbles area in the past twenty five years. As a family we have made the positive decision to invest in providing greater value for money, through enhanced services. This will hopefully keep the public “ spend “ in the locality as against the money going outside Swansea / Gower area, even South Wales, completely.

APPRAISAL

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

The application site is situated on land at Oxwich Bay Hotel. This field site (Field No. 2821) is located to the south east of the hotel at the southern end of Oxwich Bay. The site is located on the beach side of the prominent headland at Oxwich Point, both within the Oxwich Village Conservation Area, and close to the listed church of St Illtyds, and adjacent to the Gower Ash Woods Special Area of Conservation.

Retrospective planning permission is sought for the retention of the existing marquee and associated overspill car park throughout the winter periods for a continuous period until 31st October, 2011.

Planning permission was previously granted on the 15th January, 2009, for the temporary siting of this marquee at this site (Ref: 2008/2185), subject to conditions including Condition 01, as follows:-

“Notwithstanding the provisions of Section 91 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 and the Town and Country Planning (General Permitted Development) Order 1995, this permission is for a limited period expiring on 31st October 2011. During this period the marquee hereby approved shall only be used between the 1st April and 31st October (inclusive) in any year, and shall be removed in its entirety from the planning unit between the 1st November and 31st March in any year”.

Members are advised that notwithstanding the above conditional requirement, the marquee has not been removed and is still erected on site. In response to discussions with the case officer, the applicant has recently submitted a supporting written statement, copied in full above, to justify not removing the marquee.

In terms of its overall size and siting the marquee currently on site is different to the one that was granted temporary planning permission under planning application 2008/2185 so it is currently unauthorised. The approved marquee was mainly in two sections measuring 27m by 12m and 18m by 9m (486m2), however the marquee as erected is in one main section measuring 30m by 12m (324m2). Further investigation on site has also revealed that the structure has a degree of permanency that was not clarified or considered during the determination of the previous approval, including hardstandings and associated paths constructed to the front entrance to the marquee and around the sides and rear of marquee, as well as fixed connections to power supplies. There has also been a significant amount of unauthorised engineering operations. The marquee has an integral kitchen and toilets and as such could be considered a stand alone development that need not rely on the existing hotel for services or facilities.

AREA 2 DEVELOPMENT CONTROL COMMITTEE – 4 MAY 2010

ITEM 5 (CONT’D) APPLICATION NO. 2009/1599

Related Planning History

Prior to the above approval last year, the application site had been used for approximately ten years to site a temporary marquee (albeit smaller than the current proposal) during the summer months. Originally in the late 1990s, planning permission was not required for the marquee because the tent was not erected for more than 28 days in any year, and as such was permitted development for the purposes of Part 4 of Schedule 2 of the Town and Country Planning (General Permitted Development) Order 1995. However, retrospective planning permission was granted in March 1999 (application ref. 98/1207) for the associated engineering and re-profiling works that had been carried out unlawfully to this former wildflower meadow.

In 2005, planning permission was granted for the retention of a temporary marquee that had been erected at that time (application ref. 2004/1741). This marquee was smaller than the current proposal but was granted temporary planning permission for the months of April to September and the month of December, and was removed in the intervening periods with the field restored to its original state. A similar application was also approved under 2006/2781 for the 2007 season.

Prior to last year, therefore, the marquee was substantially smaller than the current structure in overall size and height, and the land was restored to a green field site during the winter. Moreover, the former site was well screened by a hedgerow on the beach side along the north eastern facing boundary of the site, which helped screen this smaller structure especially during the summer months.

Policy Considerations

The main issues to be considered are whether the retention and continuous use of the current marquee throughout the winter months until 31st October 2011 (as well as the authorised summer months) would cause material harm to the character and appearance of the countryside and rural landscape of the designated Gower Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty and Oxwich Village Conservation Area, and the setting of nearby listed Church of St. Illtyds, having regard to the prevailing policies of the Unitary Development Plan and National planning guidance. It is not considered that the provisions of the Human Rights Act raise any other overriding considerations.

Recent Central Government policy guidance, provided by Planning Policy Wales 2002 and its supporting Technical Advice Notes set out the overarching critical principles and objectives in respect of sustainability, biodiversity, design and tourism, which are applied to reinforce the policies of the Unitary Development Plan. Within AONBs the primary objective of this designation is the conservation and enhancement of their natural beauty although it will also be appropriate to have regard to the economic and social well-being of the area. In addition, the effect of development proposals on the wildlife or landscape of any area can be a material consideration. The Council has a statutory duty to have regard to the AONB purposes and protect the landscape and scenic quality (Countryside and Rights of Way Act 2000). The above National Planning Policy Guidance recognises that the Countryside Council for Wales LANDMAP provides nationally consistent data on landscape assessment in Wales.

AREA 2 DEVELOPMENT CONTROL COMMITTEE – 4 MAY 2010

ITEM 5 (CONT’D) APPLICATION NO. 2009/1599

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.

An analysis of the Visual and Sensory data for South Gower concludes that the application site falls within an area with the following ‘landscape receptors’: a gently rolling landscape where there is an overall high scenic quality (picturesque views of coast), with attractive views both in and out(views of coast/cliffs from some viewpoints) and high character (strong sense of place), where the open landscape and field/hedge character should be retained and conserved, and tourism influence should be changed. This is reinforced by the cultural landscape data for Oxwich Bay/Oxwich area, which recognises the national importance of Oxwich Bay as a “honey pot” destination for holiday makers throughout the UK and overseas. It describes the aspect area as ‘a three-mile crescent of gently-sloping white sand that culminates in the east with Great Tor. Within that area are two spectacular headlands and several castles. The village and the area is dominated by the leisure industry, though its history is still evident…the Oxwich Bay Hotel, a former 18th century rectory now utterly spoiled by modern additions’. The recommendations include the immediate improvement of the appearance of beach buildings and caravan parks.

The landscape, geological and historical layers of LANDMAP add to the above baseline data. The landscape data confirms that apart from being with the Gower AONB, the application site is close to sites of international importance and adjacent to a high value area of semi-natural broadleaved woodland ‘Woods at Oxwich Point’ which is regarded as high priority habitat supporting high levels of biodiversity within SSSI.

In conclusion, this baseline data highlights the landscape constraints, landscape value, and local landscape character of this area and underlines that the application site is in an area of high scenic quality and character, which should be retained and conserved, and tourism influence should be denied to protect these qualities.

In rural areas, PPW 2002 states that tourism is an essential element in providing for a healthy, diverse, local economy, but the scale and nature of such development must be sensitive to the local environment.

The Unitary Development Plan for Swansea was adopted on the 10th November, 2008, and in line with the above national planning policy guidance, the relevant objectives and policies seek to protect the countryside and sensitive areas of high landscape quality in Gower AONB from development that would cause material harm, particularly where the undeveloped coastline or other areas of high landscape quality are concerned. The Local Planning Authority seeks to protect the environment and landscape of Gower AONB and Oxwich Village Conservation Area through the application of Strategic Part 1 Policies SP1, SP2, and SP3 and Part 2 Policies EV1, EV2, EV9, EV11, EV21, EV22, EV25, EV26, EV31, EV40 are relevant to this application. In addition, Policy EC17 regarding rural tourism has also been considered in respect of this application.

AREA 2 DEVELOPMENT CONTROL COMMITTEE – 4 MAY 2010

ITEM 5 (CONT’D) APPLICATION NO. 2009/1599

In this particular case, because the application site is located in a particularly sensitive coastal location with the Gower AONB and the Oxwich Conservation Area, careful consideration has to be given to the need to cater for increased visitor and tourism needs against the need to safeguard the visual character and appearance and environmental capital of the Gower landscape, so that it is preserved for the benefit of future generations. The Gower Peninsula is recognised internationally as a most important visitor attraction, however if development is not carefully controlled there is a risk of destroying the very qualities which constitute its attraction.

Visual Impact

Although the application site lies within the grounds of Oxwich Bay Hotel, it is separated from the main hotel complex by a distance of approximately 76m, and is seen in the context of the surrounding countryside setting, including the wide sweep of Oxwich beach and bay to the north, and the backcloth of the Gower Ash Woods SAC to the south. In addition the marquee has to be considered in the context of the setting of the neighbouring CADW listed St Illtyds Church situated approximately 90m to the south east of the application site.

The application field site is naturally an integral part of the surrounding highly valued landscape and an intrinsic part of the character of this edge of woodland and beach location. Whilst it is acknowledged that the current marquee facility provides an improved facility for the hotel in providing a separate venue for weddings, it must also be assessed against the need to conserve the special landscape qualities of the Gower AONB.

As referred to above, 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.

An analysis of the relevant Visual and Sensory data for South Gower concludes that the application site falls within an area where there is an overall high scenic quality (picturesque views of coast), with attractive views both in and out (views of coast/cliffs from some viewpoints) and high character (strong sense of place), where the open landscape and field/hedge character should be retained and conserved, and tourism influence should be changed. This is reinforced by other layers of data including cultural landscape, geological and historical layers of LANDMAP that add to the above baseline data. In conclusion, this data highlights the landscape constraints, landscape value, and local landscape character of this area and underlines that the application site is in an area of high scenic quality and character, which should be retained and conserved, and tourism influence should be denied to protect these qualities.

The main section of the current marquee has a footprint of approximately 360m², and height of approximately 4.5m, and is significantly larger and more visually prominent in the surrounding landscape than any of the previous marquees. The case officer’s site visit has confirmed that the current marquee can be viewed easily because of its significant height above the neighbouring hedge, and the visual impact is exacerbated by the external materials finish in a brilliant white canvas.

AREA 2 DEVELOPMENT CONTROL COMMITTEE – 4 MAY 2010

ITEM 5 (CONT’D) APPLICATION NO. 2009/1599

The agent acting on behalf of the applicant has requested that Members be informed that it is proposed that the marquee continue unchanged in colour for the months of November and March, with an olive roof to be affixed for the months of December to February.

The application site is clearly visible from numerous public vantage points in the immediate and wider surrounding area, for example the existing structure can be viewed easily from all the beaches surrounding within Oxwich Bay and is also visible long distance from Pennard Cliffs and Cefn Bryn.

It has been noted that the marquee is clearly visible in the summer months, and this is further exacerbated during the winter months, when the white marquee stands out sharply against the dark backcloth of Oxwich woods as a prominent white structure. In this context, the marquee appears as an alien and incongruous feature in relation to its surroundings with significant harm to the landscape, which is characterised by the green quality of the agricultural fields, woodland backdrop and coastal views across Oxwich Bay. This contrasts particularly with the subdued impact of the protected church that nestles discretely nearby against the backcloth of trees.

Whilst it is acknowledged that the applicant has indicated that the materials for the roof of the marquee would be changed to an olive colour during the months of December to February, this does not negate the principle policy concerns that the marquee is highly visible within the wider landscape, particularly during the winter months, when additional internal and external illumination will inevitably be required, increasing the potential for light pollution at the sensitive coastal location in the Gower AONB. Furthermore, the marquee, by it’s very appearance and nature is not considered appropriate for a more permanent function facility, particularly in an area designated for its natural beauty and recognised internationally as being part of a coastal area of high scenic quality and value. Notwithstanding any change in colour, the retention of the marquee during the winter months is considered to represent an inappropriate form of development at this location that is visually harmful to the character and appearance of the natural beauty of this part of the coastline and AONB location. To allow the marquee to remain on the application site for a continuous period until 31st March 2011 would result in a degree of permanence to this development that is clearly in conflict with the overriding objective to preserve the character of the AONB, and is therefore contrary to National and Unitary Development Plan policies.

Moreover, it is not considered that screening through additional planting can help screen this structure, given its siting on a lowland coastal site which is prominently visible from higher ground in the surrounding AONB area.

In conclusion, therefore the current marquee is highly visible within the wider landscape and its retention during the winter months, notwithstanding the change in colour, is considered to represent an inappropriate form of development at this location that is visually harmful to the character and appearance of the natural beauty of this part of the coastline and AONB location. In addition, due to its size, siting, and appearance, the marquee is considered to have a dominant and obtrusive impact on the immediate setting of the protected listed church and detracts from the character and appearance of Oxwich Village Conservation Area. AREA 2 DEVELOPMENT CONTROL COMMITTEE – 4 MAY 2010

ITEM 5 (CONT’D) APPLICATION NO. 2009/1599

To allow the marquee to remain on the application site for a continuous period until 31st March 2011 would result in a degree of permanence to this development that is clearly in conflict with the overriding objective to preserve the character of the AONB, and is therefore contrary to National and Unitary Development Plan policies. It is not considered that any change in colour of the marquee would overcome the fundamental policy concerns and as such the development is contrary to national planning policy guidance and UDP policies EV1, EV2, EV9, EV11, EV22, and EV26.

The overspill car park is associated with the use of the marquee and again is more exposed during the winter months. The use of the overspill car park during the winter months would not be supported.

Tourism/Business Issues

The applicant has submitted additional information (copied above) in support of his application to retain the marquee during the winter months. In particular he maintains that the investment that he has made in this venture will support the local economy and provide enhanced services to the community through the injection of private funds and continued investment at this hotel location. He has not confirmed how much the marquee has actually been marketed or used during the 2009/2010 winter period. However, it has been noted that the marquee has been in used for various functions.

The advice in National Planning Policy guidance provided by Planning Policy Wales 2002 and its associated TANs is that in the interests of achieving sustainable development it is important to manage change in the tourism sector in ways which respect the integrity of the natural, built and cultural environment. Technical Advice Note (Wales) 13, October 1997: Tourism advises that such development should be compatible with neighbouring uses, and seek to protect the setting of historic buildings. In addition, the guidance emphasises that, ‘The fact that a development is intended to meet tourism needs does not mean that statutory or non statutory designations should not apply or that they should be applied less rigorously’ (para. 2.9 TAN 13).

In accordance with Policy EV26, in the AONB the main objective is the conservation and protection of the area’s natural beauty, whilst acknowledging the need to achieve a balance between the social and economic well-being of the area. UDP policy EC17 supports rural tourism, however this is subject to the development meeting specific criteria including criteria (ii) that they do not have significant adverse effects on the landscape or nature conservation interests.

Note has also been taken of the LANDMAP cultural landscape data for the Oxwich Bay/Oxwich area, which recognises the national importance of Oxwich Bay as a “honey pot” destination for holiday makers throughout the UK and overseas, and describes the aspect area as ‘a three-mile crescent of gently-sloping white sand that culminates in the east with Great Tor, with two spectacular headlands and several castles’. However the data also notes some detractors. Notably it highlights that ‘The Oxwich Bay Hotel, a former 18th century rectory now utterly spoiled by modern additions’.

AREA 2 DEVELOPMENT CONTROL COMMITTEE – 4 MAY 2010

ITEM 5 (CONT’D) APPLICATION NO. 2009/1599

In this respect it is considered that the current marquee may provide an improved tourist/business facility at this location and help aid the socio economic well being of the area, but this has to be considered against the primary objective to protect the AONB, and substantial weight must therefore be given in favour of conserving the character of the Gower AONB from any inappropriate development. The marquee, by its very appearance and nature is not considered appropriate for a more permanent function facility, particularly in an area designated for its natural beauty and recognised internationally as being part of a coastal area of high scenic quality and value.

In conclusion, it is not considered that it has been demonstrated that there are sufficient grounds to allow the retention of the temporary marquee in the winter months and the development should be removed during the period 1st November to 31st March in any year as previously approved under application no. 2008/2185, in order to protect the intrinsic qualities of this high quality AONB landscape in line with national and local planning policy objectives.

Moreover, it is considered that approving this application would set a dangerous precedent for the consideration of other applications, the cumulative impact of which would erode the very qualities of the environment and natural beauty of the AONB that the Council seeks to protect.

Incremental intensification and urbanisation of this site with this more permanent structure will further undermine the objectives of national planning and local planning policy guidance which seek to protect this sensitive coastal location and ensure that the very environment that attracts tourism to this popular area is not destroyed by inappropriate development.

Highway Safety Having consulted the Head of Transportation and Engineering, there have been no reported issues as a result of the temporary permission and the overspill car park is considered beneficial when events are being held at the site. No highway objection is raised.

Other Material Considerations

In response to public consultation, the Gower Society has objected raising concerns regarding the visual intrusiveness of the development and the impact upon the wider landscape, and concerns that the marquee could become a permanent at the site. These issues have been addressed above in the main body of the report.

CONCLUSION

In conclusion, having regard to the above considerations, it is considered that to allow the marquee to remain continuously on site until 31st October 2011 would result in a prominent, alien and incongruous feature within the landscape during the winter months, which would cause significant harm to the landscape and natural beauty of the Gower AONB and the Oxwich Conservation Area, and the setting of the neighbouring listed church of St. Illtyds, contrary to Policies EV1, EV2, EV9, EV11, EV21, EV22 and EV26 of the Unitary Development Plan. Refusal is recommended. AREA 2 DEVELOPMENT CONTROL COMMITTEE – 4 MAY 2010

ITEM 5 (CONT’D) APPLICATION NO. 2009/1599

RECOMMENDATION:

REFUSE for the following reason:

1 The proposed retention of the existing temporary marquee until 31st October, 2011 including changes to the colour of the roof between the beginning of December and end of February within this period, by virtue of its siting, size, design and appearance, represents an inappropriate form of development at this countryside location that results in significant harm to the rural character of the landscape and high scenic quality of this coastal area, to the detriment of the natural beauty of this part of the Gower AONB landscape, and the character and setting of the Oxwich Village Conservation Area and listed church of St. Illtyds, contrary to national planning policy guidance and UDP policies EV1, EV2, EV9, EV11, EV22, and EV26.

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, EV11, EV21, EV22, EV25, EV26, EV27, EV31, EV40, EC17.

PLANS

Site location plan x 2, 1A proposed car park plans, 4D proposed marquee site plan, design and access statement received 23rd November 2009

AREA 2 DEVELOPMENT CONTROL COMMITTEE – 4 MAY 2010

ITEM 6 APPLICATION NO. 2009/1087 WARD: Gower Area 2

Location: Barham Centre Mount Pisgah Chapel Mill Buildings Parkmill Swansea SA3 2EH Proposal: Retention and completion of lay-by, access ramp, landscaping and associated works Applicant: Mount Pisgah Chapel

BACKGROUND INFORMATION

POLICIES

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

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

Policy 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 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)

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. (City & County of Swansea Unitary Development Plan 2008)

AREA 2 DEVELOPMENT CONTROL COMMITTEE – 4 MAY 2010

ITEM 6 (CONT’D) APPLICATION NO. 2009/1087

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

Policy HC15 Proposals for new and improved local community and health facilities will be supported subject to compliance with a defined list of criteria including access ability, impact on amenity, effect on natural heritage and historic environment and impact on adjacent road network. (City & County of Swansea Unitary Development Plan 2008)

SITE HISTORY

App No. Proposal 93/0432 ERECTION OF TWO SINGLE STOREY SIDE EXTENSIONS AND ALTERATIONS TO THE EXISTING FRONTAGE TO PROVIDE DISABLED ACCESS Decision: *HGPC - GRANT PERMISSION CONDITIONAL Decision Date: 05/10/1993

93/0431 LISTED BUILDING CONSENT TO RENOVATE BUILDING AND TO ERECT TWO NUMBER SINGLE STOREY SIDE EXTENSIONS Decision: Withdraw Decision Date: 14/10/1993

RESPONSE TO CONSULTATIONS

The application was advertised on site and in the local press as a development within the Parkmill Conservation Area that might materially affect the setting of the listed building of Mount Pisgah Chapel, and two neighbouring properties were consulted individually. No response.

Countryside Council for Wales – Confirmed that consent had been granted by CCW for felling of 3 trees in the Parkmill Woods and Llethrid Valley Site of Special Scientific Interest to create a pull in and remove soil from one side of the building to stop damp and also a disabled access ramp. AREA 2 DEVELOPMENT CONTROL COMMITTEE – 4 MAY 2010

ITEM 6 (CONT’D) APPLICATION NO. 2009/1087

Environment Agency –Observations summarised as follows:-

The boundary of the application site lies within Zone C2 as defined by the Welsh Assembly’s Development Advice Maps (DAM) referred to under TAN 15. As such all appropriate pollution control measures must be adopted on site during the works. It is the responsibility of the developer to ensure that no contaminated material or water is allowed to enter or pollute surface or groundwaters. The applicants should be made aware that if any controlled waste is to be used on site (for example as infill) then they will need to obtain the appropriate authorisation from the Agency, and advised of removal of waste material off site.

Ilston Community Council – No objection to the application, but is pleased to see the reinstatement of the woodland to the rear of the lay-by. The only concern is that as Parkmill experiences cattle trespass the proposed retaining wall of natural limestone should be high enough to prevent livestock entering the area of woodland.

Gower Society – Objection on the following grounds:-

1. The desecration of this site was pointed out to Enforcement many weeks ago. 2. The Society deplores the felling of so many mature trees on site, and asks that provision be made for their reinstatement. 3. Recently, the local authority completed a pavement to the chapel with the road to Lunnon – this pavement does not reach the lay-by. 4. The Society views the claims that the ‘works’ are discussed with the authority prior to commencement with some scepticism. 5. The present appearance of the site area is a disgrace in this prominent location within the Conservation area of Parkmill. It looks a total mess, with dumped rubble etc. 6. The Society argues that the work is not required as there is adequate nearby parking. 7. The proposed lay-by is to the east of the Chapel and could necessitate walking along the road, as the recently installed pavement ends to the west of the works. 8. It asks that the site be restored to its original appearance and the land re- landscaped.

The Gower Society deplores the cavalier manner in which work was carried out without permission. Should it be allowed permission, a clause should insist in full replacement of trees on the site, and that the proposed wall in a vernacular style, is made mandatory.

Highway Observations – This application is to retain works undertaken adjacent to the Barham Centre in Parkmill. Some re-profiling of the bank has been undertaken and the installation of a lay-by for visitors to the centre. There has been an informal lay-by at the site and these works have increased the capacity of the lay-by and formalised it.

AREA 2 DEVELOPMENT CONTROL COMMITTEE – 4 MAY 2010

ITEM 6 (CONT’D) APPLICATION NO. 2009/1087

The lay-by will accommodate either visitor’s vehicles or when necessary, any funeral vehicles that need to attend at the Mount Pisgah Chapel. The applicants have advised that currently any funerals taking place have tended to park on the highway obstructing through traffic. Visibility from the lay-by is restricted due to adjacent boundaries, however this has always been the case and I consider that the benefits of the facility to provide parking outweigh the shortfall in visibility. The lay-by is to remain in private ownership and therefore control of its users will be with the Barham Centre.

In order to form the lay-by, some re-profiling of the existing bank appears to have been undertaken and the material used, together with its compaction has not been approved. It is necessary therefore for confirmation of these aspects to be provided and to that end a suitable condition is recommended.

On balance, I recommend no highway objection subject to the following;

1. Prior to any further work being undertaken, details of soil strata must be submitted for approval and any necessary remedial works undertaken in accordance with details to be agreed. 2. Prior to beneficial use of the lay-by commencing, the lay-by shall be surfaced in bituminous or other compacted non-loose material in accordance with details to be agreed. 3. Details of any proposed chain or barrier system to close off the Lay-by to non authorised users must be submitted for approval before implementation.

APPRAISAL:

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

This application seeks retrospective planning permission for the retention and completion of a lay-by, access ramp, landscaping and associated works on land to the east of the Barham Centre, Mount Pisgah Chapel, Mill Buildings, Parkmill, Swansea.

The application site is situated on the northern side of the A4118 South Gower Road, adjacent to the listed building of Mount Pisgah Chapel, on the same side of the road as the residential properties of Waterways and Riverdale. The site which formerly comprised a bank of mature trees is located within the Parkmill Conservation Area, and forms part of the Parkmill Woodland and Llethrid Valley Site of Special Scientific Interest and Gower Ash Woods Special Area of Conservation, within the Gower Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty.

The most important material planning considerations when considering the existing and proposed new development at this conservation area location are how it assimilates into the surrounding village character and landscape. Particular concerns include how it sustains the special ecological character of this area; how it protects the setting of the neighbouring listed building and the amenities of neighbouring residents, as well as highway safety on this main road location, in line with the criteria of the prevailing Unitary Development Plan Policies and National planning guidance. It is not considered that the provisions of the Human Rights Act raise any other overriding considerations. AREA 2 DEVELOPMENT CONTROL COMMITTEE – 4 MAY 2010

ITEM 6 (CONT’D) APPLICATION NO. 2009/1087

The Gower peninsula was designated as Britain’s first Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty in 1956 in recognition of the national importance of its landscape quality. Within AONBs, the primary objective of this designation is the preservation of the natural beauty of this area, and 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. Recent Central Government policy guidance, provided by Planning Policy Wales 2002 sets out the critical principles and objectives in respect of sustainability, biodiversity, design etc., which are applied to reinforce the policies of the Unitary Development Plan. Strategic Part 1 Policies SP1, SP2, and SP3 and Part 2 Policies EV1, EV2, EV3, EV9, EV22, EV25, EV26, EV27, AS 6 and HC15 are considered relevant to this application.

Parkmill is located in an area surrounded by the highest quality of landscape, and is an important visitor focus in the AONB where the Local Authority has consistently sought to protect and improve the environment, whilst encouraging improvements for residents and visitors using the area. The main thrust of the above policies is in line with the AONB primary objective, supported by Policies EV22 and EV26, which 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.

In addition, as the site is located in a European protected site (Gower Ash Woods Special Area of Conservation) and Site of Special Scientific Interest (Parkmill Woodland and Llethrid Valley SSSI), consideration has been given to the impact of the removal of the mature trees from this site and the need for suitable replacement trees to be planted to reduce the impact on the nature conservation interests of this protected area, and support the woodland’s delicate ecology in line with the provisions of Policies EV25 and EV27.

Furthermore, any new development at this location is required to respect the setting of the adjacent listed building and preserve or enhance the character and appearance of the conservation area, in line with the requirements of Policies EV1, EV2, and EV9. The proposals therefore have to be carefully assimilated into this prominent main road site without significant adverse impact to important views, vistas, street scenes, trees and other features that contribute to the character and appearance of this protected area, and amenities of nearby residents.

As the proposal includes new lay-by and access arrangements to the existing chapel, Policy AS6 is also applicable and considers appropriate access facilities and parking for private cars and service vehicles. In addition Policies EV3 and HC15 are relevant, which support improved access and new and improved local community facilities subject to certain criteria.

Trees in conservation areas are subject to similar controls as trees to which a Tree Preservation Order (TPO) applies, and require prior consent from the Council six weeks before their removal. Whilst the Countryside Council for Wales had previously given their separate approval for the removal of three Sycamore trees from the designated SAC and SSSI, they had advised the applicant that this did not override the need for separate Council consent. The subsequent removal of seven trees was therefore a breach of planning control that was duly reported and investigated by the Planning Services Department and resulted in a court case, because an offence had been committed.

AREA 2 DEVELOPMENT CONTROL COMMITTEE – 4 MAY 2010

ITEM 6 (CONT’D) APPLICATION NO. 2009/1087

However the case was discontinued by the assigned judge for lack of evidence on the basis that it was not proven who cut the trees down from this protected area.

However, this current application seeks to replant ten trees on the same hillside area, and the applicant has been given pre application advice by the Department’s Tree Officer on appropriate replacement trees. Amended plans have been submitted during the course of this application specifying details of tree type and planting details that meet the standard requirements. However, it is considered necessary to further control the planting of these trees by planning condition to ensure that there is satisfactory completion of the soft landscaping of this protected site.

In addition, following further site investigation by officers, including specialist advice from the Bridges and Structures team, the applicant has submitted further clarification of the works carried out to the original slope of this site which involved some cut and fill. The Head of Transportation and Engineering has considered the re-profiling works carried out to the bank and the proposed installation of a lay-by for visitors to the centre.

It is noted that whilst there was a previous informal lay-by at the site, the works will increase the capacity of the lay-by and formalise it. The lay-by will accommodate either visitor’s vehicles or when necessary, any funeral vehicles that need to attend at the Mount Pisgah Chapel. The applicants have advised that currently any funerals taking place have tended to park on the highway obstructing through traffic. Visibility from the lay-by is restricted due to adjacent boundaries, however this has always been the case and it is considered that the benefits of the facility to provide parking outweigh the shortfall in visibility. The lay-by is to remain in private ownership and therefore control of its users will be with the Barham Centre.

In order to form the lay-by, some re-profiling of the existing bank appears to have been undertaken and the material used, together with its compaction has not been approved. It is necessary therefore for confirmation of these aspects to be provided to include the details of the future soil strata of the slope and any remedial works considered necessary; the surfacing of the lay by in suitable bituminous or other compacted non-loose material; and a chain or barrier to close off the lay by to non authorised users. These details can be controlled by conditions. On this basis, there is no highway objection.

In conclusion, in visual terms the application site is located in a highly sensitive and prominent location in the valley floor adjacent to the main South Gower Road that leads through Parkmill Conservation Area. To this end a high quality of materials is required for the proposed lay by and associated retaining wall, and similarly the reprofiling and planting of the adjacent bank will have to incorporate a good standard of landscape design and be carefully finished in planting materials that are appropriate to this sensitive conservation area and AONB location. However, it is considered that subject to the satisfactory controls being applied by planning conditions, that a finished scheme of sufficiently high quality can be achieved to restore the former sylvan beauty of this site, at the same time as improving access for the chapel users.

Turning to the impact on residential amenity, Parkmill is an established focus for tourists either visiting the bays or countryside and has many visitor attractions in close proximity, including the Shepherds Store/café, Maes Yr Haf restaurant and the Heritage Centre. Moreover, the South Gower Road is the primary tourist route along this coastline and is subject to heavy traffic during the summer season. AREA 2 DEVELOPMENT CONTROL COMMITTEE – 4 MAY 2010

ITEM 6 (CONT’D) APPLICATION NO. 2009/1087

Provided the lay-by is not available for general public use it is not considered that its use will result in increased disturbance and associated noise from the use of this site to neighbouring residents. The Head of Transportation and Engineering has confirmed that the lay-by is not being adopted by the Council as part of the public highway and has requested it is closed off by a barrier to non authorised users.

The Environment Agency has noted that the boundary of the site lies within Zone C2 as defined by the Welsh Assembly’s Development Advice Maps (DAM) referred to under TAN 15. As advised by the EAW the developer will be advised, via informatives of their responsibilities to ensure that there is no pollution of the water environment.

The Gower Society raised objections and concerns which have been addressed above in the main body of the report. Ilston Community Council did not object but raised concerns regarding the trespass of cattle in the village and the need for the retaining wall to be high enough to prevent trespass by livestock of the area of woodland. This can be controlled by condition.

In conclusion, and having regard to all material considerations including the Human Rights Act, it is considered that subject to conditions, the proposed scheme for the lay by and replanting of trees on the protected area of the site will preserve and enhance the character and appearance of this part of the Parkmill Conservation Area, Gower Ash Woods SAC and Gower Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty in line with the essential criteria of UDP Policies EV1, EV2 EV3, EV9, EV25, EV26, EV27 and AS6. Moreover the proposal will provide improved community facilities in line with the criteria of Policy HC15. Approval is therefore recommended.

RECOMMENDATION

APPROVE, subject to the following conditions:

1 The development 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 Notwithstanding the plans submitted, prior to any further work being undertaken to the hillside bank, details of the soil strata, including precise details of the proposed slope to the bank and any necessary remedial works shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The approved scheme shall be retained and maintained as such unless otherwise approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. 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 highway safety.

AREA 2 DEVELOPMENT CONTROL COMMITTEE – 4 MAY 2010

ITEM 6 (CONT’D) APPLICATION NO. 2009/1087

3 Prior to beneficial use of the lay-by commencing, the lay-by shall be surfaced in bituminous or other compacted non-loose material in accordance with details to be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The approved scheme shall be retained and maintained as such unless otherwise approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. Reason: In the interests of highway safety.

4 Prior to the beneficial use of the lay-by commencing, details of a proposed chain or barrier system to close off the lay-by to non authorised users shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The approved means of barrier control for this lay-by shall be retained and maintained as such unless otherwise approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. Reason: To ensure that the lay-by is not used by non authorised users and in the interests of highway safety.

5 Notwithstanding the plans submitted, details of the reconstruction of the retaining wall on the northern (bankside) boundary of the lay-by shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The approved scheme shall be retained and maintained as such unless otherwise approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. Reason: In the interests of visual amenity and general amenity.

6 Notwithstanding the plans submitted, no further 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 details shall include the location, size and species of replacement trees which shall be planted in accordance with BS 4428.1989 Re Code of Practice for General Landscaping. 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, or become seriously diseased shall be replaced by trees or shrubs of similar size and species to those originally required to be planted, in accordance with details to be agreed in writing by the Local Planning Authority. 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, EV9, EV22, EV25, EV26, EV27, AS6 and HC15.

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 – 4 MAY 2010

ITEM 6 (CONT’D) APPLICATION NO. 2009/1087

3 Site operators should ensure that there is no possibility of contaminated water entering and polluting surface or underground waters. Pollution prevention notes (PPGs) are available to view and down load from www.netregs.gov.uk/netregs/links/107968.aspx

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. The developer is advised to contact the Environment Agency for Wales for advice on these matters and view their website www.environment-agency.gov.uk/subjects/waste. or contact the Swansea Environment Management Team on 01792 325637.

5 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 is 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.

PLANS

Design and access statement, site location plan, proposal plan A (block plan 1:200), section A:A, tree survey received 24th August 2009. Profile Plan and landscaping plan received 19th January 2010.

AREA 2 DEVELOPMENT CONTROL COMMITTEE – 4 MAY 2010

ITEM 7 APPLICATION NO. 2008/2092 WARD: Newton Area 2

Location: The Lodge, 11 Caswell Road, Langland, Swansea, SA3 4RA Proposal: Two storey side extension, two storey part single storey rear extension, detached garage, boundary wall up to 2.3 metres in height, trellis structure and chimney

Applicant: Mr David Jones

BACKGROUND INFORMATION

POLICIES

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

Policy 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 92/0968 Erection of dwelling house (Outline)

Decision: Appeal Allowed Decision Date: 16/06/1993

83/1075/03 ALTERATIONS + EXTENSION TO DWELLING AND ERECTION OF A NEW DETACHED GARAGE Decision: *HGPC - GRANT PERMISSION CONDITIONAL Decision Date: 24/11/1983

RESPONSE TO CONSULTATIONS

Original Proposal – ‘Two storey side extension, two storey part single storey rear extension and detached replacement garage’

Three neighbouring properties were consulted; one letter of objection was received from one neighbouring property and five letters of objection were received from another neighbouring property the comments of which are highlighted below: AREA 2 DEVELOPMENT CONTROL COMMITTEE – 4 MAY 2010

ITEM 7 (CONT’D) APPLICATION NO. 2008/2092

1. There is concern in relation to the increase to the height of the roof of the south side extension, this part of the development extends substantially beyond the line of the back of the other houses on Caswell Road and will block out morning light falling on the neighbour’s property for about two hours after sunrise.

2. There is concern with regard to the size and use of the extension (first criterion of Policy HC7 of the Unitary Development Plan). It is generally considered that the proposed development could be considered as over-development of the site. The level of private amenity space for the occupants is particularly low, and if this level of private rear amenity space was proposed for a new development within Swansea it would be refused planning permission.

3. There is concern regarding the impact on neighbouring properties (third criterion of Policy HC7 of the Unitary Development Plan). The proposal for a two storey extension and a pitched roof garage is of particular concern. The plans currently submitted as part of this application do not represent a form of development which respects the amenity of No.3 Langland Court Road. The balcony being proposed will provide the occupiers of 11 Caswell Road with a full view of the entire garden, master bedroom and conservatory of No.3 Langland Court Road.

4. There is also great concern regarding the overbearing impact of the proposed extension. The plans submitted are a little misleading, the sections on drawing No C108/PL/008 show that the neighbouring property is on the same level as 11 Caswell Road, this is however not the case as No 3 Langland Court Road is set 0.75m lower (also stated as up to 1m) than the application site and therefore the impact of any development/extension on the site is that much more. The proposed extension will have the feeling of being approximately 7m high when viewed from No.3 Langland Court Road, this also with the distances between the two properties means that it will have an overbearing impact on neighbouring properties.

5. The garage is also considered to have an impact, being 4.5m to its ridge; this along with the change in levels will have the feeling of it being almost 5.5m high. This is a particularly overbearing factor to the neighbouring residents, especially when taking into consideration the gable end of the garage will be the boundary between the two properties. This is again considered unacceptable inline with Policy HC7 of the Unitary Development Plan.

6. Any additional development of No.11 Caswell Road would have a significant detrimental impact on the privacy of the property of No.3 Langland Court Road

7. The removal of vegetation would also increase the impact of any development.

8. In terms of distances between properties, and taking a measurement from the most southerly point of 11 Caswell Road to the nearest point of 3 Langland Court Road it is only 14 metres (measurements taken from the submitted ‘Existing Site Plan 1:1000’). Furthermore, it is stated that the distance between the two properties is not far enough apart to warrant their building becoming any closer.

9. The plans are considered not to show No.3 Langland Court Road’s conservatory and hence are considered incorrect. AREA 2 DEVELOPMENT CONTROL COMMITTEE – 4 MAY 2010

ITEM 7 (CONT’D) APPLICATION NO. 2008/2092

Highway Observations – The application is for a two storey side extension, two storey part single storey rear extension and detached replacement garage. The demand for parking is not being increased within the proposal, and there remains sufficient car parking and turning space within the sites curtilage to accommodate the parking demand. The replacement garage dimensions accord with our guidelines. I recommend no highways objections be raised to this application.

Amended proposal – ‘Two storey side extension, two storey part single storey rear extension, detached garage, boundary wall up to 2.3 metres in height, trellis structure and chimney’

Three neighbouring properties were consulted; one letter of objection was received from one neighbouring property and two letters of objection were received from another neighbouring property the comments of which are highlighted below:

1. The issues regarding the south side of the extension blocking out morning light falling on the next door neighbouring property still remains. 2. The boundary wall between the two neighbouring properties is of single engineering brick construction with supporting pillars on the neighbour’s side of the wall, it is considered that any increase in height could potentially destabilise the wall. 3. The previous concerns made in relation to the application would still like to be taken into consideration. Furthermore, it still remains the case that the privacy of the master bedroom and main living room of No.3 Langland Court Road will be significantly compromised along with the external patio areas and conservatory being overlooked from a greater proximity that the proposed extension will create. The amended proposal merely replaces the balcony with a window, which has no lesser impact on the privacy at No.3 Langland Court Road. 4. The proposal is considered to be an over intensified development, with a considerable built form abutting the boundary of No.3 Langland Court Road, having a particularly dramatic and negative impact on this property, both in terms of visual amenity and loss of privacy. 5. The images included within the Amended Planning Statement do not coincide with the proposed drawings i.e. the windows and elevation treatments. 6. The proposal of a ‘louvre system’ is considered bizarre, as the image details shows clearly that the vision would be still directly into No.3 Langland Court Road’s master bedroom, lounge and garden/patio areas. 7. The proposed ground floor extension would have a considerable and unacceptable impact on No.3 Langland Court Road’s property and garden areas encroaching a further 3m to the property’s house and living accommodation. This would be only 4m from this neighbour’s living room window. This would make any further chance of extending this neighbouring property, is so desired, impossible. 8. The proposed first floor extension is over 6.45m in height and would protrude a further 3m closer to the neighbouring property and together with the window, both the built form and privacy would result in a demonstrative imposition to our property and to the enjoyment of the amenity area. 9. The proposed extension prejudice the commonly regarded distances between habitable areas, and as the view between the two properties is currently very limited, it should most certainly not be made any worse. AREA 2 DEVELOPMENT CONTROL COMMITTEE – 4 MAY 2010

ITEM 7 (CONT’D) APPLICATION NO. 2008/2092

10. The site plan does not show No.3’s conservatory, and the proposed garage is therefore only 2m away from the existing living accommodation – it is proposed as being 4.5m high being built directly on the boundary. 11. The removal of the existing vegetation and the construction of the boundary wall will add to the loss of enjoyment of the external benefits. 12. The Planning Authority has given the applicant every opportunity to submit a satisfactory application which has still not been done.

Highway Observations - No additional comments to make.

APPRAISAL

This application is reported to Committee for decision at the request of Councillor Tony Colburn.

Full planning permission is sought for a two storey side extension, two storey part single storey rear extension, detached garage, boundary wall up to 2.3 metres in height, trellis structure and chimney at the property known as ‘The Lodge’, 11 Caswell Road, Langland. The property is located in an established residential neighbourhood which is generally characterised by detached dwellings set back from the road in relatively generous plots. The two storey side extension is to be located to the west of the property and will measure approximately 5.5m in width by approximately 7.45m in height. The two storey rear extension will extend to a maximum of 6m from the main rear element of the property and the single storey rear element will then extend beyond this and will abut the boundary with No.3 Langland Court Road. To the west of the single storey extension will be the trellis structure which occupies the furthest south-westerly corner of the property’s amenity space. The garage will occupy the furthest south-easterly corner of the application site and will have a maximum ridge height of 4.33m. The boundary wall will measure 2m for the majority of it surrounding the property, with an element of the south facing boundary wall reaching a height of 2.3m. The chimney will be placed within a central location within the roofscape of the existing property.

The application has been amended due to concerns raised by officers in relation to the impact on the amenities of No.3 Langland Court Road. The amendments made include reducing the height of the garage from 4.50m to 4.33m whilst having a flat roof surrounding the south and east elements of the garage and the rear element of the roof of the garage has been replaced with a hipped roof. The balcony has been removed and a louver system with glazing has been incorporated into the rear element of the study. Furthermore the single storey rear extension has been slightly reduced in size. The height of the boundary wall has also been clarified.

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 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.

In terms of the impact on visual amenity, the proposed scheme is acceptable, in that it improves the appearance of and adds balance to the existing property through a contemporary and contextual design solution. AREA 2 DEVELOPMENT CONTROL COMMITTEE – 4 MAY 2010

ITEM 7 (CONT’D) APPLICATION NO. 2008/2092

The proposed design also makes good use of the external space surrounding the property, enhancing the amenity of the dwelling and creating a more aesthetically pleasing setting to the property. There is not considered to be a set character within the surrounding area with surrounding dwellings characterised by a variety of architectural styles and forms.

The proposed two storey side extension is considered to be in keeping with the character and appearance of the host dwelling and the surrounding area comprising of a contemporary appearance with a glazed link which provides visual separation with the original dwelling house and a grid of square windows, which are both an integral part of contemporary design concept and are considered to add quality to the scheme. The set back from the front of the property and slight set down of the extension is considered to ensure that it will not overly dominate the existing property and will, therefore, be subordinate to the main dwelling house. The set back and set down is also considered to overcome the issue regarding the width of the extension being greater than one half of the existing dwelling. Furthermore, the gap between the side of the extension and the side boundary with No.13 Caswell Road is considered to provide a sufficient visual separation between the properties in this instance.

The proposals to the rear of the property will be visible from the Langland Court Road streetscene, however, their sympathetic appearance is considered to ensure that they will not have an unacceptable impact when viewed from this perspective. The two storey rear extension is considered to be subordinate to the main dwelling house being set down from the ridgeline of the associated element of the dwelling house. Similarly, the single storey element is also considered to be acceptable with the wooden structure to the side also not considered to have a harmful impact given its minimal height. The garage will also be considered to be acceptable being set back significantly from the Caswell Road frontage and comprising of a sympathetic design. There will be flat roofs to the east and south of the garage, however, these are not considered to raise any concerns given the minimal impact that they will have on the appearance of the structure due to their height. The boundary walls are not considered to give rise to concern in terms of impact on the character and appearance of the area given the size of the structures and the minimal impact they will have on the character and appearance of the surrounding areas. The installation of the chimney is also considered to be acceptable, with other properties within the surrounding areas also having chimneys.

Turning to residential amenity issues, the two storey side extension slightly conflicts with the 45 degree code when drawn from No.13 Caswell Road, however, this minimal breach is not considered to have an unacceptable adverse impact on this property in terms of either overbearance or overshadowing due to the orientation of the roof of the proposed extension when viewed from No.13. In terms of overlooking, there is considered to be no unacceptable overlooking possible from any fenestration within this extension. The rooflight windows within the rear roof slope are not considered to give rise to unacceptable viewing with the views being limited due to the position of the two storey rear extension.

The two storey rear extension slightly conflicts with the 45 degree code when taken from No.13 Caswell Road, however, given that this proposed extension is only approximately 2m higher than the existing single storey rear extension and that this extension comprises of a steep pitched roof it is, therefore, considered that it would have a minimal impact on this property. AREA 2 DEVELOPMENT CONTROL COMMITTEE – 4 MAY 2010

ITEM 7 (CONT’D) APPLICATION NO. 2008/2092

In terms of physical impact on No.3 Langland Court Road, there are considered to be no overshadowing implications given that this neighbouring property is located to the south of the application site. In terms of an overbearing impact on No.3 it is recognised that the two storey extension will be located within relatively close proximity of the boundary (approximately minimum of 3.5m from shared boundary with No.3) and there is a change in levels (approximately 1m), however, this distance is considered to be sufficient given that the area it directly faces onto is the side garden of No.3 with the dwelling located to the east of this garden. The single storey rear element of the extension whilst considered to be located within close proximity of the boundary is considered to have a relatively minimal impact on the amenity space of No.3 given that only part of the structure measures 2.85m in height and the other part of the extension serving the potting shed and part of the wc/shower room measures approximately 2.4m in height. This element of the proposal is not considered to warrant refusal in this instance given the small amount of space it will have an impact on.

In terms of the overlooking impact from the two storey rear extension, there is not considered to be any potential for overlooking from the rooflight windows serving the study into either No.13 or No. 9 Caswell Road given that the rooflight windows are positioned high within the roof.

In terms of overlooking from the rear window serving the study in the two storey rear extension, it is considered that the separation distance between this elevation and the boundary with No.3 Langland Court Road is less than what would normally be acceptable in a built up area. Whilst it would be preferable to remove this window from this elevation the applicants have sought to design out the problem in order to maintain their desired views towards the sea. The applicant has therefore amended the scheme with a view to designing out any potential overlooking from this window. In particular a system of horizontal louvers is proposed to be attached to the exterior of the window. The louvers are proposed to be 200mm deep, 10mm thick with gaps of 50mm between them. Whilst it is still considered that there would be limited views available towards the garden of the neighbouring property, particularly at lower level, it is considered that a condition should be imposed requiring obscure glazing of the window up to a height of 1.5 metres above internal floor level. Above this level, views would still be able to be gained forwards towards the sea although the louver system would prevent views downwards into the garden. Overall, it is considered that the combination of the louver system and the obscure glazing would ensure that there would be no harmful overlooking into No.3’s garden that would warrant a refusal of permission.

In terms of any overlooking from the study into the side windows of No.3, there is considered to be a sufficient distance between the respective windows, which together with the angles between the windows ensures that no harmful overlooking would occur. It should also be noted that there currently is two unobstructed bedroom windows within the existing rear elevation of the application property at first floor allowing views towards the neighbouring property although it is acknowledged that these windows are further from the boundary. There is not considered to be any unacceptable overlooking from the fenestration within the single storey rear element given the sympathetic location of the glazing within this structure.

AREA 2 DEVELOPMENT CONTROL COMMITTEE – 4 MAY 2010

ITEM 7 (CONT’D) APPLICATION NO. 2008/2092

The detached garage is not considered to have an overbearing or overshadowing impact on No.9 Caswell Road due to its low eaves height with a flat roof section abutting the boundary with No.9 Caswell Road. The garage also has a flat roof to the rear which is a minimum of 0.2m from the boundary and a maximum of 0.82m from the boundary with a hipped roof behind this. Given the change in levels between the application site and No.3 Langland Court Road the proposed garage has the potential to be overbearing upon this property. However, the scheme has been amended by reducing the height and removing the gable roof adjacent to the boundary and replacing it with a hipped roof. Whilst the resiting of the garage further from the boundary would be preferred, upon further reflection this is considered to be acceptable and on balance the garage would not, it is considered, have a significantly harmful enough impact upon the occupiers of No.3 Langland Court Road to warrant a refusal of permission on this ground. There is not considered to be any possibilities for overlooking from the garage. The boundary wall up to 2m could be erected without the benefit of planning permission; however, its minimal height would dictate that there would not be a significant impact on the neighbouring properties abutting this wall. The element of the proposed wall that measures 2.3m is for the most part where the existing garage is situated. Therefore, the height of the boundary wall would not, it is considered, have a significantly more harmful impact than the existing garage. The trellis structure is located behind this wall and will, therefore, not have any additional impact over and above that of the proposed boundary wall. The chimney by virtue of its position within the existing roof slope is not considered to have any adverse impact.

With regard to the concerns raised, the points regarding the south side of the extension having an effect on the amount of light received is considered to be covered within the main context of the report. The development whilst occupying a relatively large percentage of the plot is considered to leave adequate amenity space and will, therefore, not result in an overdevelopment of the plot. The issues with regard to the balcony are not considered relevant now as this part of the original proposal has been removed. The change in levels between No.3 Langland Court Road and the application site has been taken into consideration during the decision making process as indicated within the context of the report. The original concern in relation to the garage is considered to be dealt with due to the amendments made and the amended garage is now considered acceptable, as stated within the report. With regard to the concerns in relation to the removal of vegetation, the vegetation could be removed without the benefit of planning permission and, therefore, the Authority cannot exercise any control over this. The distance between the properties has been taken into consideration and is discussed within the main context of the report. The conservatory, situated to the rear of No.3 Langland Court Road whilst not indicated on the plans included with this application has been taken into consideration and it is considered that it will not be adversely impacted upon by the proposals. The issues with regard to overlooking from the proposals have been taken into consideration and are discussed within the context of the report. The plans submitted are considered to be sufficient to determine the application in this instance and the plans have been amended to accommodate the change in levels between the two properties. The overbearing impact of the single storey rear extension and two storey rear extensions are considered to be covered within the context of the report. The amount of negotiation undertaken is at the Authority’s discretion and as such is not a material planning consideration. AREA 2 DEVELOPMENT CONTROL COMMITTEE – 4 MAY 2010

ITEM 7 (CONT’D) APPLICATION NO. 2008/2092

The Head of Transportation and Engineering has stated that the demand for parking is not being increased within the proposal, and there remains sufficient car parking and turning space within the sites curtilage to accommodate the parking demand. The replacement garage dimensions accord with our guidelines. Therefore, no highways objections are raised to this application.

In conclusion and having regards to all material considerations, including the Human Rights Act, the proposals are considered to have an acceptable impact on the visual amenity of the existing property and streetscene, and have an acceptable impact on the residential amenities of the neighbouring properties. The scheme therefore complies with to the provisions of Policies EV1 and HC7 of the Unitary Development Plan and the Design Guide for Householder Development. Approval of planning permission is therefore recommended.

RECOMMENDATION

APPROVE, subject to the following conditions:

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

2 Notwithstanding the plans submitted the first floor window in the south-facing rear elevation serving the study, as indicated on Plan No: C108/PL/009 Rev A shall be obscure glazed, and unopenable below a height of 1.5 metres above internal floor level and shall thereafter be retained as such. Reason: To safeguard the privacy of the occupiers of neighbouring residential properties.

3 The rooflight windows in the east and west facing elevations serving the study, as indicated on Plan No: C108/PL/010 Rev A, shall be positioned a minimum of 1.8 metres high above internal floor level and thereafter retained as such unless otherwise approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. Reason: To safeguard the privacy of the occupiers of neighbouring residential properties.

4 Prior to the first floor element of the two storey rear extension being brought into beneficial use the proposed louver system, as shown on Drawing No. C108/PL/013 received on 24th February 2010, shall be erected and attached to the building in accordance with the approved plans and shall therefater be retained as such. Reason: To safeguard the privacy of the occupiers of neighbouring residential properties.

AREA 2 DEVELOPMENT CONTROL COMMITTEE – 4 MAY 2010 ITEM 7 (CONT’D) APPLICATION NO. 2008/2092

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)

2 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).

3 Birds may be present in this building and grounds 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.

4 PARTY WALL ETC ACT 1996

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

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

PLANS

Amended plans C108/PL/001 site location plan, C108/PL/002 existing ground floor plan, C108/PL/003 existing first floor & roof plan, C108/PL/006 Rev A proposed ground floor plan, C108/PL/007 Rev A proposed first floor & roof plan, C108/PL/004 existing north & west elevations, C108/PL/005 existing south & east elevations, C108/PL/010 Rev A proposed sections, C108/PL/008 Rev A proposed north & west elevations, C108/PL/009 Rev A proposed south & east elevations, C108/PL/011 Rev A garage elevations & site plan received 24th February 2010, Additional plans C108/PL/012 existing & proposed south elevation, CL08/PL/013 Louvre screen details, planning statement received 24th February 2010

AREA 2 DEVELOPMENT CONTROL COMMITTEE – 4 MAY 2010

ITEM 8 APPLICATION NO. 2010/0253 WARD: Gower Area 2

Location: The Boat House, Rhossili, Swansea Proposal: Installation of 1.1m high handrail and gate and improvement works to footpath Applicant: Cyrenians Cymru Cyf

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 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 EV11 Development will not be permitted that would harm the character or setting of a registered Historic Park or Garden or the character of an Historic Landscape. (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)

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. (City & County of Swansea Unitary Development Plan 2008)

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 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 – 4 MAY 2010

ITEM 8 (CONT’D) APPLICATION NO. 2010/0253

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 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)

RESPONSE TO CONSULTATIONS

A site notice was displayed on site. NO LETTERS OF OBJECTION have been received:

The Gower Society – made the following comment:

1. The site is one of the most iconic within the AONB 2. The handrail looks minimal we recommend it is hot dipped galvanised and painted a suitable dark grey or dark green. 3. The footpath work is minimal we do not have any great reservations about the proposal however it is essential that the wishes of the National Trust are complied with.

Environment Agency – made the following comment The development is located within a range of designated sites and as such is subject to the provisions of TAN 5 Section 21 any development within close proximity of, or likely to affect designated sites, to be subject of special scrutiny including full consultation with the Countryside Council for Wales.

It is essential that the works do not encroach onto or damage protected habitats – the vegetated cliffs on which the works will take place are a feature of the Limestone Coast SAC and must be protected. In addition, Chough are a feature of the SPA and nest on sea cliffs. Works should be timed to avoid the nesting season if Chough breeding sites could be disturbed, as this would be an offence under the Wildlife and Countryside Act 1981

APPRAISAL

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

The proposal seeks full planning permission for the installation of a 1.1 metre high hand rail and gate and improvement works to an associated footpath adjacent to the Old Boat House, Kitchen Corner, Worms Head, Rhossili. The footpath will be upgraded using traditional detail of timber boarding and pegs and limestone gravel. The proposed scheme would see hard surfacing applied to a stretch of pathway running from the base of the existing steps to the area of existing hard standing approximately 10.0 metres in length. AREA 2 DEVELOPMENT CONTROL COMMITTEE – 4 MAY 2010

ITEM 8 (CONT’D) APPLICATION NO. 2010/0253

The Old Boat House is a large detached building on the north east facing side of the section of the headland known as Kitchen Corner Road, a footpath runs from the top of the headland past the Lookout Post through the rock outcrops down the Cliffside to its conclusion at the Old Boat House. A section of this path has been constructed in concrete as has an area of hard standing around the extant building.

The site is within the Gower Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty and the escarpment on which the application site is located is part of the Limestone Coast Special Area of Conservation as well as being designated as a Site of Special Scientific Interest and forms part of the nationally important Heritage Coast.

The main issues to be considered are the impact of the proposals on the character and appearance of the protected coastline area and the special ecological interests of this sensitive coastal environment, having regard to the prevailing policies of the UDP. It is not considered that the provisions of the Human Rights Act raise any other overriding considerations.

In respect of visual amenity it is considered that the proposed works would not present as a visually incongruous addition to the existing building. Both the existing building, hoist boom and ground works are in a dilapidated appearance and as such it is considered that the proposed scheme would help to enhance the visual appearance of the built form on site thereby enhancing the character and appearance of the AONB. Similarly the minimal works proposed to the adjoining footpath are considered to be, on balance, acceptable given the small section of alterations being proposed.

The proposed railings and associated gate will not present as a visually obtrusive addition from vantage points on the headland and as such are not considered to be detrimental to the AONB or the associated Heritage Coast designations.

Following discussions between the Council’s Ecologist and the Countryside Council for Wales it is not considered that any of the proposed works would have any adverse ecological implications. Although the site does fall within the SSSI and South Wales Limestone Coast SAC it is not considered that the proposed works will have any adverse effect on the features of either designation.

In conclusion, and having regard to all material considerations including the Human Rights Act, it is considered that the siting, design and nature of the proposed would be in keeping with the character of the setting to which it relates and would not have any adverse effect on the statutory designations identified above in accordance with the provisions of the City and County of Swansea Unitary Development Plan. Approval of planning permission is therefore justified.

AREA 2 DEVELOPMENT CONTROL COMMITTEE – 4 MAY 2010

ITEM 8 (CONT’D) APPLICATION NO. 2010/0253

RECOMMENDATION : Approve Subject to the following conditions

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

2 Notwithstanding the plans hereby approved prior to the commencement of development details of the finish/colour of the handrail and gate shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority and the development shall thereafter be completed in accordance with the approved details. Reason: In the interest of visual amenity

INFORMATIVES

1 The development plan covering the City and County of Swansea is the City and County of Swansea Unitary Development Plan. The following policies were relevant to the consideration of the application: EV1,EV22, EV26, EV28

2 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, proposed floor plans, proposed elevations, photo montage received 12th February 2010

AREA 2 DEVELOPMENT CONTROL COMMITTEE – 4 MAY 2010

ITEM 9 APPLICATION NO. 2009/1842 WARD: Gower Area 2

Location: Gors Green, Reynoldston, Swansea, SA3 1AE Proposal: Detached dwelling house with detached garage (details of the siting, design, external appearance and landscaping pursuant to condition 1 of outline planning permission 2008/0560 granted on appeal on 27th January 2009) Applicant: Mr H Kinsey

BACKGROUND INFORMATION

POLICIES

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

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

Policy 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)

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)

SITE HISTORY

App No. Proposal 2008/0560 Detached dwelling house (outline) Decision: Refuse Decision Date: 05/06/2008

2009/1697 Two storey rear extension, front porch and detached summer house Decision: Grant Permission Conditional Decision Date: 04/02/2010

90/0646/03 ERECTION OF A NEW HOUSE. Decision: *HRP - REFUSE PERMISSION Decision Date: 25/05/1990 AREA 2 DEVELOPMENT CONTROL COMMITTEE – 4 MAY 2010

ITEM 9 (CONT’D) APPLICATION NO. 2009/1842

89/0436/01 ERECTION OF DETACHED DWELLINGS Decision: *HRP - REFUSE PERMISSION Decision Date: 06/07/1989

80/0742/01 ERECTION OF A HOUSE Decision: *HRP - REFUSE PERMISSION Decision Date: 26/06/1980

76/0656/01 RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT Decision: *HRP - REFUSE PERMISSION Decision Date: 28/10/1976

RESPONSE TO CONSULTATIONS

Legal Services: Having checked the register of common land I can inform you that part of the land identified in your plans is registered common land forming part of CL6, Cefn Bryn Common.

Please note that the marked location on the map provided is registered common land and any proposed works on this you may require consent from the Welsh Assembly under s. 194 of the Law of Property 1925. Any works carried out without such consent will be unlawful.

Gower Society: Following comments:

1. The south west elevation of this property will be seen from many locations. 2. The three storey elevation will not enhance the impact of the dwelling on the AONB. 3. We ask that consideration be given to the external finishes.

We are not objecting to this proposal but ask that you take the above comments into consideration.

Highways: Access, parking and on site turning facilities are acceptable and therefore I recommend that no highway objections are raised.

APPRAISAL

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

Description

This is a Reserved Matters application for a detached dwelling and detached garage on Land adjacent to Gors Green, Reynoldston Swansea. Matters to be considered include siting, design, external appearance and landscaping. The land in question currently forms part of the residential curtilage of Gorse Green and falls steeply in a southern direction. AREA 2 DEVELOPMENT CONTROL COMMITTEE – 4 MAY 2010

ITEM 9 (CONT’D) APPLICATION NO. 2009/1842

Background

Outline planning permission was initially refused by the Local Planning Authority, however this decision was overturned at appeal as it was considered that the maintained and domestic appearance of the land had a significantly stronger correlation with the existing settlement pattern than with the surrounding countryside. Moreover it was considered that the addition of a single dwelling would have little impact on the relative scale and character of Reynoldston Village. The Inspector acknowledged that although the site falls within the Countryside in the context of UDP Policy EV16, it would be reasonably and harmoniously incorporated into the character and form of the existing Reynoldston settlement, without any unacceptable harm to the character and appearance of the surrounding countryside or AONB interests.

Issues

The main issues to be considered during the determination of this application relate to the proposals impact on the character and appearance of this part of Reynoldston and the surrounding Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty together with its impact upon the amenities of neighbouring residents and highway safety. It is not considered that the provisions of the Human Rights Act raise any other overriding considerations.

Given the recent appeal decision the principle of development at this location has been established and the application falls to be considered against the criteria under Policy EV16 and EV26 of the Unitary Development Plan. Policy EV16 requires that development within small Gower Villages, such as Reynoldston, must be appropriate in terms of a number of criteria including scale, density, elevational design, prominence, materials, screening, acceptable access and relationship to adjacent buildings, spaces and landscape features.

Policy EV26 requires development to preserve or enhance the natural beauty of the Gower AONB.

Character and Appearance

It is considered that the plot is of sufficient size to accommodate a detached dwelling, and as it is considered to fall within the village an appropriately designed dwelling would not have an adverse impact on the character and appearance of the area. The area is characterised by a mixture of architectural styles and designs and given the relatively hidden nature of the site it is not considered that there is a prevailing characteristic or dominant house type to suggest a specific architectural response on this site.

The submitted cross sections suggest the northern element of the dwelling will be raised by approximately 1m and the southern aspect sunk into the existing hollow. Subject to the submission of revised levels incorporating no raised land it is considered that a dwelling of this size and scale can be accommodated on the site without unduly affecting the character and appearance of the wider landscape. Due to the falling land levels the dwelling will be sited within a hollow and have a maximum ridge height of 11m, however due to the sloping levels and subterranean nature of part of the dwelling the proposal will incorporate a maximum height of 8.2m when viewed from the wider landscape. AREA 2 DEVELOPMENT CONTROL COMMITTEE – 4 MAY 2010

ITEM 9 (CONT’D) APPLICATION NO. 2009/1842

Due to these falling levels the general form of the proposed dwelling will appear as a part single storey with accommodation in the roof incorporating basement and part two storey with accommodation in the roof which couple to break down the overall massing of the building ensuring the proposal is in scale with the plot and the wider area.

The appearance is a mixture of contemporary and traditional designs which reflect the mixture of development which is prevailant throughout Reynoldston. The proposal will appear as single storey with accommodation in the roof from wider vantage points from the North and the southern facing aspect will not be highly visible and therefore would not detract from the overall character of the area, nor does it negatively impact on the adjacent properties. Overall it is considered that subject to conditions requiring the submission of traditional materials which should include natural slate roof, hardwood windows, doors and facias and revised levels it is considered that the proposed design adds interest and quality to the area.

The house incorporates a roughly ‘L’ shaped footprint, set well back from the road and hidden from wider vantage points on Cefn Bryn by existing landscaping and this coupled with the sloping land levels and design will shield Cefn Bryn from the bulk of the building. The southern facing elevation incorporates a significant amount of glazing which maximises solar gain into the property. The balcony area which whilst quite large and extensive will be primarily shielded from the north and east by the proposed dwelling and will only be visible from long range views from the south and west directions. The proposed garage is proportionate to and in keeping with the character and appearance of the proposed dwelling. The garage will not be visually prominent from wider vantage points and on this basis the proposal is not considered to have an unacceptable impact on this part of the Gower AONB and would not adversely impact on the character and appearance of the surrounding area.

Residential Amenity

Turning to the impact upon the residential amenities of the neighbouring residents the proposed dwelling will mainly affect The Old Manse. Given the separation distances in excess of 40m from Gorse Green and Bryn Eithin, it is not considered the proposed dwelling will have an unacceptable overbearing, overshadowing or overlooking impact upon the residential amenities of these dwellings. The dwelling will be situated within the rear garden of Gorse Green and it is considered that given the size of the plot and the fall in gradient which helps break down the overall massing of the dwelling and this coupled with the separation distances of a minimum of 10.5m from the boundaries combine to ensure the proposed dwelling will not have an unacceptable overbearing or overshadowing impact upon the residential amenities of the occupiers of these neighbouring dwellings.

With regard overlooking an agreed level of boundary treatment can overcome issues in relation to overlooking at ground level. Turning to the windows at first floor level and roof level, there are no issues raised relating to the windows in the south facing elevation. In terms of the west facing elevation, the windows will be situated in excess of 10.5m from the boundary with Bryn Eithen and will only overlook the farthest extremity of its rear garden, some 100m from the actual dwelling and as such the windows in this elevation are also considered acceptable. The north facing velux windows will be sited in excess of 11m from the boundaries with Gorse Green and this coupled with the rising land levels in a northern direction will ensure the proposed dwelling would not give rise to unacceptable overlooking in this direction. AREA 2 DEVELOPMENT CONTROL COMMITTEE – 4 MAY 2010

ITEM 9 (CONT’D) APPLICATION NO. 2009/1842

There is currently significant screening along the boundary of the proposed site with the Old Manse and as such this coupled with separation distances at a minimum of approximately 10.5m and a condition requiring the submission of revised levels it is not considered the proposal will result in unacceptable overbearing and overshadowing or overlooking from the habitable room windows in this direction.

Turning to the proposed balcony area, whilst the majority of the balcony will be sited in excess of 10m from the boundaries of the neighbouring properties which is considered sufficient in order to overcome privacy issues, a small section along the south-east elevation facing the Old Manse will be within this distance. However given the existing dense foliage and the fact that this element of the decking will only be used for access it is not considered necessary to attach a condition for the erection of a privacy screen along this boundary. However in order to retain the existing hedge row, a condition is considered necessary in this respect.

Highways

With regard to highway safety, the Head of Transportation and Engineering has no objection to the proposal as the site area an indicated layout is sufficiently large to provide more than adequate parking and suitable turning facilities together with a garage.

Response to Consultations

Notwithstanding the above one letter of comment was received from the Gower Society which raised concerns regarding the materials, visual impact of the proposal and the impact of the dwelling on the Gower AONB. The issues pertaining to which have been addressed above.

Conclusion

In conclusion, and having regard to all material considerations including the Human Rights Act, it is considered that the proposal represents an acceptable form of infill development which respects the character and appearance of the area and the wider Gower AONB whilst at the same time introducing a modern dwelling which conserves and enhances the protected area. The proposal has been carefully designed to ensure that the development does not have an unacceptable impact upon the residential amenities of the neighbouring occupiers and as such it is considered that it complies with Policies EV1, EV2, EV16 and EV26 of the Adopted UDP. Approval is therefore recommended.

RECOMMENDATION:

APPROVE, subject to the following conditions:

1 Notwithstanding the provisions of the Town and Country Planning (General Permitted Development) Order 1995, (or any Order revoking or amending that Order), Classes A, B, D and E 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 – 4 MAY 2010

ITEM 9 (CONT’D) APPLICATION NO. 2009/1842

2 Notwithstanding the approved plans, samples of all external finishes which shall include natural rendered walls, natural slate roofs, timber windows, timber fascia and soffits shall be submitted to and approved by the Local Planning Authority in writing before any construction works above ground level are commenced. The scheme shall be implemented in accordance with the approved details unless otherwise agreed in writing to the Local Planning Authority. Reason: In the interests of visual amenity.

3 Notwithstanding the submitted plans, no development shall take place on site without the prior written approval of the Local Planning Authority for a scheme for the landscaping of the site, which shall include details of a new native hedge along the northern boundary of the site. The landscaping scheme shall be implemented prior to the occupation of the dwelling and completed within 12 months from the completion of the development. The hedgerow shall thereafter be retained in accordance with the approved details unless otherwise agreed in writing by the Local Planning Authority. Reason: In the interest of visual amenity.

4 The hedgerow on the southern and eastern boundaries of the site shall be maintained in accordance with a scheme to be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority prior to the beneficial occupation of the dwelling commencing. Reason: In the interest of visual amenity.

5 Notwithstanding the plans submitted, before the development hereby permitted is commenced, details of revised levels of the dwelling in relation to the adjoining land and highway shall be submitted to and approved by the Local Planning Authority in writing. The development shall thereafter be completed in accordance with the approved details. Reason: To ensure that the work is carried out at suitable levels in relation to the highway and adjoining land having regard to the amenities of adjoining occupiers and the character of the surrounding area.

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, EV16 and EV26)

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

3 Please note that part of the site is registered common land and any proposed works on this may require consent from the Welsh Assembly under s.194 of the Law of Property 1925. Any works carried out without such consent will be unlawful.

AREA 2 DEVELOPMENT CONTROL COMMITTEE – 4 MAY 2010

ITEM 9 (CONT’D) APPLICATION NO. 2009/1842

PLANS site plan, dwg 01 existing block plan, dwg 03 site sections, dwg 06 proposed first floor, dwg 10 proposed north elevation received 14th December 2009 and SR199 04, SR199 05, SR199 07, SR199 08 and SR199 09 dated 8th February 2010 and SR 199 Dwg 02 dated 6th April 2010.

AREA 2 DEVELOPMENT CONTROL COMMITTEE – 4 MAY 2010

ITEM 10 APPLICATION NO. 2010/0065 WARD: Gower Area 2

Location: Swallow Barn Cwm Ivy Llanmadoc Swansea SA3 1DJ Proposal: Retention of garden shed and use for the sale of arts and crafts for no more than 28 days a year Applicant: Mrs Sian Griffiths

BACKGROUND INFORMATION

POLICIES

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

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

Policy 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)

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)

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)

AREA 2 DEVELOPMENT CONTROL COMMITTEE – 4 MAY 2010

ITEM 10 (CONT’D) APPLICATION NO. 2010/0065

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. (City & County of Swansea Unitary Development Plan 2008)

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 EC11 Appropriate small scale rural business development or home based employment within, and in exceptional circumstances adjoining, existing villages or closely associated with suitable groupings of farm buildings will be permitted subject to a defined set of criteria including loss of amenity, transportation considerations, impact on landscape and village scene, and natural heritage and historic environment etc. (City & County of Swansea Unitary Development Plan 2008)

Policy EC4 All new retail development will be assessed against need and other specific criteria. (City & County of Swansea Unitary Development Plan 2008)

SITE HISTORY

App No. Proposal 2009/1423 Use of the garden shed to sell crafts temporarily for less than 28 days per calendar year (application for Certificate of Proposed Lawful Development) Decision: CALLED IN Application (Swansea) Decision Date: 12/01/2010

2001/0996 Conversion of barn to residential use incorporating a two storey gable extension Decision: Grant Permission Conditional Decision Date: 25/09/2001

2001/1036 Demolition of lean-to structure attached to existing barn (application for conservation area consent) Decision: Withdrawn Decision Date: 26/06/2001

RESPONSE TO CONSULTATION

The application was advertised as a departure and one neighbouring resident was individually consulted. NO RESPONSE. AREA 2 DEVELOPMENT CONTROL COMMITTEE – 4 MAY 2010

ITEM 10 (CONT’D) APPLICATION NO. 2010/0065

Llangennith, Llanmadoc and Cheriton Community Council - No objection to this proposal.

APPRAISAL

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

Full planning permission is sought for the retention of a garden shed and the use of the shed for the sale of arts and crafts for no more than 28 days in any calendar year. The application site is located with the garden area of Swallow Barn, Cwm Ivy within the Gower Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty (AONB).

The main issues to be considered with regard to this application are the visual impact of the proposed development on the character and appearance of the surrounding area, the impact on the residential amenity of the occupiers of the neighbouring properties and highway safety, and the physical impact of the proposal on sites protected for their natural heritage that lie within close proximity to the application site. These impacts must assessed together with the need to provide visitor and tourist facilities and the benefits to the local economy having regard to Policies EV1, EV2, EV21, EV22, EV26, EV25, EV27, EC11 and EC4 of the City and County of Swansea Unitary Development Plan (UDP).

The application site is located within the Gower AONB. Policy EV26 states that within the Gower AONB the prime objective is the conservation and enhancement of the area’s natural beauty, whilst having regard to the social and economic well being of the area. Policy EV1 states that within the AONB new development should preserve and where possible enhance the environment through its location, scale and design. Policy EV2 states that new development must have regard to the physical character and topography of the site and its surroundings.

The site also lies in close proximity to the Loughor Estuary which is of considerable natural heritage value, supporting areas of International and national importance including the Carmarthen Bay Dunes and Carmarthen Bay and Estuaries SACs and the Burry Inlet and Loughor Estuary SSSI. Policies EV25 and EV27 aim to protect the integrity of these designated sites.

In terms of the planning history for this application site, planning permission was granted for the conversion of the barn to residential use in September 2001 (2001/0996 refers) subject to a number of conditions including the withdrawal of permitted development rights.

In terms of visual amenity, this application seeks to retain the existing single storey wooden outbuilding on site and use it for the occasional sale of the applicant’s own paintings and locally produced crafts. The outbuilding measures approximately 5.5m in length with a depth of approximately 3.6m and a pitched roof and ridge height of around 3m and is located in the south western corner of the residential curtilage of the host dwelling. On this basis, it is considered that the scale, design and external appearance of the outbuilding is appropriate for the rural location and would not detract from the main dwelling and the character and appearance of the surrounding area. Furthermore, the wooden outbuilding is screened by the existing boundary treatment hedgerow and as such does not appear unduly prominent when viewed from public vantage points. AREA 2 DEVELOPMENT CONTROL COMMITTEE – 4 MAY 2010

ITEM 10 (CONT’D) APPLICATION NO. 2010/0065

It is therefore considered that the proposal would does not have a significant harmful effect upon the street scene, or the visual relationship of the character of the area and its setting which contributes positively to the quality of the Gower AONB. The proposal is therefore in accordance with Policies, EV1, EV2 and EV26 of the UDP.

Having regard to the intended occasional use of the outbuilding for the sale of arts and crafts, the site lies outside the small village of Llanmadoc and in the countryside where development is strictly controlled. Policy EV21 permits non residential development within the countryside subject to a number of criteria. Whilst this proposal does not fully meet the criteria listed within policy EV21, National Policy Guidance: Ministerial Interim Planning Policy (MIPPS) does lend support to new retail services such as craft shops in rural areas. In assessing such proposals, local planning authorities should take account of:

ƒ The potential impact on nearby village shops; ƒ The desirability of providing a service throughout the year; and ƒ The likely impact of traffic generated and access and parking arrangements.

Policy EC11 promotes appropriate small scale rural business development, including craft workshops. However the policy applies to small and large villages and the application therefore does not strictly accord with policy as it is not located within or adjacent to existing small village.

Policy EC4 states that the acceptability of all retail development proposals will be assessed against the need for the development, where this is relevant to determination. The sequential approach should be used when considering proposals for new retail development. Amplification paragraph 2.4.10 states that outside established centres, consideration of the need for additional retail provision will be the starting point for determining proposals.

With regard to the current proposal, it is intended to limit the sale of arts and crafts goods for no more than 28 days a year from this location. In this respect, given the small scale of the proposed retail operation and limited size of the outbuilding, whilst the proposal does not strictly adhere to development plan policy, on balance and subject to appropriate conditions to restrict the goods sold, and to ensure that the use of the outbuilding remains ancillary to the main dwelling, it is not considered that the proposal would cause significant harm to the trade of the nearby village shop in Llanmadoc and would not therefore undermine the Unitary Development Plan policies cited above.

In terms of residential amenity, it is considered that the siting of the existing wooden outbuilding dictates that there would be no detrimental impact upon the residential amenity of neighbouring properties by virtue of unacceptable overlooking, overshadowing or overbearing physical impact. In terms of the proposed retail use, subject to appropriate conditions to control the sale of goods from the outbuilding, it is not considered that the use of the wooden outbuilding for 28 days a year is likely to cause any significant demonstrable harm to the residential amenity of the neighbouring occupants in terms of noise and disturbance or loss of privacy in this instance, in accordance with Policies EV1 and EV2 of the UDP.

In terms of highway safety, the Head of Transportation and Engineering has been consulted on this proposal and has noted that the nature of the use applied for and the size of the building involved in unlikely to result in any significant increase in traffic using the restricted access to the site. AREA 2 DEVELOPMENT CONTROL COMMITTEE – 4 MAY 2010

ITEM 10 (CONT’D) APPLICATION NO. 2010/0065

The limited parking available as indicated by the applicant will be sufficient to accommodate demand for 28 days a year and taking all circumstances in account the Head of Transportation and Engineering recommends no highway objections.

In conclusion, and having regard to all material considerations including the Human Rights Act, the scale, design and external appearance of the wooden outbuilding is considered an appropriate form of development which would not have an unacceptable impact upon visual and residential amenity. Furthermore, on balance, whilst the proposed retail use of the building for the sale of arts and crafts does not strictly accord with development plan policy as the application site is outside the village and would not normally be supported, given the restricted and small scale nature of this proposal, and subject to appropriate conditions to limit the range of goods sold and to prevent further intensification of use, overall it is not considered that the proposal would harm the trade of the village shop or cause any demonstrable harm to the residential amenity of neighbouring residents. Moreover, it is not considered that the approval of this application would prejudice the consideration of future applications for other retail uses at this location, which would need to be considered on their merits. Accordingly, on balance, it is not considered that this proposal would result in unacceptable detriment to the existing character or natural beauty of this part of the Gower AONB or the trade within the nearby village and as such does not represent a departure from the Development Plan. Approval is therefore recommended.

RECOMMENDATION

APPROVE, subject to the following conditions:

1 This permission shall ensure for a maximum of 28 days in any calendar year. Reason: The development hereby approved is such that the Council wish to retain control over any future development being permitted in order to ensure that a satisfactory form of development is achieved at all times.

2 The building shall be used for the sale of art and craft works only and for no other purpose (including any other purpose in Class A1) of the Schedule to the Town and Country Planning (Use Classes) Order 1987, or in any provision equivalent to that Class in any statutory instrument revoking and re-enacting that Order with or without modification). 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.

3 The development hereby approved shall be used wholly in conjunction with and for the occupants of the existing dwelling house and their family, and shall not be let, sublet or otherwise disposed of as a separate unit at any time. Reason: It is not considered that the application site or building is suitable for the creation of an independent or permanent retail unit.

AREA 2 DEVELOPMENT CONTROL COMMITTEE – 4 MAY 2010

ITEM 10 (CONT’D) APPLICATION NO. 2010/0065

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, EV21, EV22, EV26, EV25, EV27, EC11 and EC4 of the City and County of Swansea Unitary Development Plan (UDP).

2 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, block plan, proposed elevations, proposed floor plan, design and access statement received 12th January 2010

AREA 2 DEVELOPMENT CONTROL COMMITTEE – 4 MAY 2010

ITEM 11 APPLICATION NO. 2010/0186 WARD: Gower Area 2

Location: "Sea Shells", Llanrhidian, Gower, Swansea Proposal: Completion and retention of one rear dormer Applicant: S & J Property Limited

BACKGROUND INFORMATION

POLICIES

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

Policy 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)

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 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 90/1275/12 RELAXATION OF AGRICULTURAL OCCUPANCY CONDITION. Decision: *HGPCU - GRANT PERMISSION UNCONDITIONAL Decision Date: 23/10/1990

2010/0187 Addition of pitched roof to existing double garage, roof extension to tractor garage/workshop area and construction of glazed link to join the two outbuildings UNDETERMINED

AREA 2 DEVELOPMENT CONTROL COMMITTEE – 4 MAY 2010

ITEM 11 (CONT’D) APPLICATION NO. 2010/0186

2010/0188 Construction of an agricultural barn (application for the Prior Notification of Agricultural Development) UNDETERMINED

RESPONSE TO CONSULTATION

The proposal was advertised on site. NO RESPONSE.

Llanrhidian Lower Community Council – The Council is asking why work on the above property is underway before the plans were sent out to us.

APPRAISAL

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

Full planning permission is sought for the retention and completion of one dormer window at Sea Shells, Llanrhidian, Gower. The application property is situated within the Gower Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty (AONB) and open countryside.

The main issues for consideration with regard to this application are the impact on the character and appearance of the original dwelling and surrounding area, the impact upon the amenities of neighbouring residents and highway safety, having regard to Policies EV1, EV22, EV26 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 no additional overriding considerations arising from the provisions of the Human rights Act.

In terms of visual amenity, it is considered that the modest scale and design of the dormer window does not compromise the roof form or dominate the plane of the original roof and the proposal would be finished in materials to match the host dwelling. On this basis, the scale, design and external appearance of the dormer window would not detract from the overall character of the existing dwelling and would not appear unduly prominent when viewed from public vantage points. It is therefore considered that the proposal would not have a significant harmful effect upon the visual relationship of the character of the area and its setting which contributes positively to the quality of the Gower AONB.

The siting of application property dictates that there are no residential properties in the vicinity of the application site that are likely to be adversely affected by the proposal and there are no direct neighbours to the rear. It is therefore considered that the proposal would not give rise to any unacceptable impact on residential amenity.

With regard to issues of highway safety and access, the proposal does not affect the existing car parking arrangements.

In response to the Community Council’s question, the application is for the retention and completion of the rear dormer. The original intention was to construct two dormers but amended plans have subsequently been submitted to retain one dormer to the rear. AREA 2 DEVELOPMENT CONTROL COMMITTEE – 4 MAY 2010

ITEM 11 (CONT’D) APPLICATION NO. 2010/0186

In conclusion, and having regard to all material considerations including the Human Rights Act, it is considered that the proposal would be in keeping with the character and appearance of the host dwelling and would not adversely affect the character and appearance of the area or the wider Gower AONB, the amenity of nearby residents or highway safety standards. The proposal is therefore considered to be an appropriate form of development, which would accord with Policies EV1, EV22, EV26 and HC7 of the Unitary Development Plan and the Supplementary Planning Guidance entitled A Design Guide for Householder Development. Approval is therefore recommended.

RECOMMENDATION

APPROVE subject to the following conditions:

1 The development shall be completed in accordance with the said application plans and conditions prior to any part thereof being brought into beneficial use, unless otherwise agreed in writing by the Local Planning Authority. Reason: To comply with the provisions of Section 91 of the Town and Country Planning Act, 1990 and to ensure that the development is completed in accordance with the plans approved by the City and County of Swansea, and so avoid any detriment to amenity or public safety by works remaining uncompleted.

INFORMATIVES

1 The development plan covering the City and County of Swansea is the City and County of Swansea Unitary Development Plan. The following policies were relevant to the consideration of the application: Policies EV1, EV22, EV26 and HC7 of the Unitary Development Plan and the Supplementary Planning Guidance entitled A Design Guide for Householder Development.

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

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.

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).

AREA 2 DEVELOPMENT CONTROL COMMITTEE – 4 MAY 2010

ITEM 11 (CONT’D) APPLICATION NO. 2010/0186

PLANS

Site location plan, 1727-04 existing floor plans and elevations, 1727-05 proposed floor plans and elevations, 01727-06 proposed elevations, 1727-07 existing site plan, 1727-08 proposed site plan received 8th February 2010. Amended Plans: Site location plan, 1727- 05 (C) proposed floor plans and elevations, 01727-06 (C) proposed elevations, 1727-07 (A) existing site plan, 1727-08 (C) proposed site plan received 13th May 2010

AREA 2 DEVELOPMENT CONTROL COMMITTEE – 4 MAY 2010

ITEM 12 APPLICATION NO. 2010/0366 WARD: Gower Area 2

Location: Caravan 43 Whitford Bay Leisure Park Llanmadoc Swansea SA3 1DE Proposal: Construction of decked area Applicant: Mr Peter Maddox

BACKGROUND INFORMATION

POLICIES

Policy Policy Description Policy EC17 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 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 EC21 Improvements to the environmental quality, conditions and facilities will be encouraged within existing camping, touring unit and static caravan sites and small increases in the number of pitches maybe permitted where justified by environmental improvements and where the overalls scale would not be increased. Change to the type of accommodation will only be permitted where there is no adverse impact on the landscape, would bring about environmental improvements and not require extensive additional infrastructure, nor cause harm to the natural heritage. (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 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)

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)

AREA 2 DEVELOPMENT CONTROL COMMITTEE – 4 MAY 2010

ITEM 12 (CONT’D) APPLICATION NO. 2010/0366

SITE HISTORY

App No. Proposal 97/0506 EXTENSION TO CARAVAN PARK AND ENVIRONMENTAL IMPROVEMENTS Decision: Withdraw Decision Date: 12/08/1997

97/1249 Use of land for outdoor sports/recreations (Class D2) in association with existing static caravan site Decision: Appeal Dismissed Decision Date: 20/07/1998

99/0763 ERECTION OF SINGLE STOREY SITE OFFICE(AMENDED AND ADDITIONAL PLANS RECEIVED) Decision: Withdraw Decision Date: 12/06/2000

84/0523/03 USE OF LAND FOR CAMPING AND CARAVANNING. Decision: *HRP - REFUSE PERMISSION Decision Date: 28/06/1984

2003/1718 Occupation of caravans for residential or holiday purposes for 12 months each year (Application for a Certificate of Lawfulness) Decision: Was Lawful Decision Date: 26/05/2004

RESPONSE TO CONSULTATIONS

Neighbours: The application was advertised on site in the form of a Site Notice and no letters of response were received.

Llangennith, Llanmadoc and Cheriton Community Council: We have no objection to this proposal.

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 decked area at Plot 43, Whitford Bay Leisure Park, Llanmadoc. The proposed timber deck area will replace the existing patio area. AREA 2 DEVELOPMENT CONTROL COMMITTEE – 4 MAY 2010

ITEM 12 (CONT’D) APPLICATION NO. 2010/0366

The main issue for consideration with regard to this application is the appropriateness of this additional structure in this prominent rural location and the resultant effect upon the character and appearance of the area, having specific regard to Swansea Unitary Development Policies EV1, EV22, EV26, EC17 and EC21 and the planning history of the site.

Policies EV22 and EV26 of the Swansea UDP seek to protect the environment and natural beauty of the countryside for its own sake. Within the Gower AONB the protection of natural beauty will be the primary objective. Development will not be permitted in the open countryside except where essential for the rural economy, or in specified defined circumstances.

Whilst Planning Policy Wales (March 2002) recognises that tourism is a major element in the Welsh economy particularly in rural and coastal areas the primary objective is the preservation and safeguarding of the natural area and interests of the local communities. The general thrust of development plan policies is therefore aimed at protecting the character, appearance and natural beauty of the Gower AONB and ensuring that new tourism and recreation development is consistent with this primary objective.

The application site is well established and it benefits from a lawful use of 12 month occupancy for both residential and holiday purposes granted in May 2004 (2003/1718 refers) as “the relevant planning permission P25/Z/267 (licence reference PH/4/60 ) granted on the 1st May 1961 contained no conditions restricting type of occupier or occupancy period”.

Caravans do not benefit from any permitted development rights, as such rights only relate to dwelling houses. Notwithstanding this, it is considered that the siting of Plot 43 grouped within the main bulk of caravans within a low lying position and the fact that the decking is not raised above ground level by any significant amount dictates that any visual impact would be minimal and it would not appear unduly prominent in the landscape. It is considered therefore to comply with the prevailing Development Plan Policies.

It is not considered that there are any residential issues to consider in this instance as the amount of residential amenity expected within a caravan park is not considered to be the same as would be expected for a dwelling house. It is neither considered that the approval of this applicaiton would set an undesirable precedent for other developments of a similar nature in the park as due to the topography of the site, the visual prominence of each caravan would differ and as such, each application would be treated on its own individual merits.

There are many other examples of decking in this Caravan Park and there is only one record of any planning permission being granted. In this respect, the details have again been passed to the Enforcement Section for investigation.

In conclusion therefore and having regard to all material considerations, the proposed decking in this instance is, on balance, considered to be an acceptable form of development at this location, complying with the requirements of Policies EV1, EV22, EV26, EC17 and EC21 of the Unitary Development Plan 2008 and approval is recommended.

AREA 2 DEVELOPMENT CONTROL COMMITTEE – 4 MAY 2010

ITEM 12 (CONT’D) APPLICATION NO. 2010/0366

RECOMMENDATION

APPROVE, subject to the following condition:

CONDITION

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

INFORMATIVES

1 The development plan covering the City and County of Swansea is the City and County of Swansea Unitary Development Plan. The following policies were relevant to the consideration of the application: (EV1, EV26, EV22, EC17 amd EC21)

2 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, existing floor plan, existing elevations, proposed floor plan, proposed elevations, design and access statement received 10th March 2010

AREA 2 DEVELOPMENT CONTROL COMMITTEE – 4 MAY 2010

ITEM 13 APPLICATION NO. 2010/0339 WARD: Gower Area 2

Location: Plot 8 Greenways Caravan Park Oxwich Swansea Proposal: Construction of decked area Applicant: Mr David Kennedy

BACKGROUND INFORMATION

POLICIES

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

Policy 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)

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 EC17 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 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 EC21 Improvements to the environmental quality, conditions and facilities will be encouraged within existing camping, touring unit and static caravan sites and small increases in the number of pitches maybe permitted where justified by environmental improvements and where the overalls scale would not be increased. Change to the type of accommodation will only be permitted where there is no adverse impact on the landscape, would bring about environmental improvements and not require extensive additional infrastructure, nor cause harm to the natural heritage. (City & County of Swansea Unitary Development Plan 2008)

AREA 2 DEVELOPMENT CONTROL COMMITTEE – 4 MAY 2010

ITEM 13 (CONT’D) APPLICATION NO. 2010/0339

SITE HISTORY

App No. Proposal 2002/0578 Retention of 13 static caravans and pitches in field 4031, siting of 25 static caravans in field 3443 with associated infrastructure and landscaping works within fields, 3443, 4031, 4442, 5030 and the western part of 5836, removal of 20 caravans from and the adjustment to the siting of 20 caravans and pitches within fields 4442 and 5030 Decision: Grant Permission Conditional Decision Date: 15/03/2005

98/0395 CHANGE OF USE FROM 430 TENT CAMPING SPACES TO USE FOR THE SITING OF 70 STATIC CARAVANS Decision: Withdraw Decision Date: 23/06/1998

2006/1239 Carry out development without compliance with condition 2 of planning permission 2002/0578 granted on 15th March 2005 to allow holiday occupation of the caravans at any time of the year Decision: Approve Conditional (S73) Decision Date: 20/02/2007

2008/0061 Retention of caravan decking and access ramps Decision: Refuse Decision Date: 28/04/2009

2004/0523 Siting of caravans for residential or holiday occupation for 12 months each year (application for a Certificate of Proposed Lawful use) Decision: Withdrawn Decision Date: 03/05/2006

2009/0443 Variation of condition 2 of planning permission 2006/1239 granted on 20th February 2007 to amend the content of the register of caravan owners and occupiers by excluding reference to the dates of occupancy of caravans and to remove the requirement for annual submission of the register to the Local Planning Authority

Decision: Approve Conditional (S73) Decision Date: 15/06/2009

2009/1565 Construction of decked area Decision: Grant Permission Conditional Decision Date: 04/02/2010

AREA 2 DEVELOPMENT CONTROL COMMITTEE – 4 MAY 2010

ITEM 13 (CONT’D) APPLICATION NO. 2010/0339

2006/2636 Demolition of toilet/shower block and change of use from touring units to 7 no. holiday static caravans with landscaping Decision: Refuse Decision Date: 08/03/2007

97/0901 VARIATION OF CONDITION (C) OF PLANNING PERMISSION 75/1482/03 GRANTED ON 29th APRIL 1976 TO ALLOW RELATIVES AND FRIENDS OF THE OCCUPIERS OF THE CARAVANS TO USE THE FACILITIES OF THE CLUB HOUSE Decision: *HRP - REFUSE PERMISSION Decision Date: 23/09/1997

95/0901 VARIATION OF RESTRICTION OF OCCUPANCY TO ALLOW 10 MONTH OCCUPANCY OF CARAVANS Decision: *HGPC - GRANT PERMISSION CONDITIONAL Decision Date: 29/09/1995

81/0711/03 PROPOSED OPEN AIR SWIMMING POOL AND CHILDRENS POOL Decision: *HGPC - GRANT PERMISSION CONDITIONAL Decision Date: 25/06/1981

75/1482/03 EXTENSION TO CLUB - BALLROOM Decision: *HGPC - GRANT PERMISSION CONDITIONAL Decision Date: 30/04/1976

74/0896/01 EXTENSION TO EXISTING BALLROOM AND CLUBHOUSE Decision: *HGPC - GRANT PERMISSION CONDITIONAL Decision Date: 27/03/1975

80/1436/07 ESTABLISHED USE CERTIFICATE FOR THE SITING OF TENTS FROM EASTER TO THE END OF SEPTEMBER Decision: *HGPC - GRANT PERMISSION CONDITIONAL Decision Date: 26/02/1981

76/1095/01 CHALETS FOR HOLIDAY USAGE Decision: *HRP - REFUSE PERMISSION Decision Date: 25/11/1976

84/0721/04 RENEWAL OF TEMPORARY PERMISSION FOR TEENAGERS ROOM AND BAR STORE. Decision: *HGPC - GRANT PERMISSION CONDITIONAL Decision Date: 28/06/1984

84/0752/03 PROPOSED TOILETS AND AMENITY BLOCK. Decision: *HGPC - GRANT PERMISSION CONDITIONAL Decision Date: 29/11/1984 AREA 2 DEVELOPMENT CONTROL COMMITTEE – 4 MAY 2010 ITEM 13 (CONT’D) APPLICATION NO. 2010/0339

2005/1581 Use of clubhouse and ballroom premises without compliance with conditions 2 and 5 of outline planning permission 74/0896 and conditions (c) and (e) of reserved matters consent 75/1482 to allow use outside the hours of 11am and 11pm and use by persons not staying on site in caravans and tents Decision: Withdrawn Decision Date: 06/06/2006

2003/2508 Use of land as a Caravan Site (defined by Section 1(4) of the Caravan Sites and Control of Development Act 1960) without planning condition or limitation for residential or holiday purposes with a single storey dwelling (application for a Certificate of Lawful Use) Decision: Is Lawful Decision Date: 24/11/2004

87/1288/08 OVERHEAD LINE. Decision: *HO - OBJECTIONS Decision Date: 13/10/1987

75/1327/03 SITE FOR TOURING CARAVANS (100 MAXIMUM) PLUSS ASSOCIATED ABLUTIONS Decision: *HRP - REFUSE PERMISSION Decision Date: 29/01/1976

76/1094/03 TOURING CARAVANS Decision: *HRP - REFUSE PERMISSION Decision Date: 25/11/1976

RESPONSE TO CONSULTATIONS

The application was advertised on site and two individual properties were consulted. No response.

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 decked area at Plot 8 Greenways Holiday Park, Oxwich. The proposed deck would measure 12.3m to match the width of the caravan, have a depth of 2.3m and an overall height of 1.3m from ground level to the top of the balustrade. The decking will also encompass the northern elevation of the caravan.

The main issue for consideration with regard to this application is the appropriateness of this additional structure in this prominent rural location and the resultant effect upon the character and appearance of the area, having specific regard to Swansea Unitary Development Policies EV1, EV22, EV26, EC17 and EC21 and the planning history of the site. AREA 2 DEVELOPMENT CONTROL COMMITTEE – 4 MAY 2010

ITEM 13 (CONT’D) APPLICATION NO. 2010/0339

Policies EV22 and EV26 of the Swansea UDP seek to protect the environment and natural beauty of the countryside for its own sake. Within the Gower AONB the protection of natural beauty will be the primary objective. Development will not be permitted in the open countryside except where essential for the rural economy, or in specified defined circumstances.

Whilst Planning Policy Wales (March 2002) recognises that tourism is a major element in the Welsh economy particularly in rural and coastal areas the primary objective is the preservation and safeguarding of the natural area and interests of the local communities. The general thrust of development plan policies is therefore aimed at protecting the character, appearance and natural beauty of the Gower AONB and ensuring that new tourism and recreation development is consistent with this primary objective.

The application site is within an established caravan park within which there is permission for a mixture of static caravans together with camping pitches on specified fields. There are no permissions in relation to touring caravans within this park and an Inspector recently upheld an Enforcement Notice for the ceasing of the use of the land for the siting of touring caravans, camper vans and dormobiles on O.S parcels 2626 and 4020 (part).

Caravans do not benefit from any permitted development rights, as such rights only relate to dwelling houses. Notwithstanding this, it is considered that the siting of this caravan on Plot 8 behind the existing hedge and the fact that the decking is not raised above ground level by any significant amount dictates that any visual impact would be minimal and it would not appear unduly prominent in the landscape. It is considered therefore to comply with the prevailing Development Plan Policies.

It is not considered that there are any residential issues to consider in this instance as the amount of residential amenity expected within a caravan park is not considered to be the same as would be expected for a dwelling house. It is neither considered that the approval of this applicaiton would set an undesirable precedent for other developments of a similar nature in the park as due to the topography of the site, the visual prominence of each caravan would differ and as such, each application would be treated on its own individual merits.

In conclusion therefore and having regard to all material considerations, the proposed decking in this instance is, on balance, considered to be an acceptable form of development at this location, complying with the requirements of Policies EV1, EV22, EV26, EC17 and EC21 of the Unitary Development Plan 2008 and approval is recommended.

RECOMMENDATION

APPROVE, subject to the following condition:

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

AREA 2 DEVELOPMENT CONTROL COMMITTEE – 4 MAY 2010

ITEM 13 (CONT’D) APPLICATION NO. 2010/0339

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, EV22, EV26, EC17, EC21

PLANS

Design and access statement received 2nd March 2010. Amended plans DJK/DECK/1 Site location plan, DJK/DECK/2 block plan, DJK/DECK/4 proposed elevations received 19th April 2010

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

Labour Councillors: J E Burtonshaw E T Kirchner M C Child P M Matthews W Evans J T Miles R Francis-Davies J C Richards D H James D W W Thomas W (Billy) E A Jones P B Smith D I E Jones

Conservative Councillors: A (Tony) C S Colburn R H Kinzett (Non Voting) P R Hood-Williams (Non Voting) M Smith

Communities of Swansea Councillors: M E Gibbs R L Smith G Seabourne