COUNTY BOROUGH OF BLAENAU GWENT

REPORT TO: THE CHAIR AND MEMBERS OF THE PLANNING COMMITTEE

REPORT SUBJECT: PLANNING REPORT

REPORT AUTHOR: SERVICE MANAGER DEVELOPMENT

LEAD OFFICER/ TECHNICAL SERVICES DEPARTMENT

ORDER OF APPLICATIONS

Application No. Address

C/2014/0276 Land at Rassau Industrial Estate, Rassau, Ebbw Vale

C/2014/0193 Land at Sycamore Avenue, Tredegar

C/2014/0228 Land at Former Tech Board Site, Rassau Industrial Estate, Rassau

C/2014/0375 Former Wrekin Site, Cwm Road, Aberbeeg, Abertillery

Application No. : C/2014/0276 (Full Application)

Case Officer : Catherine Ashby

Date Lodged : 30 September, 2014

Applicant : Mr Peter Trussler Ogmore Power Limited, C/O Nathaniel Lichfield & Partner

Agent : Nathaniel Lichfield & Partners Helmont House Churchill Way, Cardiff

Location : Land at Rassau Industrial Estate Rassau, Ebbw Vale

Proposal : Construction and operation of a 16MW Short Term Operating Reserve (STOR) generating plant to include the construction of a new building with exhaust flues to house an engine generator and the provision of external plant to include outdoor cooler radiators, gas reception kiosk, security fencing, car parking, new access and landscaping scheme.

Ward : Ebbw Vale Rassau

REPORT SUMMARY The application proposes the construction of a 16MW embedded Short Term Operating Reserve (STOR) gas powered energy generating plant within a new building to include external equipment, a new access and landscaping works. The plant is designed to provide reserve electricity generation to the National Grid which can be called on at short notice at times of network ‘stress’. The principle of the proposed development and its impact on environmental, social and economic factors has been carefully assessed. It is considered that the development is acceptable in principle in this location, and that the impacts of the development are also acceptable subject to mitigation where appropriate. It is therefore recommended that planning permission be granted subject to conditions. SITE AND DEVELOPMENT DESCRIPTION The 0.64 ha application site is located within Rassau Industrial Estate and is currently being temporarily used as a compound for the purposes of constructing the realigned Heads of the Valleys A465 dual carriageway (for road construction plant, machinery and materials storage). Once complete the road will run directly alongside the northern boundary of the site. Prior to its current temporary use the site was vacant brownfield land that formed part of a development plateau. The southern boundary of the site is adjacent to the internal (unclassified) Rassau Industrial Estate road, although works in relation to the A465 dualling currently prohibit access. The site also benefits from screening from a mature belt of trees adjacent to the southern boundary.

The vacant site forms part of the wider Rassau Industrial Estate which itself comprises typical steel portal frame warehouse/industrial-style buildings on development plateaus interspersed by estate roads and belts of landscaping. There are no employment premises in the immediate vicinity of the site. The nearest industrial premises would be located north of the realigned A465 trunk road and on the far west of the development plateau. The residential area of the Rassau is located to the south/south- west and is approximately 200m away at its closest point.

The planning application proposes the construction of a 16MW embedded Short Term Operating Reserve (STOR) gas powered energy generating plant within a new building to include external equipment, an access and landscaping works.

Also known as a ‘peaking’ plant the STOR plant will provide electricity generation at short notice to the electricity network. The National Grid owns and operates the national electricity network. They are obliged to ensure that the electricity supply system runs within specified limits. Many factors change these operating conditions, but none more so that the balance between the electricity demanded by customers and the electricity generators available to produce electricity. Conventional power generation equipment can be operated with some certainty, however the increasing supply of energy from renewable sources, such as wind turbines and solar arrays, means that some power generation is reliant on prevailing weather conditions, which can create a shortfall in supply. These shortfalls are required to be replaced at short notice and for this reason the National Grid requires a number of plants across the country capable of producing small amounts of electricity at short notice. The power plant the subject of this application would be such a plant. The proposed STOR comprises of eight ‘engine-driven electricity sets’ that together create a total of around 16MW energy. Each engine generator set will be sited in its own acoustic containment cell, side by side within a new plant building. The engines would be fuelled by natural gas and will use conventional spark ignition technology to burn the fuel which in turn rotates the generator, creating electricity that is exported to support the local electricity network. The engine exhaust gases pass through a silencer before being expelled to the atmosphere. As the fuel is natural gas the exhaust emissions are similar to those expelled by a conventional gas-fired central heating boiler. The heat generated by the engines is dissipated in radiators cooled by electric fans. The engine cooling system is a closed loop water system which continues for as long as the plant is operating.

By its very nature, i.e. providing short term reserve power at short notice at times of network ‘stress’, the plant will only run for short periods of time with long periods between operating times. The developers experience show that this is infrequent and that STOR facilities are typically called on for around 60-90 minutes every 2-3 day, which equates to around 300 hours per annum. This period of time is typical in the current market, though actual usage may vary according to supply and demand and network ‘stress’.

The National Grid’s Annual Market report shows that in 2011/12 the average time for a STOR call (i.e. across the entire network) was 83 minutes and that the average number of STOR calls per day was once every 3 days. However, of this, some facilities never run whilst others run a high percentage of the STOR calls.

The proposed new plant building would be a steel clad portal framed style building approximately 45m long by 19m wide and 9m high at the ridge of the pitched roof. Ventilation louvres will be sited at high level on the northern elevation. Eight slim galvanised steel flues will be sited at equal distance along the southern roof plane of the building and will project 3m above the ridge. As indicated above, eight engine generator sets in their own individual acoustic housings will be located within the building, albeit part of each set protrudes through an opening in the southern elevation. These are the enclosure air intake vents for each unit that allow air into the generator. They have silencers behind them to ensure no noise breakout and air heating and cooling systems. They also serve as the access points for taking the generator units in and out of the building.

Eight radiator coolers will be sited within the external compound alongside the northern elevation of the building. The coolers are approximately 4m long by 2m wide and 2m high and would be finished in galvanised steel. A gas reception kiosk is proposed to be erected in the southeast corner of the compound and would be approximately 6m long, 2.6m wide and 3 m high.

The Natural Gas supply required to fuel the engine generator sets is available at the correct pressure and capacity to operate the plant. An application has been made to Wales & West Utilities for a gas connection.

An electrical connection required to export the electricity generated to the local electricity network is available at the Western Power Distribution (WPD) electricity substation situated on the estate road approximately 350m from the site. An application for an electricity connection has been made to WPD. If required, a separate planning application will be made by WPD to facilitate the electrical connection.

The site will be accessed from the Heads of the Valleys A465 trunk road via the existing estate road to the south. A new access will be formed in the south west corner of the site, which will maximise the distance between the site entrance and the new roundabout that is to be constructed as part of wider road improvement works to the estate road as part of the A465 improvements. To avoid vehicular conflict between traffic coming off the new roundabout and vehicles wishing to turn right into the site, a pull-in is proposed to ensure that traffic is not held up whilst the gates into the site are being opened. A bellmouth will be constructed at the site entrance and internal vehicles turning/ car parking arrangements are indicated. The hardstanding around the plant building will be laid to stone.

A belt of landscaping is proposed to the north and south of the main plant compound to provide screening and soften the development and it is proposed to agree the detail of these areas through a condition.

The main plant building will accommodate a welfare facility and foul water will be disposed to the main drainage system on the industrial estate. Surface water collected from the roof and hard standings will be discharged to the surface water main drainage system or soak-away.

It is proposed to enclose the main plant compound with a 2.4m high painted weld-mesh style security fence/gates, which will include a 3-strand electric wire top. The main security gate will remain locked except when being visited for maintenance. A CCTV system will be operational internally and externally around the main plant building for security and to keep a watching brief on the status of the plant. The site boundaries around the landscaped areas to the north and south of the main plant compound will be demarcated by a simple 1m high post and rail fence.

Site lighting will comprise standard, single sodium down lights positioned around the main plant building that will be activated by vehicles or personnel that enter the site. The lighting units will be hooded to allow safe access to the plant whilst minimising light impacts/ spillage.

Construction of the STOR generation plant will take around 6 months and will employ 8 construction staff on average over that period. Many of the construction staff will be sourced locally. During normal operation the site will be unmanned and controlled remotely, although regular maintenance will be carried out.

RELEVANT PLANNING HISTORY There is no relevant planning history for the site. However, a planning application for a small-scale STOR plant (ref C/2011/0192) on land immediately east of the site was refused planning permission. The reasons for refusal centred on the fact that the location of the proposed power plant was immediately south of the planned route of the A465 trunk road and conflicted with a roundabout on the industrial estate road that was planned as part of the scheme. Although Welsh Government raised no objection to the principle of a STOR power plant, they gave notice under Article 14 of the Town and Country Planning (General Development Procedure) Order 1995 that the Welsh Ministers in their capacity as highway authority direct that permission be refused in order not to prejudice the Welsh Government’s proposals for duelling of the A465 trunk road.

RELEVANT CONSULTATION RESPONSES Team Manager - Building Control Building Regulations not required.

Team Manager - European and Planning Policy Planning Policy broadly support the proposed development subject to the following issues being addressed:  The community and economic benefits of the proposed development (Policy SP8)  Biodiversity (Policy DM1 1f)  Compatibility of uses (Policy DM1 2a)  Visual Impact (Policy DM1 2b)  Water Environment (Policy DM1 1e)  Noise and light pollution (Policy DM1 2h)  Air quality (Policy DM1 2g)  Cumulative impacts of other developments (Policy DM1 2g)  Land stability (Policy DM1 1i)  Ground contamination (Policy DM1 1g)  Highway safety (Policy DM1 3a-b)  Use of palisade fencing (Policy DM2 a)  Screening to establish if a project level HRA is required (Policy DM14)  Adjacent to SINC (Policy DM14)  Loss of trees (Policy DM16) Service Manager - Infrastructure Highways The submitted report is acceptable in principle. The parking arrangements are acceptable having regard to the fact that no permanent staff are to be located on site, and should be maintained thereafter. The vehicular access is acceptable and the developer should contact the Highway Authority in this regard.

Drainage As a means of disposing of surface water the applicant suggests the use of either soakaway drainage or connection to the surface water sewers. Before any soakaway drainage can be used it will be necessary to determine the permeability of the soil. The only surface water system I am aware of is to the north of the site, which may not be suitable to connect to. If neither of the above is suitable it will be necessary to propose another method of disposal of the surface water before prior to the commencement of the development.

Ground Stability No objections in principle, but prior to development the applicant must submit details of the prevailing ground conditions and the foundation details.

Landscape Concerns raised with regard to visual impact of the development and palisade fencing from the receptors using the main A465 trunk road. A Landscape & Visual Impact Assessment (LVIA) was requested and subsequently submitted (November 2014). The LVIA is considered a robust assessment of the site conditions including positive and appropriate responses for the use of landscape detailing, including: the location of the plant compound in the centre of the site, use of native woodland planting to the north and south to provide a visual buffer against the access roads and the A465, replacement of palisade fencing with a modular system, all the details of which can be the subject of a condition.

Ecology An ecological assessment has been submitted that details there are no ecological issues related directly to the development site. Indirect impacts include the possibility for effects on the Usk Bat SAC. NRW guidance ‘AQTAG014 Guidance on identifying ‘relevance’ for assessment under the Habitats regulations for PPC installations with combustion processes’ states that for installations of between 5 and 20 MW assessment should be undertaken where the installation is less than 0.5km from a European site. The development is 2.5km distant and therefore an assessment under the Habitat Regulations is not required. Service Manager – Public Protection Ground Contamination: No information has been submitted in relation to potential ground contamination but given the proposed use it is not anticipated that there would be a level of contamination present that would prevent the proposed development proceeding given the implementation of any ncessary remediation. A condition is recommended for a desk top study, site investigation and remediation strategy.

Light Pollution: No information has been provided identifying lighting systems associated with the development and the potential impact from these systems. This aspect of the development should be the subject of a condition.

Noise: The impact of operational noise from the development has been considered by the applicant. To determine the level of impact the applicant has compared the existing noise climate at sensitive receptors (Ivy Close, Rassau), with the noise level generated from the development at the sensitive receptors.

In consideration of all the factors associated with the noise from the proposed development no objection is raised to the proposed development on noise grounds. This is primarily on the basis of the noise rating of the noise source, which is +0dB above background, indicates that the noise source will have a low impact on the existing noise climate.

If planning permission is granted a condition should be attached restricting the development to the noise levels contained within the supporting information submitted with the application. The condition would restrict the rating level of the noise emitted from the development, by not exceeding the existing night time background noise level of 25 LA90 dB by more than +) dB between 11:00pm and 07:00 am, and the existing daytime background noise level of 36 LA90 dB by more than -6 dB between 07:00 am and 11:00 pm..

Air Quality: The impact of the operational atmospheric emissions from the proposed development site has been considered by the applicant. In considering this information the views and representations of DEFRA and Public Health Wales were also sought and taken into account by the Environmental Health officer.

Potential concentration values at sensitive receptors have been predicted by computer modelling for the pollutant Nitrogen Dioxide (N02) and Carbon Monoxide (CO). This modelling looks at existing background values of NO2 and CO and calculates what the process contribution will be in addition to this background concentration. This total value is then compared to the National Air Quality Objectives, which are air quality standards the Local Authority must look to achieve within its area.

In consideration of the information that has submitted by the applicant in relation to the air quality impacts from the proposed development and the views and representations of DEFRA and Public Health Wales, no objection is raised to the proposed development.

If planning permission is granted it is recommended that a condition be attached restricting the development to the operational and emission rates contained within the supporting information submitted with the application, to the effect that, at any time the operational parameters and emission rates from the proposed development should not exceed those specified in air quality assessment report entitled “Air Quality Impact Assessment Ogmore Power Limited Rassau, Ebbw Vale OGMO01- 9128094” produced by Entran Limited”. Head of Estates & Strategic Asset Management: No response

Welsh Water Sewerage:If planning permission is granted it is requested that conditions be attached with regard to discharge of foul and surface water separately from the site, no surface water to be allowed to connect directly or indirectly to the public foul/ combined sewerage system without prior approval, and land drainage run off not to be permitted to discharge to the public sewerage system. Advisory notes should be attached to any permission.

Water supply: No objections

Hydrology: Welsh Water look to NRW to take responsibility for the protection of the potable water sources and wider impact on the environment during the construction, operation and any future decommissioning of the site. We are satisfied that NRW have looked at the issue of cumulative air quality and concluded that it is not an issue for them to consider, and therefore have no further requests for information or comments to make.

Natural Resources Wales Contamination: It is noted that the proposed site was formerly vacant brownfield land and is now a temporary compound for the highways agency. It is suggested that the site may have been a former factory site. The site also overlays a Secondary Aquifer. Since there is potential for land contamination it is advised that prior to the commencement of development a preliminary risk assessment be undertaken to assess the potential risk to controlled waters. NRW request that their full standard condition be used.

Environmental permit & air quality: It is noted from the Air Quality Impact Assessment that the proposed combustion activities will be multiple spark ignition gas engines with a combined appliance thermal input of 50MWth. However, there does not appear to be detailed calculations which provide certainty that the thermal input will be below 50MWth. This information is required to confirm if the installation will require an Environmental Permit from NRW Part A of the regulations, or from your Authority under part B of the regulations.

Surface water drainage: It is noted that surface water runoff collected from roofs and hard standings will be discharged to surface water mains or via soakaway. It is advised that only clean water free from pollutants/ contaminants should discharge via soakaway. The development will be acceptable subject of a planning condition requiring, prior to commencement of development, a scheme of surface water disposal for written approval.

Pollution prevention: It is recommended that the all relevant Pollution Prevention Guidance is followed to ensure good environmental practice throughout development and operation. Western Power Distribution Plan submitted showing location of apparatus and advice notes in relation to working in proximity to apparatus. Underground cables cross the south east corner of the site and are located in the adjacent access road. Wales and West Utilities Plan submitted showing location of apparatus and advice notes in relation to working in proximity to apparatus. A medium pressure gas main skirts the south-east corner of the site and follows the line of the adjacent access road.

Gwent Police No objection but request recommendations be taken into account regarding securing fencing, lockable gates, access doors and warning signs.

Welsh Government No objections to the proposed development but direct that conditions be included in any planning consent that the Authority is mindful to grant. The conditions include a restriction on progressing the development until such time as the site is vacated by the Construction Site Offices for Section 3 of the A465, and that any existing or future boundary feature which forms part of the improved Section 3 of the A465 is and will remain the property of the Welsh Government and shall not be removed or interfered with.

PUBLICITY The planning application was advertised by means of seven site notices (posted in locations on Rassau industrial estate and the residential estate of the Rassau) and neighbour notification letters to two neighbouring properties on the Rassau Industrial Estate. No third party representations have been received.

RELEVANT PLANNING POLICY Blaenau Gwent Local Development Plan SP8 Sustainable Economic Growth SP10 Protection & Enhancement of the Natural Environment DM1 New Development DM2 Design & Placemaking DM4 Low and Zero Carbon Energy DM10 Use Class Restrictions Employment EMP2 Employment Protection

National Planning Policy Planning Policy Wales 7th Ed. (July 2014)

PLANNING CONSIDERATION The key material planning considerations raised by the proposed development are as follows:  Environmental Impact Assessment  Principle of the proposed development;  Impact on environmental assets: Landscape, visual impact, nature conservation;  Impact on the local community: Noise, air quality, light pollution, contamination of land and controlled waters, surface water and land drainage, land stability and highways and car parking;  Ability of the proposal to connect to the national grid;

Environmental Impact Assessment Environmental assessment is a procedure that ensures that the environmental implications of decisions are taken into account. Environmental assessments for individual projects, such as a wind farm, are known as Environmental Impact Assessments (EIAs). EIAs assess the possible impact – positive and negative – that a proposed project may have on the environment and this information is submitted to the Local Planning Authority (LPA) or the Welsh Government in the form of an Environmental Statement (ES) in order for it to be considered alongside a planning application.

An EIA must be prepared for certain types of development to comply with European Union Directive 2011/92/EU also known as the EIA Directive. The requirement to carry out an EIA on certain planning proposals is contained within section 71A of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990, the Town and Country Planning Environmental Impact Assessment (England and Wales) Regulations 1999 and in subsequent amending regulations.

An EIA is needed for projects likely to have significant environmental effects by virtue of their nature, size or location. Whether or not a particular development requires an EIA to be carried out depends on the nature of the development. An EIA is compulsory for major types of development listed in Schedule 1 of the 1999 regulations. This application is not Schedule 1 development.

Schedule 2 of the regulations lists other types of development for which an EIA is required when certain thresholds and criteria are met. Consideration of whether a development listed in Schedule 2 of the regulations is likely to have significant effects on the environment must take into account factors such as its nature, size or location, and the selection criteria in Schedule 3 of the regulations. Schedule 3 identifies three broad criteria which should be considered:

 The characteristics of the development (size, use of natural resources, quantities of pollution and waste generated);  The environmental sensitivity of the location; and  The characteristics of the potential impact (magnitude and duration).

An EIA Screening Opinion was carried out by the authority for the proposed development on receipt of the planning application. The Screening Opinion concluded that under the Regulations the development is a ‘Schedule 2’ development, as it is classed in that schedule as being “an industrial installation for the production of electricity where works exceeds 0.5 hectare in area” – the site area is 0.64ha.

The development was considered against criteria listed in Schedule 3 of the Regulations and advice in Welsh Office Circular 11/99: Environmental Impact Assessment. The Screening Opinion concluded that the proposal would not have a significant effect on the environment sufficient to warrant requiring an environmental impact assessment. No ES was therefore sought. That opinion has no bearing on the acceptability of the scheme. The planning matters must still be fully considered by the local planning authority.

Principle of the proposed development The Welsh Government’s aim is to secure a mix of energy provision whilst avoiding, and where possible minimising environmental, social and economic impacts (PPW 7th Ed. paragraph 12.8.6). This proposal forms part of that vision for energy provision from a mix of sources and is therefore considered supportable in principle in the context of PPW.

The adopted LDP indicates that the site lies within the settlement boundary (Policy SB1) within which development is normally permitted subject to policies in the plan and other material considerations.

The LDP protects Rassau Industrial Estate for employment use under Policy EMP2 and designates it as a primary site in the employment hierarchy (Policies EMP2.2 and DM10). Policy DM10 of the LDP seeks to protect existing employment land and premises which are increasingly under pressure to be developed for non-employment use. Accordingly, development proposals in this location must be considered against the following criteria. a) Does the development fall within use classes B1, B2 or B8, or b) Is it an appropriate Sui Generis use, or c) Does it provide an ancillary facility or service to the existing and proposed employment use?

The proposed use is categorised as a Sui Generis use. It cannot be classed as an ancillary facility or service because the electricity generated will not be supplied directly to and for the benefit of the industrial estate and the businesses thereon, e.g. at preferential rates. It is however accepted that the estate will benefit from the wider electricity generation advantages that the development would provide.

Furthermore, Policy SP8 of the LDP seeks to promote sustainable economic growth by increasing economic activity, diversifying the local economy and ensuring that the residents of Blaenau Gwent maximise their economic potential. Criterion b states that the employment roles of major industrial areas will be identified to assist in the diversification of employment and to support the sustainable development of manufacturing.

Although it is accepted that a Sui Generis use can, in principle, be acceptable on a Primary Employment site, the appropriateness its has been queried on the grounds that the proposal relates to land which has been protected in the LDP to meet economic development and local employment need, but the level of employment and the economic benefits that would be generated from the scheme is questionable, i.e. the development will not result in anyone being permanently employed at the site. Further information has therefore been sought from the applicant to ascertain the benefits of the proposed development to the location community and economy given the aim of the LDP. The applicant has responded with a brief justification statement which is summarised as follows:  A planning history search of the site revealed that the only interest shown in developing the site for employment uses dates back to 1978 for the erection of 22 factories (which is presumed to be the permission covering the entire industrial estate). There have been no subsequent planning applications granted to develop the site.  The LDP allocates 50ha of employment land for employment and business purposes and the application site (0.64ha) represents a loss of only 1.3% of this.  The development will provide a small number of jobs for the construction period, as well as on-going maintenance.  The proposal is beneficial in that it supports the UKs renewable energy generation market, thereby supporting businesses across the region.  In view of the lack of interest in developing the site for employment uses to date and that the development will only result in a small loss of employment land it is submitted that the benefits of the proposal outweigh the harm.

I have considered the above argument and concur with the applicant’s conclusion. The development will result in a small loss of employment land which cannot be considered significant in the context of the amount of employment land in the Borough that remains available for development. Therefore, although it will result in a small loss, its impact is likely to be low. This is supported by the fact the site has remained undeveloped for almost 40 years. The wider benefits of the development, in terms of supporting the renewable energy industry across the region and ensuring a constant supply of energy for business and communities, are indisputable.

Having regard to the above and the policy objectives of the LDP I consider that the small loss of employment land that will result from the location of the proposed development on a primary employment site is not significant enough to justify refusal of planning permission. Therefore the principle of the proposed use in this location is deemed acceptable.

It is suggested that the developer be asked to give consideration to utilising local labour and supply chains in the construction, operation and decommissioning of the development to ensure that any employment opportunities created by the development (during construction and operation) benefit the residents of the Borough. An advisory note is suggested to draw the attention of the developer to this matter.

Impact on environmental assets

Landscape & visual impact Protecting attributes and features which make a significant contribution to the character, quality and amenity of the landscape is a key strategic objective of the LDP (Policy SP10(d) refers). Policy DM1.2(b) and Policy DM1.2(c) states that new development should produce no unacceptable adverse visual impact on townscape or landscape, or impact upon the amenities of neighbouring occupiers.

The development has the potential to impact on the visual appearance and amenity of the area in the vicinity of the site, including the industrial estate, the residential area of the Rassau to the south/ southeast and users of the A465 trunk road, and on open moorland landscapes to the north of the industrial estate. Whilst the building is moderate in scale in the context of an industrial estate it includes eight exhaust flues, which will project 3m above the ridge height, reaching a total height of 12m.

The landscape officer initially raised concerns with regard to the visual impact of the development from receptors using the A465 trunk road. A Landscape and Visual Impact Assessment (LVIA) was submitted by the applicant on request and has been accepted as a robust document. The LVIA concludes that whilst the landscape and views of the site will change as a result of the proposals, it is considered that the effect of the development will be of no more than local importance in landscape and visual terms. There are no identified significant effects on either views of the character of the area as a result of the proposals. The development is appropriate in its context and provides landscaping opportunities which will enhance the development and its setting.

The landscape officer concurs with the conclusions of the LVIA and the proposed landscaping strategy for the site, which includes two areas of native planting (to the north and to the south) to provide a visual buffer between the main plant compound/building and the A465, access roads and residential properties on the Rassau. It is considered that these mitigation measures provide adequate screening for local receptors and that, as a consequence, the development will not result in any unacceptable visual impact or loss of visual amenity for neighbouring occupiers.

The confirmed use of a modular, weld-mesh system of fencing, to replace the existing palisade fencing that surrounds the A465 compound, is also welcomed as a visual improvement to the site overall. It is recommended that the proposed landscaping scheme and the proposed boundary treatments be the subject of planning conditions.

Due to the distance of the development from the open moorland to the north of the industrial estate, including the statutorily protected landscapes of the Brecon Beacons National Park, and the moderate scale of the building/flues in the context of an industrial site, the development is not considered to have far-reaching visual impacts. The development will be viewed in the context of existing industrial buildings on the estate, the electricity transmission pylons to the north and the A465 dualling works. I therefore consider that the development will not have unacceptable visual impact on the wider landscape

The visual impact arising from possible plumes of moisture from the exhaust stacks has been discussed with the applicant. Some type of emissions can produce a ‘plume effect’ under certain atmospheric conditions. However, because the development proposed will be run on gas the applicant confirms that there will be no plumes from the stacks. On the basis that there will be no visible plumes I am satisfied that there will be no visual impact in this regard.

The Welsh Government has raised an issue with regard to a boundary feature that will be installed as part of the A465 dualling works in the immediate vicinity of the site. No information has been provided on the feature or its precise location, but it is presumed to be landscaping or a boundary treatment of some description. They confirm that the feature will remain the property of Welsh Government and request a condition that it will not be removed or interfered with in any way. As the boundary feature would appear to be outside the application site and in the ownership of Welsh Government it is not considered reasonable to attach a condition, but I recommend that an advisory note be attached alerting the developer to the issue.

Nature Conservation Protecting and enhancing features of nature conservation value, and maintaining and enhancing green infrastructure is a key strategic objective of the LDP (Policy SP10 refers). In support of this objective Policy DM1(f) requires development proposals do not result in a net loss of biodiversity and provide mitigation and/or compensation where necessary. Policy DM14 further requires that proposals within 10km of the Usk Bat Special Area of Conservation that would have an impact on the connectivity of corridors or cause direct or indirect disturbance to the features, must be subject to a project level Habitat Regulations Assessment.

An ecological assessment has been submitted with the application that details there are no ecological issues related directly to the development site. The council ecologist concurs with this assessment.

The council ecologist has highlighted the proximity of the proposed development to the Usk Bat Special Area of Conservation (SAC), which gives rise to potential effects on the SAC. The potential effects relate to the impact of the emissions from the plant on local air quality and the effect that this may have on the habitats that are a feature of the SAC. In assessing the potential for possible effects the council ecologist has referred to NRW guidance (Ref AQTAG014). This states that a Habitats Regulations Assessment for installations of between 5 and 20 MW should be undertaken where the installation is less than 0.5km from a European site. Because the development is 2.5km away from the SAC the council ecologist concludes that an assessment under the Habitat Regulations is not required.

The proposed landscaping scheme includes native planting and has the potential to enhance biodiversity /green infrastructure.

Impact on the local community

Noise Policy DM1.2(h) requires that there would be no unacceptable risk of harm to human health and or local amenity from unacceptably high levels of noise.

The impact of operational noise arising from the development has been addressed by the applicant in the accompanying noise assessment. Subsequently an updated noise report was submitted by the applicant that revisited the standard of noise insulation associated with the original proposal. This amended noise report demonstrated a lower level of noise emission from the site. The report establishes that background noise monitoring, including daytime and night time noise, has been carried out to ascertain the background noise levels at the nearest noise sensitive receptors (dwellings at Ivy Close, Rassau). This is then compared with the projected noise level to be generated from the development at these receptors.

An assessment by Environmental Health on the level of the impact from this development looked at a number of factors that have the potential to impact on the noise effects of the development due to their local context. These include:

 The overall level of the noise source is given a rating level of 30 dB (i.e. the actual noise from the development plus a 5 dB penalty for tonal noise);  An impact assessment, which classified the overall noise from the development as around 0 dB (i.e. the overall level of the noise source (30 dB) minus the background level of noise (30 dB), which indicates that the development will have a low impact on receptors;  The tonal nature of the noise source compared to the existing noise climate, which does not contain similar noise sources in the vicinity and would therefore make the proposed noise source more noticeable;  The sensitivity of receptors and the potential lack of noise specific insulation at these receptors due to the age of the housing stock;  The intermittent nature of the noise and the periods of day which the plant is likely to operate; periods of peak demand for the development are likely to be between 7am – 12 noon and 5pm until 10pm, when dwellings are more likely to be occupied.

Based on all the noise factors identified no objection is raised to the proposed development on noise grounds. This is primarily on the basis of the noise rating of the noise source, which is +0 dB above background levels, and which indicates that the noise source will have a low impact on the existing noise climate.

It is recommended that a condition be attached to any planning permission restricting the development to the noise levels contained within the supporting information contained within the submitted noise assessment report.

Air quality Policy DM1.2(g) requires that new development would not result in airborne emissions which have an unacceptable effect on the health, amenity or natural environment of the surrounding area taking into account cumulative effects of other proposed or existing sources of air pollution in the vicinity.

An air quality assessment has been submitted with the application which considers the impact of the operational atmospheric emissions. This has been supplemented by further information from the applicant as requested by the Environmental Health officer. The submitted information takes account of the re-routing of the A465 trunk road and the Circuit of Wales racetrack in the air quality calculations. Both developments will have an impact on air quality due to their close proximity to the application site. In assessing the submitted information the Environmental Health officer has also sought the views and representations of DEFRA and Public Health Wales.

The air quality assessment, using computer modelling, predicts potential concentration values at sensitive receptors for the pollutant Nitrogen Dioxide (NO2) and Carbon Monoxide (CO). The modelling looks at the existing background levels of NO2 and CO and calculates what the process contribution will be in addition to this background concentration. This total value is then compared to the National Air Quality Objectives, which are the air quality standards that the Local Authority must look to achieve within its area.

The receptors considered in the air quality assessment were locations at: Trefil Farm, Ivy Close, Stonebridge Road and Rassau Industrial Estate.

The submitted information indicates that there is a negligible increase at relevant receptors in the annual N02 objective as a result of potential emissions from the proposed development. At non relevant receptors, the annual NO2 concentration increases were again below the annual objective. At relevant receptors, i.e. the residential areas of the Rassau, the hourly NO2 exposure levels are considered to be insignificant. This is the same situation with CO exposure.

There is potential for exceedences of the hourly limit for NO2 at receptor areas on Rassau Industrial Estate. However these areas are not considered relevant receptors for the purposes of air quality assessment. At relevant receptors hourly exposure levels for NO2 and for CO are well below the relevant air quality objectives.

On the basis of the submitted information and the views and representations of DEFRA and Public Health Wales, no objection is raised in relation to the air quality impacts from the proposed development.

It is recommended that a condition be attached to any planning permission restricting the development to the operational and emission rates contained within the supporting information submitted with the application.

NRW state that the information submitted with the application does not make it clear if the development would require an Environmental Permit under Part A of the Environmental Permitting Regulations (England and Wales ) 2010. It is understood by Environmental Health that due to the thermal capacity of the proposed plant an environmental permit is not required. However the proposed planning condition will assist in the regulation of the emissions of the development.

In considering the issue of air quality, I consulted NRW for advice on whether or not the authority should require the applicant to provide a ‘cumulative air quality assessment’ to take into account other similar STOR plants on sites across the Borough on which planning permission was also being sought. NRW confirmed that cumulative air quality was not considered to be an issue in relation to this or other planning applications for STOR developments.

Light pollution Policy DM1.2(h) requires that new development would cause no unacceptable harm to health and/or local amenity from unacceptably high levels of light pollution.

Although the application indicates the type of lighting that will be required on site (single hooded sodium downlights, activated with passive infrared sensors, positioned around the main plant building) no information on the lighting system and its potential impact has been submitted with the application. Regard must be had to the fact that the Brecon Beacons National Park to the north has been designated as a dark skies area.

I consider that the impacts of light can be satisfactorily controlled through the use of a condition and it is recommended that a condition be attached to any planning permission to ensure that future lighting of the site is reasonable and does not have any unacceptable adverse impact on the environment, neighbouring occupiers and ecology.

Contamination & Quality of Controlled Waters Policy DM1.2 (j) requires that new development takes practicable and effective measures to treat, contain or control any contamination. Policy DM1.2 (e) requires that new development would have no adverse impact on the water environment or an unacceptable risk to the quality of controlled waters (including groundwater and surface water).

No information has been submitted with the application with regard to potential ground contamination. The Environmental Health officer does not anticipate that there would be a level of contamination present that would prevent the development of the site and recommends that a condition be attached to any planning permission for a desk-top study, site investigation and a remediation strategy.

In their comments NRW suggest that the site may have been formerly occupied by a factory and identifies that it overlays a Secondary Aquifer. Because there is potential for land contamination at the site and the presence of the aquifer it is advised that a preliminary risk assessment be undertaken to assess the potential risk to controlled waters. A standard NRW condition has been suggested to address these issues.

Welsh Water also raised a concern that the emissions associated with the development, in combination with other proposed STOR facilities in the Borough, could have a negative impact on hydrology in terms of the quality of potable water resources. As referred to above, the issue of cumulative air quality and impacts arising was broached with NRW during the course of the application. NRW confirmed that cumulative air quality was not considered to be an issue in relation to this or other planning applications for STOR developments. On the basis of that information Welsh Water confirmed that raise no objection on the impact of the development on hydrology.

It is considered that the issue of ground contamination and the risk to controlled waters can be satisfactorily addressed by the use of a condition requiring the necessary risk assessment, site investigation, remediation and validation to be carried out prior to the commencement of development. It is recommended that a combined condition to this effect be attached to any future planning permission.

Surface water and land drainage Policy DM1.1 (e) requires new development to reduce surface water run-off through minimising an increase in impermeable surfaces and using Sustainable Drainage systems where appropriate.

The planning application confirms that surface water runoff will be collected from roofs and hardstandings and discharged to the surface water main drainage system or soakaway. NRW advise that only clean water free from pollutants/ contaminants should discharge via a soakaway. The Councils drainage officer also notes that before it can be confirmed if soakaway drainage can be used it will be necessary to determine the permeability of the soil. Welsh Water also confirm that no surface water should be allowed to connect directly or indirectly to the public/foul/ combined sewerage system without their prior approval, and land drainage runoff should not be permitted to discharge to the public sewerage system.

To ensure that the above surface water and land drainage issues are addressed an integrated scheme of drainage from the site will need to be agreed prior to the commencement of the development. It is proposed that this form the basis of a condition on any future planning permission.

It is also proposed to attach an advisory note drawing the attention of the developer to the specific drainage requirements/ advice of Welsh Water.

Ground Stability Policy DM1.2 (i) requires new development to be made stable and capable of supporting the development without risk of damage to buildings on the site or adjoining land.

The application site is not located in a Coal Authority High Risk area was not therefore necessary to request the submission of a Coal Mining Risk Assessment. The council engineer has no objections in principle to the proposed development but requests that the details of the prevailing ground conditions and the foundation details of the proposed development be submitted for examination prior to the commencement of the development. It is recommended that a condition should be attached to any future planning permission requiring a site assessment addressing ground instability issues to be carried out prior to the commencement of the development. A further condition is also required in respect of the submission and approval of the proposed foundation design of structures on the site.

Highways & car parking Policy DM1(a-d) requires development proposals to have regard for the safe, effective and efficient use of the transportation network, are designed to promote sustainable modes of transport, to secure provision for people with access and mobility needs and provides adequate parking, servicing and operational space.

The Welsh Government has not raised any objections to the proposed development on the impact of the proposal on the A465. However, it requests that a condition be attached to any future planning permission restricting commencement of the development until such time that the site is vacated by the A465 construction site offices/compound. Whilst this cannot be controlled through the planning permission an advisory note can be attached to advise the developer of the restriction.

The Highway Authority confirms that the proposed access and car parking arrangements for the proposed development are acceptable and require that the car parking arrangements on the site be retained for the proposed use. Permission will also be required from the Highway Authority to create the new access under separate licence. It is considered that these matters be the subject of a planning condition and advisory note respectively.

Connection of the development to the national grid The applicant states that the grid connection can be achieved at a sub-station close to the site and that the application to connect has been made to the District Network Operator (DNO), Western Power Distribution (WPD). It is not anticipated that any further planning permission will be required to make the grid connection, which is normally covered by the permitted development rights of the DNO. However, if required, WPD will submit a separate planning application to facilitate the grid connection.

Conclusion The principle of the proposed development and its impact on environmental, social and economic factors has been carefully assessed. It is considered that the development is acceptable in principle in this location, and that the impacts of the development are also acceptable subject to mitigation where appropriate. I therefore recommend that the application be granted subject to conditions and advisory notes.

RECOMMENDATION

That planning permission be GRANTED

1. Permission is granted subject to the provisions of section 91(1) of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 namely that the development to which this permission relates must be begun not later than the expiration of 5 years beginning with the date on which the permission is granted. Reason: To comply with the requirements of Section 91 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990.

2. The development shall not be carried out except in complete accordance with the details of the following approved plans and documents, except where amended by conditions attached to this planning permission:

Plans: Site Location Plan (Ref WPL-007-001 Revision B), received 17.09.2014 Detailed Site Plan (Ref WPL-007-002 Revision C), received 29.09.2014 Proposed Building Elevations & Roof Plan (Ref WPL-007-003 Revision B), received 29.09.2014 Proposed Site Elevations (Ref WPL-007-004 Revision A), received 17.09.2014 Proposed Gas Kiosk & Radiator Details & Proposed Floor Plan (Ref WPL-007-005), received 17.09.2014

Documents: Planning Statement (September 2014), by Nathaniel Lichfield & Partners (NLP), received 01.09.2014 Design & Access Statement, by NLP, received 01.09.2014 Noise Assessment (August 2014), by MLM Acoustics, received 01.09.2014 Air Quality Assessment (August 2014), by Entran, received 01.09.2014 Ecology Assessment (August 2014), by Seasons Ecology, received 01.09.2014 Statement of Landscape & Visual Effects (November 2014), by NLP, received 12.11.2014 Updated Noise Assessment (November 2014), by MLM Acoustics, received 14.11.2014 Reason: For the avoidance of doubt and to ensure compliance with the approved plans and documents.

3 The area designated for parking and turning on the approved plans shall not be obstructed and shall be retained and kept available for their designated purposes at all times. Reason: To ensure that the parking and turning needs of the development are adequately met at all times.

4 Notwithstanding any details indicated on the approved plans no development shall commence on site until details are submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority of a scheme for the comprehensive and integrated drainage of the site showing how foul water, surface water and land drainage will be dealt with. The development hereby approved shall not be brought into use until all drainage works relating to the development and its connection to the wider drainage network are completed in accordance with the approved details. Reason: To ensure that effective drainage facilities are provided for the proposed development and that no adverse impact occurs to the environment or the existing public sewerage system.

5 No development shall take place until an assessment of the stability of the land (and the surrounding area) has been carried out in accordance with a methodology which must first be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The results of such an assessment (and any intrusive site investigation works identified as being necessary) shall be submitted to the Local Planning Authority before works commence on site. If any land instability issues are found during the site investigation, a further report specifying the measures to be taken to remediate the site to render it suitable for the development hereby approved shall also be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority before works commence on site. The development shall not be brought into use until all the measures identified as necessary in any reports that are approved by the Local Planning Authority are implemented and the Local Planning Authority is provided with a validation report, signed by a suitably qualified person that confirms that such measures and/or works have been fully implemented. Reason: The Local Planning Authority is aware that the site may be affected by land instability and considers that this should be addressed prior to development.

6 No development shall take place until details of the proposed foundations for structures on the site have been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The foundations should be designed having regard to the results of and mitigation measures identified in the slope stability assessment required by Condition 5 of this permission. Reason: The Local Planning Authority is aware that the site may be affected by land instability and considers that this should be addressed prior to development.

7 No development shall commence until an assessment of the nature and extent of any site contamination is undertaken in accordance with a methodology which must first be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. Such assessment shall include: a) A desktop study to include the identification of previous site uses, the extent and type of any contamination and their impacts on land and controlled waters, and details of all potential source, pathway and receptor linkages, and potentially unacceptable risks arising from contamination at the site. The information should be used to produce a Site Conceptual Model for all potential contaminant sources, pathways and receptors; b) A site investigation and risk assessment shall be designed for the site having regard to the desktop study and Conceptual Model to provide information for a detailed assessment of the risk to all receptors that may be affected, including off-site. The proposed design shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority prior to the site investigation being carried out on site. c) The site investigation and risk assessment shall be undertaken in accordance with the approved details and with BS 10175/2011 (Investigation of Potentially Contaminated Sites – Code of Practice). d) Where necessary an options appraisal and method statement detailing the remediation measures identified as necessary to treat/remove contamination to ensure that the site is fit for purpose shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. e) The development hereby approved shall not be brought into use until all such measures identified as necessary to decontaminate the site, as contained in the approved remediation report, are implemented. f) On completion of the remediation works the applicant shall provide for the written approval of the Authority a validation report and verification plan signed by a suitably qualified person that confirms that such measures and/or works have been implemented fully in accordance with the approved remediation report. The verification plan shall identify any requirements for the longer-term monitoring of pollutant linkages, maintenance and arrangements for contingency action.

The development shall implemented fully in accordance with the detailed as agreed and approved. Reason: The Local Planning Authority is advised that the site may be affected by contamination and considers it appropriate to assess the significance of such contamination to human health and the quality of controlled waters before development can proceed.

8 If, during the course of development, any contamination is found which has not been identified in the site investigation required by condition 7 additional measures for the remediation of this source of contamination in the form of a remediation scheme shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The remediation of the site shall incorporate all approved additional measures and shall be completed before the development hereby approved is brought into beneficial use. Reason: To ensure that any unexpected contamination issues are adequately addressed and that suitable mitigation measures are implemented.

9 No external lighting shall be erected that causes glare outside of the site on the public or private highways. All overnight exterior lighting shall be shrouded and fitted with as a low a lumen output as possible without breaching health and safety requirements. During the night-time hours (23:00-06:00) the use of high output flood lighting shall be restricted for use where absolutely necessary for external operations. Reason: To minimise disturbance and annoyance to other industrial users in the vicinity of the site. In the interests of environmental sustainability. To minimise the impact of excessive lighting on the fauna of the locality. In the interests of minimising light pollution.

10 The rating level of the noise emitted from the development site shall not exceed the existing night time background noise level, determined to be 25 LA90 dB, by more than +0 dB between 11:00pm and 7:00am, and the existing daytime background noise level, determined to be 36 LA90 dB, by more than -6dB between 7:00am and 11:00pm. The noise levels shall be determined at the boundary of the nearest noise sensitive premises located at Ivy Close, Rassau, Ebbw Vale. The measurements and assessments shall be made according to BS 4142:2014. The noise levels specified are in accordance with the noise assessment reports hereby approved. Reason: To safeguard the amenities of occupiers and the users/occupants of nearby properties.

11 At any time the operational parameters and emission rates associated with emissions to atmosphere from the proposed development should not exceed those specified in air quality assessment report submitted in support of the application entitled “Air Quality Impact Assessment Ogmore Power Limited Rassau, Ebbw Vale OGMO01- 9128094” produced by Entran Limited, dated 31/08/2014, and hereby approved. Reason: In the interests of amenity

12 No development shall take place until there has been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority a scheme of landscaping. The submitted scheme shall include:

 Indications of all existing trees (including spread and species) and hedgerows on the land clearly identifying those to be lost or retained;  Measures for the protection of retained trees or hedges throughout the course of development;  Details of ground preparation, planting plans, number and details of species;  Maintenance details for a minimum period of 5 years;  A phased timescale of implementation. Reason: To ensure submission of an appropriate landscaping scheme and to secure a development that makes a positive contribution to the landscape and visual amenities of the area.

13 Notwithstanding any details indicated on the approved plans no development shall take place until details of the siting, design, and materials of any gates/ fences/ boundary treatments proposed in relation to this development have been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. Any boundary treatments approved shall be erected before the development is brought into use and shall be maintained, thereafter at all times. Reason: To safeguard the visual amenities the area.

14 No development shall take place until samples of all external facing and roofing materials, including the finishes of the exhaust flues, radiator coolers and gas reception kiosk, have been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The development hereby approved shall not be brought into beneficial use until all external finishes are completed in full accordance with such details as may be approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. Reason: To safeguard the visual amenities of the area

15 No development shall commence on site until a Construction Method Statement has been submitted to and approved in writing by The Local Planning Authority. The Statement shall provide details of for :-  hours of working;  the parking of vehicles of site operatives and visitors;  delivery of materials.  wheel washing facilities;  storage of plant and materials used during construction;  the erection and maintenance of security hoarding ;  measures to control the emissions of dust and dirt during construction;  a scheme for the recycling/disposing of waste resulting from the construction works; and  the siting and details of any construction compound. Such details and measures as contained in a Statement that is approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority shall be adhered to throughout the construction period. Reason: To safeguard local amenity interests and to ensure that the impacts of the construction phase of the development are appropriately and adequately addressed. Informative Advice

1 This planning permission does not cover the grid connection; separate planning permission may be needed for this. 2 The development hereby approved may require an Environmental Permit. The Developer is advised to contact Natural Resources Wales. 3 It is recommended that the developer follows all relevant Pollution Prevention Guidance to ensure good environmental practice during the construction and operation of the development. The developer is advised to contact Natural Resources Wales. 4 The developer is respectfully requested to utilise local labour and supply chains in the construction, operation and decommissioning of the development in the interests of the local economy. 5 Further advice and guidance from Western Power Distribution is contained in their letter of response and advice note dated 01.10.14. 6 Further advice and guidance from Wales & West Utilities is contained in their letter of response and advice note dated 14.10.14. 7 Further advice and guidance from Welsh Water on drainage issues is contained in their letter of response dated 14.11.14. 8 Further advice and guidance from Gwent Police on Secured by Design issues is contained in their e-mail response dated 03.10.14. 9 The developer must contact the Highway Authority in order to construct the required new highway junction works. No works are to commence on site until the appropriate highway works licences are in place. 10 The developer is advised by Welsh Government that:  The development shall be restricted from progressing until such time as the site is vacated by the Construction Site Offices for Section 3 of the A465; and  Any existing of future boundary feature which forms part of the improved Section 3 of the A465 is and will remain the property of the Welsh Government and shall not be removed or interfered with in any way. For further information please contact: Route Engineer, Transport Division, tel: 02920 826446

The following policies in the Local Development Plan were material to this decision: SP8, SP10, DM1, DM2, DM4, DM10, EMP2

Application No. : C/2014/0193 (Full Application)

Case Officer : Anthony Pyne

Date Lodged : 23 July, 2014

Applicant : Premier Holdings Ltd Units 8 & 9 Wern Trading Estate Newport Agent : John Payne Cwmffynnon Cottage Twyn College Newbridge

Location : Land at Sycamore Avenue Tredegar

Proposal : Construction of 3 detached 2 storey houses with integral garages and parking

Ward : Tredegar Central & West

REPORT SUMMARY This application seeks planning permission for the construction of three detached dwellings on a parcel of land in the predominately residential area of Sycamore Avenue Tredegar.

The report considers the principle of development, representations made by a local resident in relation to the development of the site and details amendments secured by negotiation to ensure the scheme protects the amenity of existing residents.

It concludes with a recommendation that planning permission be GRANTED

SITE AND DEVELOPMENT DESCRIPTION This application seeks planning permission for three detached properties on land adjacent to Sycamore Avenue, Tredegar. The site has been vacant for a period of time and is understood to have previously formed part of the southern area of a pipe works and more latterly a bakery. The site falls away to the northern edge and beyond the site boundary on an adjacent lower land parcel (originally part of the same factory site) a number of residential properties have been constructed fronting Charles Street. To the eastern site boundary there is a detached bungalow (High View) set back from Sycamore Avenue. To the western boundary the application site has an irregular boundary where a Shoe Repair shop is located and beyond that lies a church building.

The proposed site layout orientates each new dwelling to front onto Sycamore Avenue with parking provided for each plot. Each two storey dwelling would be 9.9m wide by 9.2m deep with a height of 8.45 metres to the ridge. The dwellings would be finished in brickwork with a tiled roof. The front elevation contains architectural detailing including feature double height bay windows with gable feature in the eaves. An open canopy is also proposed over the entrance door and integral garage.

Each dwelling would provide on the ground floor a lounge, dining room with kitchen, entrance hallway and integral garage. The first floor of each dwelling provides four bedrooms (master with ensuite) and a separate bathroom. There are good sized rear amenity areas allocated to each plot.

RELEVANT PLANNING HISTORY C/2005/0075 Residential Development Approved 12.02.05 C/2008/0187 Renewal of C/2005/0075 Approved 09.10.08 C/2009/0365 Residential Development Approved 04.01.10 – 1 dwelling (RM) Plot 2 C/2010/0331 Residential Development Approved 06.01.10 – 1 dwelling (RM) Plot 4 C/2012/0226 Detached 2 storey house Approved 08.10.12 with accommodation in attic space and attached garage and sun room – Plot 1 C/2014/0176 Construction of detached Approved 28.08.14 2 storey house with integral garage and 2 parking spaces RELEVANT CONSULTATION RESPONSES Team Manager - Building Control Building regulations required Service Manager - Infrastructure Highways No objections subject to relocation of existing traffic calming measures on Sycamore Avenue and conditioning of detailed highway considerations.

Drainage Initially provided a holding objection due to a lack of information. Following submission of a drainage plan removed the objection but requires percolation tests to be provided prior to development works commencing.

Ground Stability No objections

Service Manager – Public Protection Contamination Initial concerns were raised in relation to the potential for asbestos due to the former use of the site as a pipe works. Following the submission of an additional survey carried out on the site which determined there was no widespread contamination the officer confirmed that there were no objections to the development.

Tredegar Town Council No objections

Welsh Water No objections

Western Power Distribution Provides details of apparatus in the vicinity of the site

Wales and West Utilities Provides details of apparatus in the vicinity of the site

PUBLICITY The application was advertised via a site notice and letters sent to nearby occupiers.

Following amendments negotiated with the applicant which involved changes to fenestration and site levels a reconsultation was carried out.

A resident responded with emails in relation to the development and expresses views which are summarised below:

 Does not object to the redevelopment of the site in principle  Expresses concern regarding the importation of material onto the site  Questions whether the material is infected with Japanese Knotweed  Suggests screening is required to prevent overlooking  Indicates that the proposed drainage plan connects into the existing system on his land and this is not acceptable.

RELEVANT PLANNING POLICY Blaenau Gwent Local Development Plan DM1 New Development DM2 Design and Placemaking H1/HC1 Housing Allocations and HC1 Housing Commitments

PLANNING CONSIDERATION This application would represent the final element in the redevelopment of this part of Sycamore Avenue/Charles Street from formerly industrial/business use to residential. The adjacent lower Charles Street area has been redeveloped into residential plots over the last number of years however the current application site has remained vacant and is fenced off. The principle of developing the site located within the urban area of Tredegar for residential use has been well established through previous planning permissions and its inclusion within the Local Development Plan under Policy HC1 as a Housing Commitment site (HC1.12).

The layout of the proposed development takes the form of three detached residential properties fronting Sycamore Avenue but set back from the footway to provide on plot parking within the front curtilage. The building line on this part of Sycamore Avenue is varied on the northern side adjacent to the application site with a Cobbler’s Shop and to the southern side is a detached bungalow (High View) which is set back deep within the plot. There is greater uniformity on the opposite side of Sycamore Avenue with pairs of semi detached properties providing a consistent building line but those properties are raised above the road level by approximately 0.5m with steps within the front garden areas.

Having regard for the variation in the type, form and siting of the existing dwellings and businesses in the locality I consider the proposed layout will have an acceptable visual contribution to the street scene and importantly will provide the new dwellings with on plot parking which is lacking for a number of properties on the opposite side of the road.

The design of the dwellings are similar in architectural style to a number of recently approved plots on nearby Charles Street and it is considered that the development is appropriate in its visual appearance and will contribute positively to the character of the area.

Residential Amenity

The impact of the proposed dwellings on the surrounding residential properties has been carefully considered. The tapering nature of the site results in plot 1 being noticeably closer to the rear elevation of properties on Charles Street than occurs with plots 2 & 3 to the south-east. The separation distance for plots 2 & 3 range from approximately 21m for plot 2 to 25m for plot 3. I have considered the impact of the level difference between the proposed new dwellings and the dwellings which front Charles Street but consider that plots 2 & 3 on the application site will have an acceptable separation distance and will not result in an unacceptable impact on neighbour amenity.

I did however consider that the scheme as originally submitted would result in an inadequate separation distance between plot 1 of the Sycamore Avenue application site and the dwelling known as Plot 2 on the Charles Street development. The distance between the two main rear facades of the dwellings was reduced to approximately 16.5m. In considering the acceptability of this separation distance I also took account of the level difference which meant (as originally submitted) the new plot 1 dwelling would look down towards plot 2 and also plot 3 at distances significantly less than 21 metres. I negotiated with the agent to amend the fenestration of the dwelling on plot 1 to remove the upper floor habitable room windows from the rear elevation and to replace them on the side elevations. This will remove the overlooking from habitable room to the properties on Charles Street and the eastern side elevation of plot will look towards the side elevation of plot 2 whose side elevation only has a single window serving a utility room at ground floor level. The west facing bedroom 4 window for plot 1 will view in a north westerly direction. I have considered the arrangement of the existing dwellings, the cobblers shop and the church site to the north-west (which has an extant outline permission for residential) and I find that the impact of the dwelling’s revised fenestration will not have an unacceptable effect on any adjacent dwellings nor prohibit the development of the church plot.

Level Changes and Boundary Treatments

I have also considered the impact of the site level changes on the adjacent dwellings and discussions were held with the applicant in relation to the proposed regrading works on the site. Amendments to the plans were made which have resulted in a shallowing of some of the rear portions of garden areas to the new dwellings which is considered beneficial as the original plans provided a steep slope down to the rear gardens of the adjacent Charles Street properties which restricted the practical use of areas of the gardens and was considered to be likely to be difficult to maintain. The introduction of gabion baskets along some of the rear boundary was proposed but the applicant has acknowledged that the exact design of the regarding works could be subject to some change.

I have considered the impact on the neighbouring dwellings and am content that the scheme as presented would have an acceptable impact on their outlook. I do however consider there is merit in placing a condition on the permission in relation to final levels to allow the developer to determine whether there are improvements which could be made to both increase the use of the garden areas, reduce the need for gabion baskets or other method of retaining and maintain an appropriate boundary treatment to both respect the neighbouring properties outlook and privacy. The applicant was amenable to this approach which was agreed at a meeting.

I therefore propose that conditions be added to the permission to require details on site levels at the rear of the site and boundary treatment details to be submitted to the Local Planning Authority for approval prior to commencement of works.

Highway considerations

The Highway Authority have offered no objections to the proposed site layout subject to the imposition of conditions to address detailed design issues. There are existing speed reduction measures along Sycamore Avenue which will need to be amended to facilitate the new dwellings driveways. A condition is proposed which requires details to be submitted in relation to the speed reduction measures. However the Highway Authority’s request that these should be provided prior to any works commencing on site is overly onerous on the developer (and could stifle development) and I therefore propose a condition which allows details to be submitted either within 6 months of the date of the permission or prior to the commencement of development (whichever is later) to allow some flexibility. Members are advised that the condition requires the speed reduction measures to have been implemented prior to the occupation of any of the plots and therefore it is considered that highway safety will be maintained.

Other matters raised by a local resident

A local resident has made representations on the application and it is considered that all matters raised can either be addressed by conditions or are not matters which are material to the determination of the planning application.

In relation to concerns related to the importation of material onto the site this was addressed before the comments were received. It was noted during my initial site visit that soil had been imported onto site without the benefit of planning permission. The agent was contacted and agreed to stop the importation of any further material.

As discussed in the earlier part of the report the broad principles of the site level has been established to the satisfaction of the Local Planning Authority and the imposition of a condition to allow flexibility to the developer to refine the design is considered to be acceptable.

A further concern of the resident was that material imported onto site may have been infested with Japanese Knotweed. The agent for the application was asked to comment on the allegation and has responded that the material is free from Japanese Knotweed. It is considered that the application will be determined on the basis of the statement provided by the agent and an informative will be added to permission reminding the developer of their need to be aware of the legal responsibilities in relation to Japanese Knotweed.

It is proposed that the imposition of a condition requiring full details of boundary treatments will provide a mechanism for agreeing suitable screening to all neighbouring properties including addressing the concerns of the resident who made representations.

The issue of drainage was also highlighted by the local resident who made a statement in relation to a concern regarding a proposed connection to the existing drainage system which was to be made on his land. The resident has stated that they will not allow the developer to enter their land and make the connection. I note that Welsh Water has offered no objection to the development and it is considered that it is a civil matter between the developer and the land owner over securing agreement to enter land and complete the works. I have imposed a condition to require full drainage details to be submitted to the Local Planning Authority which will allow for a redesigned scheme should a different connection point be required and will also facilitate the submission of percolation tests required by the council’s drainage officer.

I consider that through negotiations with the developer to amend detailed aspects of the scheme such as fenestration on Plot 1 the proposed residential scheme is acceptable will facilitate the redevelopment of a vacant site with good quality housing whilst having an acceptable impact on neighbouring properties. I recommend its approval accordingly.

RECOMMENDATION That planning permission be GRANTED subject to the following conditions & for the following reasons:

1. The development shall be completed in full accordance with the following approved plans and documents

Site Location Plan (1:500) – dated 7th July 2014 Plots 2 & 3 Elevations – drawing ref 001 revision A – dated 7th October 2014 Plots 2 & 3 Floor plans - drawing ref 002 revision A – dated 7th October 2014 Plots 1 - 3 Block Plans - drawing ref 003 revision B – dated 20th November 2014 Plots 1 - 3 Sections - drawing ref 004 revision C – dated 24th November 2014 Plot 1 Elevation - drawing ref 005 no revision – dated 7th October 2014 Plot 1 Floor Plans - drawing ref 006 no revision – dated 7th October 2014

unless otherwise specified or required by conditions 2-17 listed below.

Reason: To clearly define the scope of this permission. 2. Notwithstanding any details indicated on the approved plans no development shall commence on site until details are submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority of a scheme for the comprehensive and integrated drainage of the site showing how foul water, surface water and land drainage will be dealt with. None of the dwellings hereby approved shall be occupied until all drainage works relating to that property and its connection to the wider drainage network are completed in accordance with the approved details.

Reason: To ensure that effective drainage facilities are provided for the proposed development and that no adverse impact occurs to the environment or the existing public sewerage system. 3. All works undertaken shall be implemented in full accordance with the recommendations contained in Terra Firma GeoTechnical and GeoEnvironmental Report reference 10928, dated January 2010 as updated and supplemented by Terra Firma Letter report dated 18th December 2014, reference ML/10928/Let3. The development shall not be brought into use until the Local Planning Authority is provided with a validation report, signed by a suitably qualified person that confirms that such recommendations, measures and/or works have been fully implemented.

Reason: To ensure that the development is implemented in a manner that gives due regard to ground contamination issues.

4. If, during the course of development, any contamination is found which has not been identified in the site investigation required by condition 3 additional measures for the remediation of this source of contamination in the form of a remediation scheme shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The remediation of the site shall incorporate all approved additional measures and shall be completed before the development hereby approved is brought into beneficial use.

Reason: To ensure that any unexpected contamination issues are adequately addressed and that suitable mitigation measures are implemented.

5. No development shall commence on site until a Construction Method Statement has been submitted to and approved in writing by The Local Planning Authority. The Statement shall provide details of :- • hours of working; • the parking of vehicles of site operatives and visitors; • delivery of materials. • wheel washing facilities; • storage of plant and materials used during construction; • the erection and maintenance of security hoarding ; • measures to control the emissions of dust and dirt during construction; • a scheme for the recycling/disposing of waste resulting from the construction works; and • the siting and details of any construction compound.

Such details and measures as contained in a Statement that is approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority shall be adhered to throughout the construction period.

Reason: To safeguard local amenity interests and to ensure that the impacts of the construction phase of the development are appropriately and adequately addressed.

6. No development shall commence until details/samples are submitted to the Local Planning Authority of all external finishes to the dwellings hereby approved. All dwellings shall be erected and completed in accordance with details approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority before they are occupied.

Reason: To safeguard visual amenity interests 7. No dwelling hereby approved shall be occupied until the access, driveway and parking areas relating to that dwelling are constructed, surfaced and drained as indicated on the approved plans. The areas provided shall be retained for their designated purposes at all times.

Reason: To ensure the parking needs of the development are adequately met and to safeguard highway interests. 8. Before commencement of works or within 6 months of the date of this permission (whichever is the later) the developer shall submit for the written approval of the Local Planning Authority a Speed Reduction Measures scheme for Sycamore Avenue. The speed reduction measures shall be completed in full accordance with the approved scheme prior to the beneficial occupation of any of the dwellings on the application site.

Reason: In the interests of highway safety. 9. No development shall take place until a plan indicating the position, design and materials of all boundary treatments has been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. All approved boundary treatments shall be provided before the dwelling to which they relate is occupied and shall be retained as such at all times.

Reason: To protect residential amenity interests and to safeguard the visual and landscape amenities of the area. 10. Notwithstanding the details submitted prior to the commencement of works full details of proposed site levels in the area hatched in green on the approved layout plan (referenced 003) shall be submitted for the written approval of the Local Planning Authority. The approved site levels and retaining structures shall be provided on each plot prior to the dwelling to which they relate is occupied.

Reason: In the interest of neighbour amenity.

11. Before works commence on site details shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority of the finishes and constructional details of any retaining wall or works required in association with the construction of the plots hereby approved that will exceed 1.5 metres in height. Such details must also include a certificate signed by a suitably qualified engineer that shall verify the structural integrity of the proposed works. All works shall be undertaken and completed in full accordance with such details and specifications as may be approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority before the extension/building is brought into beneficial use.

Reason: To safeguard the integrity of any retaining works required in association with the approved development and to safeguard visual amenity interests. 12. Visibility splays of 2.4 metres by 43 metres at the point(s) of access onto the public highway shall be provided before the commencement of the development. These splays shall be kept free of any obstruction exceeding 0.9 metres in height at all times. Reason: In the interests of highway safety.

13. Any gates provided shall not open over the highway

Reason: To safeguard highway interests.

14. The maximum gradient of each access and driveway shall not exceed 1 in 8 (12.5%) between any two points.

Reason: In the interests of highway safety

15. Notwithstanding the provisions of the Town and Country Planning (General Permitted Development) Order 1995 (as amended for Wales) (or any Order revoking or re-enacting that Order with or without modification) no window or door openings other than those shown on the approved plans shall be formed in the rear (north-east) elevation of plot 1 of the development hereby approved.

Reason: To protect the privacy and amenities of the occupiers/users of the adjoining property.

16. Before the dwelling hereby permitted on plot 1 is brought into use the rear first floor bathroom window marked “Obscure” shall be fitted with obscured glazing, details of which shall be first submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. Any part of the window(s) that is less than 1.7metres above the floor level of the room in which it is installed shall be non–opening. A window(s) of such design and glazing shall be permanently retained in that opening thereafter.

Reason: To safeguard the privacy and amenities of occupiers of nearby properties.

17. The development shall begin not later than five years from the date of this decision notice.

Reason: To comply with the requirements of Section 91 of The Town and Country Planning Act 1990.

Informative Advice

1. The developer is advised that the construction method statement required by condition 5 must include protection measures addressing the need for suitable mitigation from asbestos required during ground works as detailed in the Terra Firma letter report dated 18th December 2014, reference ML/10928/Let3. 2. The developer is advised that a third party has alleged that imported material may have been infected by Japanese Knotweed. The Local Planning Authority has received confirmation from the planning agent (email 15/09/14) that imported material is not contaminated with Japanese Knotweed and the planning application has been determined on this basis. The developer should ensure they are fully aware of their legal responsibility in relation to Japanese Knotweed. 3. The developer is advised that to contact the highway authority (01495 355371) to discuss the detailed highway specification requirements in relation to preparing the speed reduction measures required under condition 8. The Highway Authority have also confirmed that the off-site highway works will be required to be subject to a Section 278 agreement under the Highways Act 1980. 4. The developer is reminded that in preparing the drainage scheme required by condition 2 that percolation tests will need to form part of these details.

The following policies in the Local Development Plan were material to this decision: DM1, DM2, HC1

Application No. : C/2014/0228 (Full Application)

Case Officer : Anthony Pyne

Date Lodged : 19 August, 2014

Applicant : FirstGen Uk Ltd C/O Asbri Planning Ltd Unit 9 Oak Tree Court Cardiff Gate Business Park Agent : Asbri Planning Ltd Mr Simon Williams Unit 9 Oak Tree Court Cardiff Business Park Cardiff

Location : Land at Former Tech Board Site Rassau Industrial Estate Rassau

Proposal : Construction of a standing reserve power plant comprising of 48 diesel generators with office and storage buildings, fencing, acoustic barrier enclosure and ancillary structures.

Ward : Ebbw Vale Rassau

REPORT SUMMARY

The application seeks permission for the construction of a 19.2MW standing reserve power plant to be located on a portion of the front western curtilage of the former Techboard Factory on the Rassau Industrial Estate. The plant comprises of 48 acoustically protected diesel generators with ancillary equipment/infrastructure and is designed to provide extremely fast start up electricity generation to the National Grid on demand during periods of peak load. The report considers the principle of the development and its impacts on social, environmental and economic factors. It concludes with a recommendation that the application be GRANTED SITE AND DEVELOPMENT DESCRIPTION This application seeks planning permission for the construction of a standing reserve power plant. The applicants are seeking to meet the National Grid Requirements for “Fast Reserve” classification. In practice this would mean the plant could respond to an electronic instruction from the National Grid and provide power to the grid within 2 minutes of receiving the instruction. The supporting information indicates that the generators would become operational during periods of peak demand on the electricity supply network and would typically be operational for approximately 350 hours in any one year (6-7 hours per week). It is stated that it is less likely that such demand would occur during the night time period.

The proposed plant takes the form of 48 diesel generations arranged in groups of four within a designated compound. Each group would be connected to a 0.4/33kv step up transformer. Each generator and transformer are proposed to be sited on concrete plinths.

The generators would be housed in acoustically protected containers approximately 5m long by 2m wide and 2m high. The generators are fuelled with ultra-low sulphur diesel (0.001% sulphur). The generating equipment would be surrounded with solid acoustic fencing circa 4m high for noise mitigation purposes.

On site fuel storage would be via three 22,500 litre steel containers and would be refilled by bulk fuel road tanker. The site would be accessed via the existing Techboard entrance junction and the internal Rassau Industrial Estate highway.

Facilitating the operation of the development, there would be significant amounts of electrical equipment including switch gear used to connect the generator transformers to the site export transformer and from there electricity would be transported via a high voltage (132kv) cable to a substation or alternate connection point. There is a 40m by 20m compound proposed to be for the use of Western Power Distribution. Separately a container will also be provided to store spare equipment for the operation and also on site will be a modular temporary office style container including welfare facilities. A small area for car parking is shown. The whole site (approximately 130m by 40m) is proposed to be enclosed by 2.4m high fencing.

The 0.535ha application site is part of the former Techboard Factory, a large vacant unit with an extensive curtilage on the eastern side of the Rassau Industrial Estate within the Ebbw Vale Enterprise Zone. It comprises of an area of land at the front of the industrial unit’s forecourt towards the extreme western edge of the Techboard site. The site is bounded on the west by the internal estate road which runs parallel to the site boundary and rises steadily to the north. To the north is an undeveloped grassed plateau bounded by a tree belt. The application site is immediately surrounded to the east and south Techboard site’s curtilage. The nearest residential properties are on the Rassau housing development located approximately 270m to the south of the application site.

It is estimated that the development will provide 4 full time jobs likely to be comprised of a plant manager, skilled floor operators and security staff.

RELEVANT PLANNING HISTORY 313 Industrial Estate (Outline) Approved 02.03.76 2109 Infrastructure works Approved 10.04.80 (Phase 2) 10363 Erection of Hardboard Approved 23.12.93 Manufacturing Mill with external log yard and carparking C/1994/0132 Variation of condition 2 of Approved 12.05.94 planning permission 10363 to allow installations of combined heat and power plant instead of previously proposed Boiler Plant C/1995/0408 Erection of industrial Approved 29.02.96 building linked to existing Techboard Factory C/1996/0045 38 Square Metre Acoustic Approved 15.05.96 Building adjacent to existing Factory to house vacuum fans necessary to perform the main process in the factory C/1997/0064 Erection of 30-40 metre Approved 10.04.97 high stack (approx 2.8 metre diameter) for the purpose of environmental improvement plant for process exhaust. C/2012/0369 Erection of a single wind Refused 14.02.14 turbine and associated (Appeal transformer enclosure Dismissed) 06.11.14

RELEVANT CONSULTATION RESPONSES Team Manager - Building Control Building Regulations required

Team Manager - European and Planning Policy Planning Policy broadly support the proposed development subject to the following issues being addressed:  Compatibility of uses (Policy DM1 2a.)  Visual impact (Policy DM1 2b.)  Noise and light pollution (Policy DM1 2h.)  Air quality (Policy DM1 2g.)  Cumulative impacts of other developments (Policy DM1 2g.)  Highway safety (Policy DM1 3a-b.)  Use of palisade fencing (Policy DM2 a.)

Service Manager - Infrastructure Highways No objections

Landscape No objections in principle. Recommends the proposed palisade fencing should be replaced with a more visually appealing boundary fencing. Consideration to be given to hedgerow planting.

Ecology No expected impact on upon priority or protected species. Requested an assessment be made on the impact to the Usk SAC. Following extra information supplied by the applicant determined that the proposal would not have any significant impact on European designated sites.

Service Manager – Public Protection Ground Contamination: No information has been submitted in relation to potential ground contamination but given the proposed use it is not anticipated that there would be a level of contamination present that would prevent the proposed development proceeding given the implementation of any necessary remediation. A condition is recommended for a site investigation and remediation strategy, to include a desk top study.

Light Pollution: No information has been provided identifying lighting systems associated with the development and the potential impact from these systems. This aspect of the development should be the subject of a condition.

Noise Initally objected to the development because of concerns about the level of impact from operational noise from the proposal on sensitive receptors in the area.

Following clarification on methodolgy, more accurate modelling and amendments to proposed acoustic mitigation the objection has been withdrawn subject to the imposition of planning conditions to protect noise senstive receptors.

Air Quality The impact of the operational atmospheric emissions from the proposed development site has been considered by the applicant. The air quality assessment submitted considered the levels of impact from the development for annual No2 (Nitrogen Dioxide) concentration values at four locations (Honeyfield Road, Pen-y-Bryn, Pen-Y-Crug and Maple Drive) where there are residential senstive receptors.

The resultant modelling also showed that the hourly N02 limit of 200 µg/m³ could be exceeded guidelines at a level of 220.42 µg/m³ at Honeyfield Road. There was however a low probability of this occurring calculated to be once in a 23,800 year period. This means there is chance that 1 year in every 23,800 years will exceed the 200µg/m³ limit for the 18 exceedances specified in the air quality objectives.

Whilst this would seem a very low level of event occurrence, it should be born in mind that given the nature of probability prediction these events could occur in the first year of operation.

In consideration of the information that has submitted by the applicant in relation to the air quality impacts from the proposed development and having sought advice from various public bodies including the views and representations of DEFRA and Public Health Wales, Environmental Health would not object to the development proceeding on air quality grounds due to the marginal exceedence of the hourly N02 air quality objective at relevant receptors.

Service Manager – Waste Standard Advice

Welsh Water Public sewer crosses site

Natural Resources Wales

Air Quality In their initial response Natural Resources Wales considered the level of information supplied was insufficient to comment on the impact on protected sites in the vicinity of the installation.

Following the receipt of a revised Air Quality Assessment which address the deficiencies highlight by NRW and also an Assessment provided by the Council’s Ecologist under the Habitat Regulations it was confirmed that NRW are in agreement that the proposals will not have a likely significant effect alone or in combination on the Usk Valley Bat sites SAC.

Environmental Permit Confirms that the installation will not reach the threshold for it to be required to be permitted by NRW but will instead be permitted by the Local Authority.

Fuel Tanks Recommend that a method statement is prepared detailing the process of how manual filling of fuel tanks is completed and what pollution prevention measures will be employed to prevent leaks and spills during fuel transfer.

Drainage Raise queries over detailed aspects of the foul sewerage and surface water details and recommend full details are conditioned.

Western Power Distribution Provides details of apparatus in the vicinity

Wales and West Utilities Provides details of apparatus in the vicinity

GWT No response received

Welsh Government Transport Division No objections – No new access arrangements are proposed and the construction and operational traffic levels are not significant and would not impact adversely on the existing trunk road nor the section 3 improvement to the A465 currently under construction.

PUBLICITY The application was publicised via a press notice, site notice and notification letters sent to Units 35, 41 and Techboard on the Rassau Industrial Estate.

Two notification letters were returned undelivered.

No representations were received relative to the consultation exercise.

RELEVANT PLANNING POLICY National planning Policy PPW Planning Policy Wales TAN 5 Nature Conservation & Planning TAN 32 Economic Development

Blaenau Gwent Local Development Plan SP8 Sustainable Economic Growth SP10 Protection & Enhancement of the Natural Environment DM1 New Development DM2 Design and Placemaking DM10 Use Class Restrictions - Employment DM14 Biodiversity Protection and Enhancement EMP 2 Employment Protection Area

PLANNING CONSIDERATION The key material planning considerations raised by the proposed development are as follows:  Environmental Impact Assessment  Principle of the proposed development;  Impact on environmental assets: Landscape, visual impact, nature conservation;  Impact on the local community: Noise, air quality, light pollution, contamination of land and controlled waters, surface water and land drainage, and highways and car parking;  Ability of the proposal to connect to the national grid; Environmental Impact Assessment

Environmental assessment is a procedure that ensures that the environmental implications of decisions are taken into account.

An EIA is needed for projects likely to have significant environmental effects by virtue of their nature, size or location.

An EIA Screening Opinion was carried out by the authority for the proposed development on receipt of the planning application. The Screening Opinion concluded that under the Regulations the development is a ‘Schedule 2’ development, as it is classed in that schedule as being “an industrial installation for the production of electricity where works exceeds 0.5 hectare in area” – the site area was stated as 0.5ha on the application form however due to an amendment to extend the redline boundary to the adopted highway it has resulted in the site area being 0.535ha and therefore is required to be screened.

The development was considered against criteria listed in Schedule 3 of the EIA Regulations and advice in Welsh Office Circular 11/99: Environmental Impact Assessment. The Screening Opinion concluded that the proposal would not have a significant effect on the environment sufficient to warrant requiring an environmental impact assessment. No ES was therefore sought. That opinion has no bearing on the acceptability of the scheme. The planning matters must still be fully considered by the local planning authority.

Principle of the Development

It is considered that the principle of the development is supported by national planning guidance issued by Welsh Governmment. The infrastructure chapter of Planning Policy Wales (PPW) acknowledges that within the energy sector Welsh Government’s aim is “to secure an appropriate mix of energy provision for Wales which maximises benefits to our economy and communities, whilst minimising potential environmental and social impacts.” (PPW, para 12.8.6).

The Planning Policy section have confirmed that the site falls within the defined settlement boundary (Policy SB1) and within land allocated for Employment under Policy EMP2 (Employment Area Protection and DM10 (Use class restrictions – Employment).

Policy EMP2 allocates the Rassau Industrial Estate as a Primary site (EMP2.2) which (in conjunction with Policy DM10) allows activities falling within the established Business planning use classes (B1, B2, or B8) on Primary Sites as well as appropriate Sui Generis uses and ancillary facilities in order to protect the area from being developed for non- employment use.

The proposed use is considered to be a Sui Generis use and not an ancillary facility, as the electricity generated is not proposed to be supplied directly for the benefit of other businesses on the industrial estate. It is however acknowledged that users on the Industrial Estate may indirectly benefit from the improvement in capacity for the national grid within the area and security of supply that the development may bring, particularly at times of high demand.

Whilst the Planning Policy section has not objected to the development they note that the type of development is not necessarily the type of Sui Generis use specifically anticipated by the Local Development Plan. However they have also noted the Planning Policy Wales highlights that infrastructure including electricity is “crucial for the economic, social and environmental sustainability of all parts of Wales” (PPW, para 12.1.1).

The applicant was requested to provide comments on the Planning Policy sections’ response and they highlighted the following points:  The proposed land use is a suitable as a Sui Generis  The employment is commensurate with the relatively small site area  The reuse of vacant land on the industrial estate will allow for a more efficient use of land.  There will remain a number of vacant industrial on the estate with little sign of take up in the longer term  The nature of the proposal is to reinforce the national grid and local electricity distribution network with sufficient electricity as and when required.  It supports the development of the manufacturing section according with LDP Policy SP8(b)  The employment resulting from the development will be varied from management position to maintenance and site security staff.

The applicant’s response was referred to the Planning Policy Section who confirmed they did not wish to comment further on the application.

I have considered both the query raised by the Planning Policy section as to the suitability of the use and the response from the applicant. I have also considered the Technical Advice Note 23 on Economic Development.

In paragraph 1.1.4 the technical advice note highlights that “Planning Policy Wales advises that economic land uses include the traditional employment uses (Class B in the Use Classes Order) as well as retail, tourism and public services. This list is not exhaustive and amongst other activities, economic land uses also include agriculture, energy generation and other infrastructure.”

It is important to note that in the latest version of Planning Policy Wales there has been a refinement to the wording in the section referenced by the TAN with the wording amended to “The construction and energy sectors are also important to the economy and are sensitive to planning policies” (PPW, 7.1.1).

I have had regard to both the nature of the development and the application site. In broad terms I consider the siting of such a generation facility is well suited to the Rassau Industrial Estate which is divorced from sensitive receptors and has an industrial character. I am guided by Planning Policy Wales which advises in that the planning system needs to support economic and employment growth whilst considering this in the context of the impacts on social and environmental considerations.

In considering whether the development is an acceptable sui generis use for the industrial estate it important to consider from a sequential point of view whether there are more suitable types of location. I conclude that due to considerations on emissions and noise that locating these types of developments immediately adjacent to residential areas would be highly likely to be undesirable and problematic. Alternatively there would be likely to policy objections, visual and environmental concerns for such proposals to be located outside of the defined settlement boundaries. I find on balance that the use is an acceptable sui generis use as it will provide employment (estimated to be 4 full time jobs) and the industrial land is considered to be a suitable site location whereby visual and environmental concerns will be minimised. I find support from national planning guidance which subject to material planning considerations recommends “local planning authorities should aim to steer economic development to the most appropriate locations, rather than prevent or discourage such development”.

Having regard to the above and the policy objectives of the LDP I consider that the small loss of employment land that will result from the location of the proposed development on a primary employment site is not significant enough to justify refusal of planning permission. Therefore the principle of the proposed use in this location is deemed acceptable.

Existing and proposed developments

The application has considered the cumulative impact of the development in conjunction with a number of existing and consented developments in the area including a biomass plant at Unit 21 on the same industrial estate, the outline permission for the proposed Circuit of Wales racetrack development located to the north of the industrial estate and the dualling works to the A465 trunk road which involves a significant realignment of the road to the south of the industrial estate and would move the trunk road alignment onto intervening land between the industrial estate and the nearest residential receptors on the Rassau housing development. These developments have potential impact for noise and air quality which are considered in the next section of this report.

Impact on environmental assets

Landscape & visual impact Protecting attributes and features which make a significant contribution to the character, quality and amenity of the landscape is a key strategic objective of the LDP (Policy SP10(d) refers). Policy DM1.2(b) and Policy DM1.2(c) states that new development should produce no unacceptable adverse visual impact on townscape or landscape, or impact upon the amenities of neighbouring occupiers.

The application site is within the confines of an existing large industrial estate and therefore the development will be viewed in conjunction with the surrounding existing large industrial units. The highest part of the development will be the acoustic fencing which is indicated within the noise assessments to be 4 metres in height substantially exceeding the height of the generators (circa 2.3m high) and other equipment within the compound. It is proposed to condition the acoustic fencing to allow for a suitable colour and specification to be agreed.

There is significant mature planting on the periphery of the industrial estate and also just to the north of the nearest residential properties in the Rassau. I therefore do not consider that the development will be highly visible outside of the immediate confines of the Industrial Estate. However it is noted that the redline boundary includes a small portion of tree belt at the northern edge of the site. The submitted site layout plan indicates this area is outside of the proposed area for plant or machinery and it is considered appropriate to add conditions to prohibit the felling of any existing trees without the written permission of the Local Planning Authority and also require the developer to provide a landscaping scheme to be submitted prior to commencement of works. This will allow for a agreement over a suitable level of screening to the development.

I note the comments of the Landscape Officer in relation to boundary treatments and potential for landscaping. I agree that a powder coated fencing would be preferable solution to palisade fencing and propose a condition be added to require details of boundary treatments to be submitted prior to development commencing.

The site is located at the southern end of the industrial estate and is therefore located away from the open moorland to the north of the industrial estate, including the statutorily protected landscapes of the Brecon Beacons National Park. I consider that the limited height of the development together with existing screening in both terms of natural tree coverage and other industrial units mean that the development will not have significant visual impacts in the wider locality. The development will be viewed in the context of existing industrial buildings on the estate, the electricity transmission pylons to the north and the A465 dualling works. I therefore consider that the development will not have unacceptable visual impact on the wider landscape

Nature Conservation The application site lies approximately 1.5km from the Usk Bat Site Special Area for Conservation (SAC) and just under 2km from the Mynydd Llangyndr and Mynydd Llangatwg Sites of Special Scientific Interest.

Protecting and enhancing features of nature conservation value, and maintaining and enhancing green infrastructure is a key strategic objective of the LDP (Policy SP10 refers). In support of this objective Policy DM1(f) requires development proposals do not result in a net loss of biodiversity and provide mitigation and/or compensation where necessary. Policy DM14 further requires that proposals within 10km of the Usk Bat Special Area of Conservation that would have an impact on the connectivity of corridors or cause direct or indirect disturbance to the features, must be subject to a project level Habitat Regulations Assessment.

The air quality assessment was updated to include consideration of Nitrogen deposition rates for both the Site of Scientific Interest and the Special Area for Conservation. The report concluded that the development would have an insignificant effect on each designated site.

A screening exercise for the need for an appropriate assessment under the Habitat Regulations has been carried out by the Council’s Ecologist and reviewed by Natural Resources Wales. This found the development would not be likely to have a significant effect alone or in combination with other development on any European protected site.

Impact on the local community

Air Quality Policy DM1.2(g) requires that new development would not result in airborne emissions which have an unacceptable effect on the health, amenity or natural environment of the surrounding area taking into account cumulative effects of other proposed or existing sources of air pollution in the vicinity.

An Air quality assessment was submitted with the planning application. This was updated to address Natural Resources Wales’ comments. Thereafter the applicant and their consultant have had significant dialogue with the council’s Environmental Health Officer on the scheme and have prepared technical notes and addendum on air quality. The Environmental Health officer has in turn provided updated consultation responses to respond the consideration of information.

The submitted information takes account of the re-routing of the A465 trunk road, the existing unit 21 development and the Circuit of Wales racetrack in the air quality calculations. All these developments will have an impact on air quality due to their close proximity to the application site. In assessing the submitted information the Environmental Health officer has also sought the views and representations of DEFRA and Public Health Wales.

The air quality assessment, using computer modelling, predicts potential concentration values at sensitive receptors for the pollutant Nitrogen Dioxide (NO2). The modelling looks at the existing background levels of NO2 and calculates what the process contribution will be in addition to this background concentration. This total value is then compared to the National Air Quality Objectives, which are the air quality standards that the Local Authority must look to achieve within its area.

The senstive receptors considered in the air quality assessment were locations at: Honeyfield Road, Pen-y-Bryn, Pen-y-Cryg and Maple Drive.

As referred to in detail in his response contained within the consultation section of this report the Environmental Health Officer has highlighted that the submitted information acknowledges that at Honeyfield Road there is the theoretical potential for exceedances of the Nitrogen Dioxide hourly limit albeit with an extremely low probability of occurrence (1 year every 23,800).

I concur with the Environmental Health Officer that on balance and with the imposition of suitable conditions the development will not have an unacceptable impact on air quality for sensitive receptors.

Noise Policy DM1.2(h) requires that there would be no unacceptable risk of harm to human health and or local amenity from unacceptably high levels of noise.

The Environmental Health Officer has considered the noise climate in the area and has raised with the developer a number of other developments proposed including the dualling of the A465 Trunk road which is being re-aligned to run just south of the industrial estate.

Following initial concern over methodology additional noise modelling was undertaken by the developer at the behest of the Environmental Health Officer. The Officer has since removed an initial objection to the development in relation to noise subject to the imposition of a number of planning conditions. These conditions impose limits on noise level, require at the request of the Local Planning Authority the submission of an assessment of noise levels and where any exceedence of agreed noise levels are found the plant to be modified, limited or shut down until measures are taken to reduce noise levels.

It is considered that with these safeguards the development will not have a significant impact on noise sensitive receptors.

Light Pollution Policy DM1.2(h) requires that new development would cause no unacceptable harm to health and/or local amenity from unacceptably high levels of light pollution.

No information has been submitted in relation to lighting requirements for the site. However regard must be had to the fact that the Brecon Beacons National Park to the north has been designated as a dark skies area.

I consider that the impacts of light can be satisfactorily controlled through the use of a condition and it is recommended that a condition be attached to any planning permission to ensure that future lighting of the site is reasonable and does not have any unacceptable adverse impact on the environment, neighbouring occupiers and ecology.

Contamination & Quality of Controlled Waters Policy DM1.2 (j) requires that new development takes practicable and effective measures to treat, contain or control any contamination. Policy DM1.2 (e) requires that new development would have no adverse impact on the water environment or an unacceptable risk to the quality of controlled waters (including groundwater and surface water).

No information has been submitted with the application with regard to potential ground contamination. The Environmental Health officer does not anticipate that there would be a level of contamination present that would prevent the development of the site and recommends that a condition be attached to any planning permission for a desk-top study, site investigation and a remediation strategy.

Surface water and land drainage Policy DM1.1 (e) requires new development to reduce surface water run- off through minimising an increase in impermeable surfaces and using Sustainable Drainage systems where appropriate.

However it is noted that Natural Resources Wales have advised due to the nature of the development that the entire site should have an impermeable surface with a sealed drainage system. They have requested that method statements are prepared for managing the process of filling the fuel tanks of the generators from the onsite storage facilities.

To ensure that the above surface water and land drainage issues are addressed and the adequate protection of the wider environment is maintained it is proposed that a condition be imposed requiring an integrated scheme of drainage from the site will need to be agreed prior to the commencement of the development.

Highways & car parking Policy DM1(a-d) requires development proposals to have regard for the safe, effective and efficient use of the transportation network, are designed to promote sustainable modes of transport, to secure provision for people with access and mobility needs and provides adequate parking, servicing and operational space.

The Welsh Government has not raised any objections to the proposed development on the impact of the proposal on the A465 and the Highway Authority has offered no objections to the development.

Connection of the development to the national grid The applicant states that the grid connection can be achieved at a sub- station close to the site. It is not anticipated that any further planning permission will be required to make the grid connection, which is normally covered by the permitted development rights of the District Network Operator. However, if required, the statutory undertaker will submit a separate planning application to facilitate the grid connection.

Conclusion

The principle of the proposed development and its impact on environmental, social and economic factors has been carefully assessed. It is considered that the development is acceptable in principle in this location, and that the impacts of the development are also acceptable subject to mitigation where appropriate. I therefore recommend that the application be granted subject to conditions and advisory notes.

RECOMMENDATION That planning permission be GRANTED subject to the following conditions:

1. The development shall not be carried out except in complete accordance with the details of the following approved plans and documents, except where amended by conditions attached to this planning permission:

Plans: Site Location Plan - ref 39/L(00)210, received Site Plan - ref 39/L(00)205, received 15.08.14 STOR Generator Layout – ref 2MVA STOR received 15.08.14 Container drawing – ref EBD5000, received 08.08.14 Switchgear Housing – received 15.08.14 DNO Relay and Metering Room, received 15.08.14 Welfare Office – ref L(00)220, received 08.08.14 Storage Unit – ref L(00)221, received 08.08.14 GA of Perkins 2506 Std Tank – ref MGA7032 revision A, received 08.08.14

Documents: Design and Access Statement (August 2014) by Asbri Planning, received 11.08.14 Noise Impact Assessment (31.07.14), by Accon UK, received 08.08.14 Revised Air Quality Assessment (10.10.14), by Accon UK, received 13.10.14 ACCON UK Clarification sheet 26.09.2014, received 28.09.14 ACCON UK Noise Clarification sheet, dated & received 21.10.14 ACCON UK Air Quality Assessment – Technical Note V2, dated & received 21.10.14 ACCON UK Noise Assessment – Technical Note v6 dated & received 07.01.15 ACCON UK Response Note v3, dated and received 16.01.15 ACCON UK Air Quality Technical Note dated and received 20.01.15 Reason: For the avoidance of doubt and to ensure compliance with the approved plans and documents.

2. At any time the operational parameters and emission rates associated with emissions to atmosphere from the proposed development shall not exceed those specified in air quality assessment report entitled “Air Quality Assessment Report for the Techboard/Brecon Site” produced by ACCON UK, dated 10/10/2014 and submitted in support of planning application reference C/2014/0228. Reason: In the interests of amenity

3. Prior to commencement of the development an air quality management plan shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. This plan shall set out how the developer will demonstrate compliance with the predicted air quality impacts set out in the technical report “Air Quality Assessment Report for the Techboard/Brecon Site” produced by ACCON UK, dated 10/10/2014 and all associated technical reports submitted in support of planning application reference C/2014/0228. The plan shall have particular reference to any air quality monitoring and modelling proposed to demonstrate this compliance including timescales for this to be undertaken. The recommendations of the approved air quality management plan shall be implemented in full. Reason: In the interests of amenity

4. During the course of any air quality impact assessment conducted in compliance of Condition 3, should the development be identified as operating above the parameters specified in Condition 2, the development shall be modified, limited or shut down. These measures shall be applied until such time as maintenance, modification or repair is undertaken sufficient to reduce the air quality impacts from the development to within the parameters specified in Condition 2. Reason: In the interests of amenity

5. The rating level of the noise emitted from the development site shall not exceed the background noise level established during the commissioned phase of the development by more than + 0 dB between 23:00 hrs and 07:00 hrs, -11 dB between 07:00 hrs and 19:00 hrs and -6 dB between 19:00 hrs and 23:00 hrs. The noise levels shall be determined at the boundary of the noise sensitive premises exposed to the highest level of noise from the development. The measurements and assessment shall be made according to BS 44142:2014 Reason: To safeguard the amenities of occupiers and the users/occupants of nearby properties.

6. At the written request of the Local Planning Authority the operator of the development shall, at its expense, employ an appropriately qualified consultant approved by the Local Planning Authority, to assess the level of noise emissions from the development at noise sensitive receptors (as specified by the Local Planning Authority) following the procedures and methodology described in B.S. 4142:2014. The developer shall:

a) Inform the Local Planning Authority in writing at least two weeks prior to the noise assessment of the name of the appointed noise consultant and the noise assessment shall not take place until the Local Planning Authority has confirmed in writing that the proposed noise consultant is suitable.

b) During the course of any noise assessment conducted under this condition, should the development be identified as operating above the parameters specified in Condition 5, the development shall be modified, limited or shut down and the Local Planning Authority informed within 24 hours of this occurring. These measures shall be applied until such time as maintenance, modification or repair is undertaken sufficient to reduce the absolute noise level from the development to within the parameters specified in Condition 5. Reason: In the interests of sensitive receptors

7. No development shall commence until an assessment of the nature and extent of any site contamination is undertaken in accordance with a methodology which must first be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. Such assessment shall include:

a) A desktop study to include the identification of previous site uses, the extent and type of any contamination and their impacts on land and controlled waters, and details of all potential source, pathway and receptor linkages, and potentially unacceptable risks arising from contamination at the site. The information should be used to produce a Site Conceptual Model for all potential contaminant sources, pathways and receptors; b) A site investigation and risk assessment shall be designed for the site having regard to the desktop study and Conceptual Model to provide information for a detailed assessment of the risk to all receptors that may be affected, including off-site. The proposed design shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority prior to the site investigation being carried out on site. c) The site investigation and risk assessment shall be undertaken in accordance with the approved details and with BS 10175/2011 (Investigation of Potentially Contaminated Sites – Code of Practice). d) Where necessary an options appraisal and method statement detailing the remediation measures identified as necessary to treat/remove contamination to ensure that the site is fit for purpose shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. e) The development hereby approved shall not be brought into use until all such measures identified as necessary to decontaminate the site, as contained in the approved remediation report, are implemented. f) On completion of the remediation works the applicant shall provide for the written approval of the Authority a validation report and verification plan signed by a suitably qualified person that confirms that such measures and/or works have been implemented fully in accordance with the approved remediation report. The verification plan shall identify any requirements for the longer-term monitoring of pollutant linkages, maintenance and arrangements for contingency action.

The development shall implemented fully in accordance with the detailed as agreed and approved.

Reason: The Local Planning Authority is advised that the site may be affected by contamination and considers it appropriate to assess the significance of such contamination to human health and the quality of controlled waters before development can proceed. 8. If, during the course of development, any contamination is found which has not been identified in the site investigation required by condition 7 additional measures for the remediation of this source of contamination in the form of a remediation scheme shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The remediation of the site shall incorporate all approved additional measures and shall be completed before the development hereby approved is brought into beneficial use. Reason: To ensure that any unexpected contamination issues are adequately addressed and that suitable mitigation measures are implemented.

9. No external lighting shall be erected that causes glare outside of the site on the public or private highways. All overnight exterior lighting shall be shrouded and fitted with as a low a lumen output as possible without breaching health and safety requirements. During the night-time hours (23:00-06:00) the use of high output flood lighting shall be restricted for use where absolutely necessary for external operations. Reason: To minimise the impact of excessive lighting which may cause disturbance and annoyance to other industrial users and in the interests of environmental sustainability 10. Prior to the development coming into operation full details of the siting and design of the three fuel storage tanks shall be submitted for the written approval of the Local Planning Authority. The development shall be completed in accordance with these details. Reason: In the interests of achieving a safe form of development and satisfactory pollution control.

11. Prior to the development coming into operation a method statement shall be submitted for the written approval of the Local Planning Authority which shall detail in relation to the filling/refilling of the onsite fuel storage tanks and each generator (or grouping as required) the following:  The process for manual filling  Pollution prevention measures to be employed to prevent leaks and spills during fuel transfer. Reason: In the interests of protection of the environment and pollution control

12. The development hereby permitted shall not be commenced until such time as a scheme to disposes of foul and surface water has been submitted to, and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The scheme shall be implemented as approved. Reason: To prevent pollution to the water environment.

13. Notwithstanding any details indicated on the approved plans no development shall take place until details of the siting, design, and materials of any gates/ fences/ boundary treatments proposed in relation to this development have been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. Any boundary treatments approved shall be erected before the development is brought into use and shall be maintained, thereafter at all times. Reason: To safeguard the visual amenities the area.

14. Notwithstanding the details submitted prior to the commencement of development details and specifications of an acoustic barrier to surround the 48 generators shall be submitted for the written approval of the Local Planning Authority. Prior to the development coming into beneficial use the acoustic barrier shall have first been erected in accordance with the approved details and shall be retained thereafter. Reason: To ensure that the nearby dwellings and units to the hereby permitted installation do not experience unacceptable levels of noise disturbance.

15. No development shall take place until there has been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority a scheme of landscaping. The submitted scheme shall include:

 Indications of all existing trees (including spread and species) and hedgerows on the land clearly identifying those to be lost or retained;  Measures for the protection of retained trees or hedges throughout the course of development;  Details of ground preparation, planting plans, number and details of species;  Maintenance details for a minimum period of 5 years;  A phased timescale of implementation. Reason: To ensure submission of an appropriate landscaping scheme and to secure a development that makes a positive contribution to the landscape and visual amenities of the area.

16. Permission is granted subject to the provisions of section 91(1) of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 namely that the development to which this permission relates must be begun not later than the expiration of 5 years beginning with the date on which the permission is granted. Reason: To comply with the requirements of Section 91 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990.

Informative Advice

1 The proposed development site is crossed by a public sewer with the approximate position being marked on the attached record plan. Further advice and guidance from Welsh Water on drainage issues is contained in their letter of response dated 30.09.14

2 Further advice and guidance from Western Power Distribution is contained in their letter of response and advice note dated 21.08.14

3 Further advice and guidance from Wales & West Utilities is contained in their letter of response and advice note dated 29.08.14

4 The developer is advised to contact Natural Resources Wales in relation to preparing details on foul drainage in relation to condition14. Further advice and guidance from NRW is contained in their letter of response and advice note dated 30.09.14

5 The developer is advised that in the preparation of details for condition 16 they should be aware that the Local Planning Authority considers that palisade style fencing and fencing comprising of a galvanised finish are not considered visually acceptable for the locality.

6 This planning permission does not cover the grid connection; separate planning permission may be needed for this.

7 The developer is advised that the Local Planning Authority intends the requirement for a noise assessment under condition 6 to be invoked only where there are substantial and substantiated reasons to suspect a noise issue from the development. Such a decision will be taken in consultation with the Environmental Health Officer.

8 It is recommended that the developer follows all relevant Pollution Prevention Guidance to ensure good environmental practice during the construction and operation of the development. The developer is advised to contact Natural Resources Wales.

9 The developer is respectfully requested to utilise local labour and supply chains in the construction, operation and decommissioning of the development in the interests of the local economy.

The following policies in the Local Development Plan were material to this decision: SP8, SP10, DM1, DM2, DM4, DM10, EMP2

Application No. : C/2014/0375 (Outline Application)

Case Officer : Eirlys Hallett

Date Lodged : 10th September 2014

Applicant : Mr C Francombe Pantyseawen Farm Newbridge NP11 4RJ Agent : Richard Whitaker Architects Ltd Penarth Haven 43 Plas Saint Andresse Penarth CF64 1BW Location : Former Wrekin Site Cwm Road Aberbeeg Abertillery Proposal : Proposed single storey dwelling and detached garage (outline)

Ward : Ebbw Vale Cwm

REPORT SUMMARY The application seeks approval in principle to erect a single dwelling on land outside the settlement boundary as defined in the Local Development Plan. Following detailed examination of the site, national and local planning policy and other material planning considerations it has been concluded that there are no exceptions in either local or national policy that justify allowing the erection of a dwelling on this site. Approving unacceptable ribbon development of this nature without reasoned justification would set a precedent that could undermine the credibility of Authority’s adopted LDP. This application is a resubmission of an identical application refused in December 2013. There have been no changes in planning policy since the previous refusal or additional information submitted in support of the current application that might warrant a making a different recommendation. It is accordingly recommended that this application be REFUSED.

BACKGROUND This is an outline planning application for a single storey dwelling and a detached garage on the former Wrekin Site, Cwm Road, Aberbeeg. This application is a resubmission of an identical application refused by Planning Committee in December 2013. Application C/2012/0284 was refused in accordance with the planning officer’s recommendation for the following planning policy based reason: -

The application relates to the erection of a dwelling outside the defined settlement boundary which would constitute an unacceptable form of ribbon development. To approve such an application would run counter to the Policy SB1 of the adopted Blaenau Gwent Local Development Plan and national planning policy as contained in Planning Policy Wales (Edition 5, 2012). To allow a development which does not qualify as a exception to local or national policy would prejudice implementation of the recently approved development plan and may establish a precedent that could result in further unplanned development, the combined impact of which could adversely affect the landscape amenities of the area.

The applicant has now exercised his right to submit a further application to the Planning Authority which is accompanied by a ‘Supplementary Statement’ which seeks to explain why he considers that the initial application should have been granted. The officer’s view on the contents of that supporting statement will be addressed at the end of the Planning Considerations section of this report. Members should note that the following report is an updated version of the officer’s report to Planning Committee in December 2013.

SITE AND DEVELOPMENT DESCRIPTION The application site, which is an area of grassland and scrub, is an irregularly shaped area of land measuring 50m by 50m and its widest points sited off Cwm Road, Aberbeeg. The land is bound to the east by a single storey residential property (used as a care facility), and to the south and west by an irregular shaped area of land (also owned by the applicant) which forms part of the embankment to the River Ebbw. Along part of the frontage of the plot, between the site and Cwm Road there is a further irregular shaped parcel of land which falls under separate ownership. To the east of the care home facility there is a relatively recently constructed dwelling.

The application is in outline with all statutory matters (i.e. access, appearance, landscape, layout and scale) reserved for future consideration. Illustrative details have been submitted in support of the application indicating how a 3 bedroom single storey dwelling with a detached double garage could be accommodated on the land. Access to the proposed property would be from the adopted public highway at the north-eastern corner of the site. The application includes a statement confirming minimum and maximum dimensions for the proposed dwelling and garage.

Members are advised that part of the current application site was the subject to an outline planning application in 2010 for a single storey dwelling with detached double garage. The application (Ref C/2010/0006) was refused for three reasons. Namely, because the site was outside the defined urban area and that the applicant had not provided the level of information considered necessary to ensure that its development would not risk pollution of protected waters nor not adversely affect any protected and priority species and their habitat.

Members will also appreciate that a more recent planning application was refused by the Authority in December 2013 on the grounds that there were no exceptions in local or national policy that may have justified approval of an application for development outside the defined LDP settlement boundary. (Application C/2012/0284 refers). The current application is a re-submission of that 2012 application.

RELEVANT PLANNING HISTORY C/2004/0696 Housing Withdrawn C/2010/0006 Single storey dwelling with double Refused garage and 2 car parking places 14/5/2010 C/2012/0284 Proposed single storey dwelling and Refused detached garage (Outline) 11/12/2013

RELEVANT CONSULTATION RESPONSES Team Manager - Development Plans Confirmed that the application site falls outside the settlement boundary, as identified on the adopted Local Development Plan (2013). Advised that the LDP policies of relevance to determination of the application would be policies SB1, DM1, DM2, DM8, DM14, DM15, DM16, DM19, ENV2, ENV3, M1 and SP7. Confirmed that Policy SB1 of the LDP which identifies settlement boundaries is a key mechanism for helping to deliver the LDP’s objective of maximising use of land and that it is the policy that is used to define those areas in the Borough within which any new development will normally be permitted, subject to other policies in the plan, and any other material planning considerations.

Advised that an important objective of Policy SB1 is to prevent inappropriate development in the countryside. Explained that the adopted LDP relies on national guidance (i.e. Planning Policy Wales) to control development outside the settlement boundary. Referred specifically to how PPW – Edition 7, July 2014 advises that “new housing developments should be well integrated with and connected to the existing pattern of settlement” and “that the expansion of towns and villages should avoid creating ribbon development, coalescence or a fragmented development pattern”. Acknowledged that the guidance also states that ‘sensitive infilling of small gaps within small groups of houses, or minor extensions to groups, in particular for affordable housing to meet local need may be acceptable, though much will depend upon the character of the surroundings and the number of such groups in the area’. Drew attention also to national guidance that states that “insensitive infilling or the cumulative effects of development or redevelopment including conversion and adaptation should not be allowed to damage an area’s character or amenity’ and ‘That this includes any such impact on neighbouring dwellings such as serious loss of privacy or overshadowing”.

Within the context of such national planning policy guidance the Team Manager - Development Plans noted that the application site lies outside and at a distance of approximately 65 metres from the settlement boundary and that there are currently two properties sited between the settlement boundary and the application site. The one dwelling was granted permission by the LPA (contrary to the officer recommendation), the other is a building used for a care related use but originally approved as a dwelling in 1994. Advised that from a planning policy perspective there is concern that incremental development creates ribbon development and that allowing this development would risks damaging the rural character of the area. In commenting specifically in relation to policy SB1 The Team Manager - Development Plans also responded briefly to the ‘Supplementary Statement’ submitted support of the current application. Her comments in this respect have been included in the Planning Considerations Section of this report

In the detailed response to the current application The Team Manager – Development Plans has also assessed the proposal in relation to the further 11 policies in the LDP. These include detailed criteria based Development Management Policies (DM1, DM2, DM8, DM14, DM15, DM16 and DM19), Allocation and Designation related policies (ENV2, ENV3, and M1) and Strategic Policy SP7. I do not consider it necessary or appropriate to record in this section of the report all her comments regarding the proposed developments acceptability (or otherwise) relative to all those policies. It is considered sufficient to advise that she is content in the case of most of these policies that the issues they cover can be referred to third parties such as the Council’s highways, environmental health, ecology and landscape officers and NRW, or that the development raises no policy concerns. It should be noted however that in relation to her assessment of the proposal against criteria a, b and g of Policy DM1 she is of the view that those matters referred to (compatibility of development in terms of type, form, scale and mix to local context; good design that reinforces local character and distinctiveness of the area and suitable visual setting and whether landscaping or planting might integrate the proposal into wider context) are of relevance to the assessing the overall acceptability of the proposal.

In summary The Team Manager - Development Plans objects to the development as it is considered that the proposal runs contrary to Planning Policy Wales ( Para 9.3.1) and the LDP ( Policy DM1) . She is of the view that the proposal is for a new dwelling in the open countryside (outside SB1) and risks creating ribbon development. It is not viewed as being a rural enterprise dwelling or an affordable housing exception site.

Service Manager - Infrastructure Highways Confirmed that the application is acceptable to the highway authority and would comply with the requirements of criteria ‘a’ and ‘d’ of Policy DM 1 of the LDP. Satisfied that the off street parking and the turning provision indicated on the illustrative scheme would meet the requirements of the adopted Access, Parking and Design SPG and that adequate visibility splays can be provided. Stressed need to ensure that such visibility spays are achieved and maintained, that driveway gates are set back a minimum of 6metres from the highway that any driveway provided is of 3metres minimum width and is hard surfaced. Drainage Confirmed that they had no objection to the development from a surface water disposal perspective. Had previously suggested in relation to the 2012 application that future occupants of any new property should register with NRW to ensure they receive flood warnings to enable them to mitigate the potential effects of flooding. Suggested that future residents should also be made aware that securing insurance for any property built on the land might be difficult and/or very expensive due to the proximity of the river/ flood plain.

Geotechnical Advised that it would be prudent to require the developer to provide a desk study prepared by a qualified and experienced geotechnical engineer and that if such a report highlights any potential ground stability issues that intrusive site investigation might be required.

Team Manager – Green Infrastructure (Landscape) Objected to the proposal. Noted that the proposal is for a residential dwelling on a site which falls within the Cefn Manmoel Special Landscape Area and outside the defined settlement boundary as defined by the adopted LDP. Advised that little information is provided with the application that might demonstrate consideration of the impact of the proposal on the valued local landscape characteristics and there is no attempt to apply a specific design approach either in the built form or in the application of a robust landscape strategy to ensure that the proposal complies with aims and objectives of LDP para 8.75 ‘in order to protect the visual qualities of the SLA, development proposals will be required to conform to the highest possible design statements’. Advised that the proposal is viewed as being an extension of the urban settlement of Aberbeeg, beyond the clearly defined settlement boundary without reasoned justification and is therefore antagonistic to the aims and objectives of the SLA designation.

Ecologist Advised that otters are know to be active along the river corridor. Acknowledged that the likelihood of works resulting in their disturbance (or significant disturbance under Conservation of Habitats and Species Regulations 2010) was low and that no other offences (deliberate capture, injure or killing of an otter or damage or destruction of an otter holts) were considered likely to occur as a result of the development. Advised that attaching a condition that would ensure that all works were undertaken during daylight hours (as lighting the site at night is know to affect otter movement) would be acceptable.

Noted that the development site lies directly adjacent to the river SINC and is therefore protected under policy DM14 of the LDP but accepted that a condition that would prevent construction storage or transportation of materials to be undertaken in the area of the designated SINC (including the tree line at the rear of the site and 3metres from the base of any tree) would be acceptable. Such a condition would also provide additional protection for any otters moving along the river corridor.

Noted that a reptile survey has been undertaken and that a population of slow worms were found on site. Requires that the mitigation detailed in the report be implemented.

Head of Environmental Health Contamination Confirmed that they have no comments to make in relation to the application.

Principal Estates Officer No response received. Confirmed in relation to the 2012 application that the Council had no ownership interest in the application site, nor in any adjacent land.

Team Leader – Waste Prevention and Re-use Requested that the developer be advised that any removal and disposal of waste from any site development must be dealt with in accordance with The Waste (England and Wales) Regulations 2011 Article 12, and the principles of the Waste Hierarchy. Highlighted that it is a developer’s responsibility to ensure that all waste is dealt with in an appropriate manner and to be able to secure and produce evidence to enable the tracking of such waste upon request. Abertillery and Llanhilleth Community Council No comments received

Welsh Water Requested that if planning permission is granted that standard conditions are imposed that will ensure site drainage is dealt with in an appropriate manner. Advised that site is crossed by a public sewer and that no part of any building should be sited within 3metres either side of the centreline of the pubic sewer. Advised on procedures to be followed by the developer for any proposed connection to the public sewer. Natural Resources Wales Confirmed that their response in relation to flood risk and drainage are un-changed from those made by the Environment Agency relation to the 2012 application. In October 2012 the EA confirmed that they had no objections to the development on flood risk or drainage grounds. They advised at the time that the site fell within Zone B, as defined by Flood Risk Development Advice Map (DAM), referred to in Technical Advice Note 15: Development and Flood Risk. Suggested that as they did not hold any flood risk information on this site, the Council’s Drainage Department should be consulted for advice on flooding issues. Noted that whilst the site fell within a sewered area no drainage details had been provided. Advised of need to deal with drainage in accordance with government circular advice. The EA also confirmed in 2012 that they had not advised on land contamination issues as the controlled waters at this site were considered to be of low environmental sensitivity. They advocated however that the advice contained in Planning Policy Wales and the Environment Agency Guiding Principles for Land Contamination Documents should be followed and that an informative note to such effect should be attached to any planning permission that might be granted.

In response to the current application NRW have commented briefly in relation to ecology. They initially requested to see copies of any comments made previously by the Council’s ecologist and queried why past survey work had only focused on reptiles. They stressed the need to establish if there had been evidence of otter holts in or near the site and whether any trees would be removed as a result of the development. They suggested that if trees were to be removed they should be checked first for bats. Advised that if no otters or bats use the site, the applicant would need to agree a lighting plan to prevent light pollution of the river. This was an issue they considered could be dealt with by means of a planning condition.

[On receipt of these queries NRW were furnished with copies of the Council’s ecologist’s comments in relation to the 2012 application, however no subsequent correspondence has been received from NRW]

Western Power Distribution Advised of apparatus which cross the site, including an overhead line.

Wales and West Utilities Provided advice on apparatus in the vicinity of the application site

Network Rail Advised that they had no objections in principle to the proposal but gave detailed advice on requirements for the safe operation of the railway and the protection of Network Rail’s adjoining land.

Caerphilly County Borough Council (adjoining authority) Noted that (notwithstanding the Design and Access Statement description) the site does not appear to fall within the definition of a brownfield or to be significantly linked to pattern development, access to services etc. i.e. infill. Advised that accordingly any planning decision would need to address Blaenau Gwent CBC Local Development Plan Policy.

PUBLICITY This planning application has been the subject of statutory publicity in the form of the display of a site notice and notification letters sent to the owner/occupiers of 2 nearby properties. Ward Members were also advised of the receipt of the application in accordance with standard procedures.

No responses were received as a result of this consultation exercise.

RELEVANT PLANNING POLICY Adopted Blaenau Gwent Local Development Plan Policy SB1 Settlement Boundaries Policy DM1 New Development Policy DM2 Design and Placemaking Policy DM8 Affordable Housing Exception Sites Policy DM14 Biodiversity Protection and Enhancement Policy DM15 Protection and Enhancement of Green Infrastructure Policy DM16 Trees Woodland and Hedgerow Planting Policy DM19 Mineral Safeguarding Policy ENV2 Special Landscape Areas Policy ENV3 Sites of Importance for Nature Conservation Policy SP7 Climate Change Policy M1 Safeguarding of Minerals

Planning Policy Wales (Edition 7) July 2014 TAN 5 – Nature Conservation and Planning (2009) TAN 15 – Development and Flood Risk (2004)

PLANNING CONSIDERATION This is an outline application which seeks approval in principle for a dwelling and detached garage on a parcel of land at Aberbeeg.

Members will appreciate that this is a re-submission of an application refused by this Authority in December 2013 which was the subject of a detailed report to Planning Committee. This report is therefore an updated version of the 2013 officer’s report amended to reflect the comments received from consultees in relation to the current application and to address specific comments made by the applicant/agent in a ‘Supplementary Statement’ that accompanied the current application.

Members will be aware that when considering any planning application it is incumbent upon the Authority to assess and determine applications in accordance with the adopted development plan for the area unless material considerations indicate otherwise (Planning and Compulsory Purchase Act 2004- Section 38(6)).

The adopted development plan for the Borough now (and when a previous application for the same development (Application C/2012/0284) was determined in December 2013) is the Blaenau Gwent Local Development Plan (LDP), November 2012. Members should note therefore that it is on the basis of the policies of the 2012 adopted LDP that the current application falls to be assessed. It is recognised however that when a previous application for a similar development was refused in 2010 and when the most recent application (Application C/2012/0284) was submitted in September 2012 the adopted development plan for the area was The Blaenau Gwent Unitary Development Plan 2007.

In terms of historical context Members should appreciate that when an application for a dwelling on part of the same site was refused in 2010 it was refused for three reasons - on the grounds that the site fell outside the UDP defined urban area and for two other more technically based reasons.

When considering the current application the Team Manager – Development Plans has advised that the following policies from the adopted LDP are considered to be of relevance to the determination of this application - Policies SB1, DM1, DM2, DM8, DM14, DM15, DM16, DM19, EV2, EV3, M1 and SP7.

Members will be aware that in order to manage spatial growth and to ensure full and effective use of urban land in the Borough the Proposals Map of the adopted LDP identifies a settlement boundary (Policy SB1 of the LDP). The purpose of defining such a boundary is to promote the full and effective use of urban land by defining the area within which development will normally be permitted and preventing inappropriate development in the countryside. The current planning application site falls outside the defined boundary. In such context it would appear on initial assessment that this proposal would be considered unacceptable. However Members are reminded that the approach to a settlement boundary in the adopted LDP is different (and in some circumstances) might be viewed as being more flexible than that which was evident in the now superseded UDP. In line with national policy (PPW), Policy SB1 of the LDP now gives some flexibility for the Local Planning Authority to allow outside any designated settlement boundary (in certain specific circumstances) some minor forms of excepted development, e.g. “sensitive infilling of small gaps within small groups of houses or minor extensions to groups, in particular for affordable housing to meet local need” (PPW Para 9.3.2.). However an Authority’s consideration of any planning application for new development outside settlement boundaries must also have regard to other riders evident in national guidance such as that expansion of towns and villages “should avoid creating ribbon development, coalescence of settlements or a fragmented development pattern” (PPW Para 9.3.1); and that “development should not be allowed to damage an area’s character and amenity” (PPW Para 9.3.4). The adopted Blaenau Gwent LDP clearly states that in the case of development in the countryside (which is the context in which this application must be considered) the Authority will deal with such applications in accordance with national policy. In this context I have carefully examined the application site and surrounding area to establish whether there are site circumstances or any other exceptional matters that may justify allowing the erection of one dwelling on this site.

The application site lies to the northwest and immediately adjacent to two properties used for residential and related purposes which are located adjacent to, but outside the defined settlement boundary. South east of these properties (within the settlement boundary) but also to the south of Cwm Road, lies the Kingdom Hall Building. In a topographical context the application site forms part of a larger plateau which is at a similar level to that of the adjacent residential property and the land to the north and is similarly bound to the south by the River Ebbw. There is nothing on site that physically demarcates the site along its irregularly aligned northwestern boundary. It is acknowledged however that the indicative plan submitted in support of the application indicates that the applicant proposes to provide landscaping/tree planting along part of this boundary as part of this development.

Having examined national planning policy I am mindful that it might be contended that residential development on this land would be acceptable if it could be demonstrated that such development did not create ribbon development (PPW para 9.3.1.), might constitute sensitive infilling (PPW para 9.3.2), or might not damage an area’s character or amenity (PPW para 4.3.8. and 9.3.3 and 4). I have therefore carefully examined the current proposal within the context of each of these requirements/characteristics.

Whilst part of this northwestern boundary is set back significantly from the road frontage (probably for land ownership reasons) and built development on this part of the application site may not necessarily be prominent as viewed off the road frontage, I am of the view that it would be difficult to argue how the development as proposed does not constitute an unacceptable form of ‘ribbon development’. In my opinion erecting another dwelling outside the settlement boundary along this road frontage would result in unplanned incremental development along the highway without any reasoned justification. On such basis I consider that approving the application would run counter to national planning policy guidance.

I have also given consideration to whether this application might be viewed as ‘sensitive infilling’ or ‘minor extensions’ within small groups of houses (PPW para 9.3.2.). However I find it difficult to justify recommending approval of the application based on such basis as this proposal clearly does not constitute ‘infilling’ nor an extension of a group of houses. It proposes in essence an extension of one of the primary settlement areas within the LDP area beyond a recently defined settlement boundary. I am also very mindful of the precedent that approving this application, on the edge, but outside the settlement boundary might set at what is a relatively early stage in the life of the 2012 adopted LDP. Approving this application may reasonably lead to the submission of a number of applications to build alongside the defined settlement boundary elsewhere in the Borough and the multiplier effect of such unplanned development (which would not have been subjected to the rigorous assessment procedures of the LDP process) could have significant detrimental impact in both landscape and amenity terms. In my opinion to approve such an application would potentially undermine the credibility and relevance of the Authority’s adopted development plan policies. In referring to national planning policy guidance it is apparent that the impact that a proposal may have on the character and amenity of its surroundings is a matter which carries significant weight (PPW Para 9.3.4. and 4.7.8). Due to the topographical characteristics of the site I am not convinced that erecting one dwelling on this site would harm the character and amenity on the area. However I am mindful that cumulative effects of allowing any ‘ad hoc’ development outside defined settlement boundaries “away from existing settlements or areas allocated for development in development plans” could significantly affect the character and visual/landscape amenities of the area. PPW makes it clear that any such development “must continue to be strictly controlled” (Para 4.7.8.)

In terms of Policy SB1 of the LDP, as guided by national planning policy, I am of the view that the proposed development is unacceptable. Allowing the development would in my opinion result in an unacceptable form of ribbon development and would set a precedent for new development outside settlement boundaries both in the immediate vicinity and elsewhere in the Borough without being justified by any of the exceptions contained in national planning policy.

Other policies of relevance to the consideration of the application would be policies DM1 and DM2, DM8, DM14, DM15, DM16 DM19, ENV2, ENV3, M1 and SP7.

The criteria listed in several of these policies refer specifically to the detailed requirements of a development proposal. Members will appreciate that this application is an outline application and conditions can be imposed to ensure compliance with some of the criteria e.g. highways and ground stability conditions. However having regard to the circumstances and characteristics of this site, residential amenity, visual and ecological impact, green infrastructure, mineral protection, affordable housing exceptions and climate change are all aspects that have warranted more detailed consideration.

In terms of residential and visual amenity the application site lies adjacent to two residential properties (one used as a care facility). The indicative plan submitted in support of the application proposes the erection of a detached single storey property positioned within a generous plot and sited a considerable distance off the boundary with the adjacent residential property. It is considered that such a property would be visually compatible with existing development in the area. However care would need to be taken with regard to overlooking and privacy issues when a detailed scheme is submitted, due to the orientation of the dwelling on the adjacent site. I am confident however that such matters could be addressed by sensitive design and planning conditions. In terms of the visual amenities of the area I am satisfied that a dwelling of the parameters indicated by the applicant may have been appropriate within this setting however this would not overcome the more fundamental issue of such development constituting an unacceptable form of ribbon development which has been explained previously in more detail elsewhere in this report.

Members are advised that in the context of ecology, that the current application was supported by a reptile survey prepared in September 2013. The ecologist has confirmed that she is content with the submitted report providing conditions are imposed that would ensure translocation of reptiles and the implementation of other measures that might support ecological enhancement and mitigation. This would ensure that any development of the site would be in accordance with the requirements of policy DM1.1(f), and DM14, would safeguard the interests of the designated River Ebbw SINC (Policy ENV3) and comply with the advice contained in Planning Policy Wales (Edition 7) and TAN 5 (Nature Conservation).

The Team Manager - Green Infrastructure has objected to the proposal on the grounds that such a development would fall outside the settlement boundary and within the Cefn Manmoel Special Landscape Area (SLA). He noted that the submission pays scant regard to the proposals potential impact on a valued local landscape nor includes any information that would suggest that consideration has been given to fact that Policy ENV2 specifically requires any development within SLA to ‘conform to the highest standards of design, layout and materials appropriate to the character of the area’. From a landscape perspective he is of the opinion that allowing such a development as an extension to the urban settlement of Aberbeeg without any justification would be antagonistic to the aims and objectives of the SLA designation. Whilst I share his views I am mindful that it may be feasible to design a scheme that addresses some of these concerns and that conditions could be imposed that would address the need to safeguard existing landscape features or provide mitigation that would enhance the area’s green infrastructure. Notwithstanding this opinion I remain of the opinion that such development would constitute ribbon development which should be resisted in this open countryside location.

The Team Manager – Development Plans has noted on this occasion that the site falls within a Minerals Safeguarding Area i.e. an area identified as a sandstone resource. She is content however that this would not be an issue as the scale and location of the site is such that its development would have no significant impact on the possible future working of that resource. I have no reason to disagree with this view.

The Team Manager – Development Plans has also confirmed that she is content to assess this application relative to policy DM8 (affordable housing exception sites) as if it was located in the southern area of the Borough – i.e. a policy that may allow as an exception development outside but adjoining the settlement boundary in the southern part of the Borough that provides for affordable housing that meets a local need, providing it accords with stipulated criteria (a-d). She notes however that no evidence has been submitted nor do the illustrative proposal suggest that this application is intended to meet any local need for affordable housing. It must be concluded on such basis that there is no such ‘exception’ that might justify this development outside the settlement boundary.

Strategic Policy SP7 of the LDP deals with Climate Change. Criterion 2b and 2c of the policy gives a commitment to address the causes of climate change by directing new development away from areas which are at high risk of flooding and managing flood risk through appropriate design and mitigation measures. I am satisfied that such matters have been appropriately addressed in relation to this submission. In accordance with the advice from NRW and the Council’s drainage engineers conditions and or informative notes could be attached to any permission to ensure that any developer was appropriately appraised of potential flood risk on this land and given the opportunity to mitigate against such flooding by taking account of such issues at the detailed design stage.

Finally, The Supplementary Statement which accompanied the current application makes several comments and accusations against planning officers in relation to the planning advice that has been offered to the applicant in the past and the manner in which the planning application refused in 2013 was dealt with.

I have listed below in italics in bullet point format a summary of those allegations followed by a response from myself and a colleague to each comment.

 that the officer report presented to Planning Committee in December 2013 ‘failed to present relevant, significant information to Members which resulted in them not being given the full facts….’

By the applicant/agents own admission the report presented to Committee was a ‘comprehensive coverage of the planning and material issues’. I strongly refute the allegation that Members were not furnished with all the facts that were relevant to their consideration of the planning application.

 that the officers report failed to acknowledge that the applicant/agent had been informed by a Council officer in January 2013 that on the basis of new provisions regarding settlement boundaries in the LDP that he was prepared to recommend approval of the application.

It is not clear whether the officer advice in January 2013 referred to by the applicant was written or verbal advice. It is accepted however that the initial planning policy advice (dated October 1st 2012, copied to the agent on 3rd October 2012) did suggest that the applicant might wish to re-apply when the emerging LDP was adopted. However such advice was offered on a without prejudice basis and no guarantees were give as to the outcome of such an application. The advice was based on the knowledge that the approach towards development in the countryside in the LDP was to differ from that in the previously adopted UDP and that the LDP would not include a specific restrictive policy on development in the countryside. It was known at that juncture that the emerging LDP would rely on national policy to assess the acceptability (or otherwise) of development proposals outside settlement boundaries. It was implicit within that officer response that any application for new development outside settlement boundaries would have to be assessed against national and local planning policy. Officers also made specific reference in that response to the reasoned justification for the emerging Policy SB1 as being that “in accordance with national policy outside the settlement boundary, sensitive infilling of small gaps within small groups of houses or minor extensions of groups may be acceptable”. The Team Manager – Development Plans has specifically noted that based on subsequent detailed consideration of the 2012 application relative to such national planning policy advice it was concluded that the proposal raised concerns regarding the risk of creating ribbon development and the risk of damaging the rural character of the area.

From reviewing the planning application file (Ref C/2012/0284) it has also been noted that in an e-mail sent by the agent to the initial case officer in January 2013 it is claimed that the officer may have verbally indicated that if certain nature conservation issues were satisfactorily addressed he would have been prepared to recommend approval of the planning application due to the changes introduced by the LDP adopted in November 2012. The applicant’s professional agent would have been well aware however that it is not within the gift of any planning officer to give any guarantees regarding the possible outcome of any planning application (unless that guarantee was given by an officer in a senior position with delegated authority to make decisions on behalf of the LPA). This would have been particularly the case in instances where determination of a application might depend on the interpretation of recently introduced planning policy and was to be the subject of a report to Planning Committee. It is clear for the e-mail threads on file that the agent that had been advised from the outset that the application in question was one that would need to be reported to Planning Committee.

 That officer support for the application was conditional upon additional ecological survey work being undertaken on the site and that the application could be placed in abeyance until such survey work was undertaken due to survey timing issues.

It is not disputed that the agent was advised of the ecological survey work requested by the Council’s ecologist and that the initial case officer agreed that the application be held in abeyance pending receipt of such survey results. The planning file also confirms that there was protracted correspondence between the agent and the Council’s ecologist regarding the need for such survey work. An e-mail on file from the initial case officer clearly advised that providing this survey work could potentially overcome one of the three reasons for refusal cited by the Authority when determining an earlier planning application in 2010 for similar development on the same site.

 The ecological work was submitted to the Council during the autumn of 2013. It showed that the development would have no adverse on nature conservation interests.

This statement is not disputed by the relevant officers. It should be noted however that the reports submitted on behalf of the applicant identified mitigation measures that would need to be implemented to ensure that the development would not have an adverse impact on nature conservation interests.

 That officers ‘turned turtle’ and behaved in an ‘about face’ manner and recommended refusal of the application without the common courtesy of informing the applicant.

The applicant made enquiries with the department in November 2013 regarding progress on the application. He was advised by e- mail by myself that I was aiming to report the application to the December 2013 Planning Committee. He was advised in the same e-mail to contact the office at the end of November 2013 to ascertain whether the application was listed to be heard at that the 5th December Committee. The applicant would have been aware that all Planning Committee reports are made available for public inspection for a minimum period of three working days before the date of Planning Committee and also made available on the Council’s web site for the same period. It is understood that the applicant did contact the office by telephone and was verbally advised that the application was listed on the agenda for the 5th December Committee. There is no procedure in place to formally notify applicants, nor objectors, of when their application (or an application or case they may have an interest in) is to be heard by Planning Committee.

 Alleges that the case officer who presented the report to Committee in December 2013 was fully aware of an indication given earlier in the year to the applicant that officers would support the application but contends that the advice of an individual case officer is not necessarily binding of other professional officers of the authority. Expresses concern that the outcome of a planning application in Blaenau Gwent may be dependent upon which case officer‘s desk the application lands.

As the relevant case officer I fully accept that I was aware of the correspondence on file that suggests that the initial case officer may have indicated that he would recommend approval of the planning application. However I am equally satisfied that the report presented to Planning Committee on December 5th 2013 was the result of detailed discussions and deliberations between myself and the Team Manager – Development Plans and was very carefully and thoroughly assessed relative to national and local planning policies and other material planning considerations as required by Section 38 (6) of The Planning and Compulsory Purchase Act 2004. Whilst I accept that there is inevitably an element of professional and subjective judgement that might influence any individual officers interpretation of some planning policies I am satisfied that there are sufficient checks in place in Blaenau Gwent to ensure that the recommendations presented to Planning Committee and the delegated decisions made on behalf of the Planning Authority are made consistently and in accordance with adopted local and national planning policies.

 Suggests that Members should be given a full account of the deliberations of officers and be informed of the flexibility that exists in the Council’s adopted policy to view the development as a minor expansion of a settlement which causes no harm to the environment, ecology or countryside. Claims that Members should be advised that any decision would be a finely balanced one and that cursory examination of the site and local road pattern would demonstrate that the officer fear of precedent and ribbon development is unfounded.

It is my contention that the reports presented to Planning Committee in December 2013 and this report are both thorough and robust reports that adequately explain the planning context which led to the recommendation to refuse the applications for national and local planning policy based reasons. In the concluding paragraph of my report to Planning Committee in December 2013 I fully acknowledged and explained the reasoning behind my decision to recommend ‘on balance’ that the application be refused. In my opinion the applicants claim that any ‘cursory examination of the site and the road pattern’ demonstrating that my fear of a precedent being set for ribbon development is unfounded shows that he has failed to understand the precedent that allowing development on this land contrary to national planning policy might have in a Borough wide context. It is within that context that I would strongly urge Members to support refusal of the current application for a reason almost identical to that issued in December 2013.

Additionally I would wish to advise Members that in my opinion the concerns expressed by the applicant in the Supporting Statement are matters that could have been more appropriately addressed by either the submission of a planning appeal or/and the submission of a complaint to the Ombudsman. There is no new information submitted with the current application that would warrant the Local Planning Authority making a different decision to that which it reached in December 2013. If the planning merits are to be contested it is suggested that the applicant should submit an appeal to the Planning Inspectorate. If the applicant is concerned regarding any matters of procedure in relation to the consideration of either this or the initial application in it is suggested that the Ombudsman would be the appropriate avenue to air such grievances

To reiterate the concluding paragraph of my report to Planning Committee in December 2013 in relation to an identical planning application, it is my considered view that the current application should be refused.

“……having given regard to national and adopted development plan policies and all other material planning considerations, I am of the view that there are no policies contained within the adopted Local Development Plan nor within national planning policies which might justify allowing the erection of one dwelling on this site. On balance, having considered all those matters referred to in local and national planning policy I consider that allowing one dwelling on this land would result in ribbon development and could set a precedent which if repeated may significantly damage the landscape amenities of the area. I have given careful consideration to whether there may have been planning conditions that could have been imposed that might overcome my concerns however I have concluded that no conditions would have overcome the fundamental issue – that the proposal relates to a new build development outside a recently defined settlement boundary to which there are no exceptions in national policy that may justify approval”

RECOMMENDATION That planning permission be REFUSED for the following REASON:-

1. The application relates to the erection of a dwelling outside the defined settlement boundary which would constitute an unacceptable form of ribbon development. To approve such an application would run counter to the Policy SB1 of the adopted Blaenau Gwent Local Development Plan and national planning policy as contained in Planning Policy Wales (Edition 7, 2013). To allow a development which does not qualify as a exception to local or national policy would prejudice implementation of the adopted Local Development Plan and may establish a precedent that could result in further unplanned development, the combined impact of which could adversely affect the landscape character and amenities of the area.