CITY and COUNTY of SWANSEA Civic Centre, SWANSEA 2.00P.M

CITY AND COUNTY OF SWANSEA

NOTICE OF MEETING

You are invited to attend a Meeting of the

AREA 1 DEVELOPMENT CONTROL COMMITTEE

At: THE COUNCIL CHAMBER, Civic Centre, SWANSEA

On: Tuesday 18th August 2009

Time: 2.00p.m. Members are asked to contact John Lock (Applications Manager) on 635731 or Fran Barnes on 635714 should they wish to have submitted plans and other images of any of the applications on this agenda to be available for display at the Committee meeting.

AGENDA

1. Apologies for Absence.

2. Declaration of Interest To receive Disclosures of Personal and Prejudicial Interests from Members in accordance with the provisions of the Code of Conduct adopted by the City and County of Swansea.

(NOTE: Members are requested to identify the Agenda Item /minute number/ planning application number and subject matter that their interest relates).

3. Minutes of the meeting of the Area 1 Development Control Committee held on 28th July and Site Visits held on 11th August 2009.

4. Morriston Hospital, Heol Maes Eglwys, Morriston, Swansea.

FOR DECISION

5. Town and Country Planning - Planning Applications. (a) Items for deferral/withdrawal. (b) Requests for Site Visits. (c) Determination of Planning Applications. 6. Exclusion of the Public

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

7. Liberty Stadium Travel Plan.

David M Daycock Head of Legal & Democratic Services 11.08.2009 Contact: Democratic Services 01792 636291

ACCESS TO INFORMATION LOCAL GOVERNMENT ACT 1972 (SECTION 100) (AS AMENDED) (NOTE: The documents and files used in the preparation of this Schedule of Planning Applications are identified in the ‘Background Information’ Section of each report. The Application files will be available in the committee room for half an hour before the start of the meeting, to enable Members to inspect the contents)

Item No. 2

Disclosures of Personal Interest from Members

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

CITY AND COUNTY OF SWANSEA

MINUTES OF THE AREA 1 DEVELOPMENT CONTROL COMMITTEE

HELD ON TUESDAY, 28TH JULY 2009 AT THE CIVIC CENTRE GUILDHALL AT 2.00 P.M.

PRESENT: Councillor A R A Clement (Chairman) presided

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

C R Doyle A Lloyd I M Richard J Evans P N May G Phillips M J Hedges J T Miles R L Smith D T Howells J Newbury R C Stewart D H James H M Morris D G Sullivan M R Jones B G Owen C Thomas M H Jones

Non-voting Members:

Councillor(s): Councillor(s):

J E Burtonshaw P B Smith

29. APOLOGIES

Apologies for absence were received from Councillors V N Abbott, W J F Davies, R Francis-Davies, M E Gibbs, J B Hague, W E A Jones, E T Kirchner, R D Lewis, D Phillips, S J Rice, D A Robinson, R J Stanton, J M Thomas, L G Thomas and J Woodman.

30. DECLARATIONS OF INTEREST

In accordance with the provisions of the Code of Conduct adopted by the City and County of Swansea, no interests were declared.

31. MINUTES

RESOLVED that the minutes of the Area 1 Development Control Committee held on 7th July 2009 and the Minutes of the Site Visits held on 21st July were agreed as a correct record.

Minutes of the Area 1 Development Control Committee (28.07.09) Cont’d

32. ITEMS FOR DEFERRAL

RESOLVED that the undermentioned planning applications BE DEFERRED for the reasons shown:

(Item 2) Application No. 2009/0654

Detached dwelling (amendment to planning permission 2008/0277 granted 10th October, 2008) at land adjacent to Bolgoed Road, Pontardawe, Swansea.

(NOTE: The reason given for deferment was to address further information within the report).

33. ITEMS DEFERRED FOR SITE VISITS

(Item 4) Application No. 2009/0769

Detached garage/store at 63 Bwllfa Road, Ynystawe, Swansea.

(NOTE: The reason for the site visit was to consider highway conditions along Bwllfa Road and at the application site).

(Item 3) Application No. 2009/0674

Conversion of property into two self contained flats with fenestration alterations at 26 Ernald Place, Uplands, Swansea.

(NOTE: The reason for the site visit was to assess car parking standards and refuse storage arrangements in accordance with Policy HC6.

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

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

Minutes of the Area 1 Development Control Committee (28.07.09) Cont’d

RESOLVED that:

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

# (Item 1) Application No. 2009/0605

Change of use from drive through car wash to car and van sales and hire at former car wash, Neath Road, Hafod, Swansea.

(NOTE: Description amended to read ‘retention of change of use’).

35. PUBLIC ART AND PUBLIC REALM WORKS MERIDIAN QUAY, MARITIME QUARTER, MARITIME QUARTER

The Head of Planning Services reported on the request from the developer that the sum of £50.000 agreed for public art in the area be waived by the Authority in lieu of the additional works carried out in the development.

He referred to the site visit undertaken by Members of the Committee and outlined the additional public realm works that had been undertaken by the developer. The additional financial expenditure incurred by the developer was outlined.

RESOLVED that the request from the developer be refused .

36. EXCLUSION OF THE PUBLIC

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

The Public Interest Test, the Proper Officer (the Monitoring Officer) has determined in preparing this report that paragraph 18 should apply.

His view on the public interest test is in relation to paragraph 18 that the Authority’s statutory powers could be rendered ineffective or less effective where there is to be advanced knowledge of its intention/the exercise of the Council’s statutory power could prejudice by public discussion or speculation on the matter to the detriment of the Authority and the inhabitation of its area. On that basis he felt that the Minutes of the Area 1 Development Control Committee (28.07.09) Cont’d

public interest in maintaining the exemption outweighed the public interest in disclosing the information. Members were asked to consider these factors when determining the public interest test, which they must decide when considering excluding the public from this part of the meeting.

It was RECOMMENDED that as in all the circumstances of the case the public interest in maintaining the exemption outweighs the public interest in disclosing the information, the public should be excluded.

The Committee having considered paragraph 18 and the public interests as applied by the Proper Officer (Monitoring Officer) resolved that the public interest in maintaining the exemption outweighs the public interest in disclosing the information and RESOLVED to exclude the public.

(CLOSED SESSION)

37. ENFORCEMENT PROGRESS REPORT

The report submitted informed the Committee of the current position in relation to all outstanding enforcement action authorised within the Area 1 Development Control Committee area.

The meeting ended at 2.25 p.m.

CHAIRMAN

S: Area 1 Development Control Committee - 28 July 2009 (GB/GDL) 27 July 2009

CITY AND COUNTY OF SWANSEA

MINUTES OF THE AREA 1 DEVELOPMENT CONTROL COMMITTEE SITE VISITS

HELD AT THE CIVIC CENTRE, SWANSEA ON TUESDAY 11th AUGUST 2009 AT 10.00 A.M.

PRESENT: Councillor A R A Clement(Chairman) presided

Councillor(s): Councillor(s): Councillor(s): CR Doyle(b only) DH James S Rice(a only) R Francis-Davies WEA Jones JM Thomas(a only)

1. APOLOGIES

Apologies for absence were received from Councillors VN Abbott, WJF Davies, DT Howells, MH Jones, ET Kirchner, J Newbury, D Phillips, IM Richard, DA Robinson, PB Smith and LG Thomas

2. TOWN AND COUNTRY PLANNING SITE VISITS

Following deferment for site visits at the meeting of the Area 1 Development Control Committee held on 28th July 2009, Members visited the undermentioned sites prior to their determination at the Committee scheduled for Tuesday 18th August 2009.

a) Planning Application No. 2009/0674 Conversion of property into two self contained flats with fenestration alterations at 26 Ernald Place, Uplands, Swansea, b) Planning Application No. 2009/0769 Detached garage/store at 63 Bwllfa Road Ynystawe Swansea

The meeting ended at 11.05am

CHAIRMAN

Item No. 4

Electoral Division: MORRISTON

Report of the Head of Planning Services

Area 1 Development Control Committee - 18th August 2009

Construction of new multi storey car park (maximum 4 levels) and surface car park (providing a total of 1305 spaces), incorporating an elevated helipad and new junction on Gelliwastad Road with new internal access road and associated infrastructure and landscaping works

Morriston Hospital, Heol Maes Eglwys, Morriston

Planning Application No. 2008/1495

1.0 Background

This item is reported to Committee at the request of the Ward Member, Cllr. Rob Stewart.

Members will recall that the above development was granted planning permission on 18 December, 2008. The permission is subject to the following planning condition:

10. Details of all proposed lighting / floodlighting and closed circuit television (cctv) shall be submitted to and approved by the Local Planning Authority and thereafter implemented in accordance with the approved Phasing Programme.

Reason: In the interests of public safety and amenity.

In order to satisfy the requirements of the planning condition an External Lighting and CCTV Assessment Report (rev. B) has been submitted.

2.0 Lighting Strategy

2.1 The report indicates that the external lighting within the car park has been designed to minimise light pollution outside the site boundary. This is achieved by the selection and erection of the luminaires and by lighting control. It is further indicted that the selected luminaires for the surface car park, the top deck of the multi-storey car park and the adjacent new road will provide full cut off light at and above the horizontal plane (i.e. no direct upward light). The optics for the luminaires near to the adjoining residential area have been specified to minimise the disturbance to residents. The columns heights for the luminaires consist of 8 metre high columns located within the external car park to the rear of the residential properties in Cyril Evans with Way with 6, 5 and 3 metre high columns located elsewhere.

2.2 In accordance with Condition 17 of the permission a local liaison group has been established comprising of representatives of local residents, Ward Members and representatives of the contractors and the applicant who meet on a monthly basis. The issue of the height of the lighting columns was discussed at the Meeting of the Liaison Group on 27 May, 2009. The minutes of the Meeting indicate that the preliminary lighting design indicated that the installation of 6 metre high columns within the external surface car park to the rear of Cyril Evans Way would require an additional 5 columns in order to achieve the requisite lighting level, together with some potential review of the 3 metre high columns. The minutes indicate that this would represent a very significant additional visual intrusion as well as major delays and costs since the car park was already substantially complete. The Liaison Group agreed that they would accept the 8 metre lighting columns subject to the amended landscaping scheme (as requested by the Liaison Group) being accepted by the Local Planning Authority (LPA). The submitted landscaping scheme has now been approved by the LPA in accordance with Condition 5.

2.3 Following the installation of the 8 metre high lighting columns, the local residents have expressed concerns that the lighting columns would have an unacceptable impact. In order to address the issue of potential light spillage levels, particularly to the houses in Cyril Evans Way, the External Lighting and CCTV Assessment Report (rev. B) incorporates a 3 D light simulation model. The results of the model indicates that the maximum luminance is below the maximum luminance trespass allowed in the “Guidance Notes for the Reduction of Light” published by the Institute of Lighting Engineers. The report has been subject to consultation with the Council’s Electrical Design Manager who has confirmed that the lighting scheme would be compliant with spillage guidelines and therefore in terms of light pollution, it is not considered that this would adversely affect the residential amenities of neighbouring occupiers.

2.4 In terms of the visual impact of the 8 metre high lighting columns, there are 5 columns adjacent to the landscaped embankment within the external surfaced car park adjacent to the residential properties in Cyril Evans Way. As has previously been stated above that in order to achieve the requisite lighting level, the installation of 6 metre high columns would require an additional 5 columns (10 in total) in order to achieve the requisite lighting level. Having regard to the location of the landscaped embankment and proposed soft planting (yet to be completed), it is considered that the positioning of the five 8 metre high lighting columns has an acceptable visual impact whilst achieving an acceptable lighting level within the surfaced car park.

3.0 CCTV System

3.1 The submitted External Lighting and CCTV Assessment indicates that the CCTV system will comprise of the following:

The new car park and helipad scheme will be provided with a CCTV system for security purposes. The CCTV system will monitor the following:

• the car park perimeter • entry and exit to the surface car park and multi-storey car park. • stair cores

The system will operate 24 hours a day and will consist of the following:

• 4 No. fully functional domes mounted on top of 6 metres columns within the surface car park and the multi-storey top deck area. • 23 No. cameras within the multi-storey car park and the car park below the helipad. These cameras will be ceiling mounted and they will not cover areas outside the boundaries of the multi-storey car park and below helipad car park.

The proposed locations for the CCTV cameras and covering angles based on the 6 metres height for the CCTV cameras within the at grade car park are provided in Appendix C.

The CCTV system is designed in order to comply with the Data Protection Act. This will include positioning the cameras in order to avoid capturing the images of persons not visiting the premises. The system will also use appropriate software to ensure that the adjacent properties will be shadowed and that they will not covered by the CCTV scheme.

Scenes that belong to private spaces will be masked so that when they pass through the cameras field of view they are obscured. The system will electronically mask sensitive areas within the external camera’s field of view generating a 3-D spatial mask which varies proportionally in size and position to track pan, tilt and zoom operations preventing pre-specified scenes from being recorded.

3.2 Concerns have been expressed by local residents to the Ward Members that the installed security cameras are unsightly and are an invasion of privacy. The locations and general arrangement of the security cameras based on the 6 metre high columns are indicated within the External Lighting and CCTV Assessment. These show the covering angles and expected fields of view from the cameras. These indicate that the adjacent residential properties in Cyril Evans Way would not be adversely effected in terms of a potential loss of privacy.

4.0 Recommendation

It is therefore considered that the details of the lighting / floodlighting and closed circuit television (cctv) are acceptable for use in the development and it is recommended that the details are approved to satisfy the requirements of Condition 10 of planning permission 2008/1495.

CITY AND COUNTY OF SWANSEA DINAS A SIR ABERTAWE

Report of the Head of Planning Services to the Chairman and Members

Area 1 Development the Control Committee

DATE: 18TH AUGUST 2009

19 30

16 21 2. BONYMAEN 3. CASTLE 17 4. CLYDACH 6. CWMBWRLA 22 15. LANDORE 26 16. LLANGYFELACH 17. LLANSAMLET 19. MAWR 6 15 2 21. MORRISTON 22. MYNYDDBACH 33 26. PENDERRY 30. PONTARDDULAIS 34 3 31 31. ST. THOMAS 33. TOWNHILL 34. UPLANDS

BRYAN GRAHAM B.A. (HONS); Dip. T.P.; M.R.T.P.I. HEAD OF PLANNING SERVICES CONTENTS

ITEM APP. NO. SITE LOCATION OFFICER REC.

1 2008/2128 Tal Y Coppa Isaf Farm, Heol Cae Glas, Llansamlet, REFUSE Swansea, SA7 9XE Agricultural barn (application for the Prior Approval of the Local Planning Authority)

2 2008/1005 Land to the rear of 338 Neath Road Plasmarl Swansea REFUSE SA6 8JN Detached dwelling

3 2009/0769 63 Bwllfa Road Ynystawe Swansea SA6 5AL APPROVE Detached garage/store

4 2009/0674 26 Ernald Place, Uplands, Swansea, SA2 0HN APPROVE Conversion of property into two self contained flats with fenestration alterations

5 2007/1793 East End Garage, Pontardawe Road, Clydach, Swansea APPROVE Demolition of existing garage and construction of a supermarket (Class A1) and associated car parking and landscaping

6 2008/2009 67-69 St Helens Avenue Swansea SA1 4NN APPROVE Change of use of first floor from retail warehouse (Class B8/A1) to offices (B1)

7 2008/2240 10 Manselton Road, Manselton, Swansea, SA5 8PG REFUSE First floor rear extension

8 2009/0137 Land south of and adjacent to Liberty Stadium, Morfa APPROVE Retail Park, Landore, Swansea Construction of MOT/service centre for class 4 motor vehicles with car valet facility and a restaurant (Class A3 - food and drink) with associated car parking and landscaping

AREA 1 DEVELOPMENT CONTROL COMMITTEE – 18TH AUGUST 2009

ITEM APP. NO. SITE LOCATION OFFICER REC.

9 2009/0291 George Hotel 30 Walter Road Swansea SA1 5NN APPROVE Side canopy

10 2009/0654 Land adjacent to Bolgoed Isaf Farm Bolgoed Road APPROVE Pontarddulais Swansea SA4 8JP Detached dwelling (amendment to planning permission 2008/0277 granted 10th October 2008)

11 2009/0779 43 Heathfield, Swansea, SA1 6EJ APPROVE Conversion of dwelling into 5 self contained flats with fenestration alterations

12 2008/2265 32E St Leger Crescent, St Thomas, Swansea, SA1 8EU APPROVE Retention and completion of a two storey detached dwelling house with single storey garage

AREA 1 DEVELOPMENT CONTROL COMMITTEE – 18TH AUGUST 2009 AREA 1 DEVELOPMENT CONTROL COMMITTEE – 18TH AUGUST 2009

ITEM 1 APPLICATION NO. 2008/2128 WARD: Area 1 Llansamlet

Location: Tal Y Coppa Isaf Farm, Heol Cae Glas, Llansamlet, Swansea, SA7 9XE Proposal: Agricultural barn (application for the Prior Approval of the Local Planning Authority) Applicant: Mr John McGuinness

BACKGROUND INFORMATION

POLICIES

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

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

Policy EV23 Within green wedges development will only be permitted if it maintains the openness and character of the green wedge and does not contribute to the coalescence of settlements or adversely affect the setting of the urban area. (City & County of Swansea Unitary Development Plan 2008)

Policy EC14 Agricultural developments requiring planning permission or prior approval should give proper consideration to the protection of natural heritage and the historic environment and be sympathetically sited, designed and landscaped. (City & County of Swansea Unitary Development Plan 2008)

Policy EV21 In the countryside non-residential development will only be permitted where it can be demonstrated that it is beneficial for the rural economy, or it meets overriding social or economic local needs, or it is appropriate development associated with farm diversification, sustainable tourism or nature conservation, or it provides an acceptable economic use for brown field land or existing buildings, or it is essential for communications, other utility services, minerals or renewable energy generation. (City & County of Swansea Unitary Development Plan 2008)

SITE HISTORY

App No. Proposal 2003/0382 Two detached dwellings (outline) Decision: Grant Permission Conditional Decision Date: 29/05/2003

AREA 1 DEVELOPMENT CONTROL COMMITTEE – 18TH AUGUST 2009

ITEM 1 (CONT’D) APPLICATION NO. 2008/2128

2005/0961 Residential development (outline) Decision: Grant Permission Conditional Decision Date: 23/08/2005

84/1535/03 CHANGE OF USE OF BARN TO DWELLING. Decision: *HGPC - GRANT PERMISSION CONDITIONAL Decision Date: 29/11/1984

92/0407 ERECTION OF DOUBLE GARAGE AND ENTRANCE PORCH Decision: *HGPC - GRANT PERMISSION CONDITIONAL Decision Date: 12/06/1992

94/0287 SINGLE STOREY SIDE EXTENSION Decision: *HGPC - GRANT PERMISSION CONDITIONAL Decision Date: 22/04/1994

94/0729 RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT (OUTLINE) Decision: *HRP - REFUSE PERMISSION Decision Date: 04/10/1994

86/1119/03 ERECTION OF PORCH + ADDITIONAL BEDROOM ACCOMMODATION. Decision: *HGPC - GRANT PERMISSION CONDITIONAL Decision Date: 25/09/1986

RESPONSE TO CONSULTATIONS

The application was advertised on site and FOURTEEN neighbouring properties were consulted. FOUR LETTERS OF OBJECTION and a PETITION OF OBJECTION containing 384 signatures was received the main points of which are summarised as follows:

1. Pig farm would be yards from back gardens and in close proximity to a large residential area. 2. Pig farms near residential areas create intolerable nuisances for local residents by way of pollution, noise and smell. 3. Electrical fencing will be used but such fencing can get damaged and pigs could attack local residents using footpaths. 4. Pig farms generate serious problems which lower environmental and public health standards for nearby residents. Problems include poor air quality, swarming insects, chemicals pollution of watercourses, soil contamination, air-borne diseases, vermin problems, pungent and putrid odours from swine manure heaps. 5. There is not suitable foul drainage system in this area. A pig farm will only cause further water pollution problems. 6. Increase in traffic/lorries in a residential area 7. Impact on valuation of properties and commercial premises. AREA 1 DEVELOPMENT CONTROL COMMITTEE – 18TH AUGUST 2009

ITEM 1 (CONT’D) APPLICATION NO. 2008/2128

8. Proposal will impact on Crymyln Bog SSSI which is situated at the southern foothill of the proposed pig farm. 9. Application plans indicate a proposed barn which is to be positioned close to residential properties; such a building will be a haven for vermin which will spread disease into nearby residential development. 10. Members should reject and dismiss this proposed piggery outright on grounds of high risks to public health and the inevitable and unmanageable environmental pollution problems that this will cause to residents, the communities and areas of protected conservation within the County Councils of both Neath & Port Talbot and Swansea City.

Countryside Council for Wales: Object to the proposal as there is insufficient to assess the possible effects on the interests of the Crymlyn Bog Site of Special Scientific Interest (SSSI), which is a component of the Crymlyn Bog Special Area of Conservation (SAC), Ramsar Site and National Nature Reserve (NNR).

Environment Agency: No objection subject to standard informatives.

Agricultural Consultant: The conclusion reached is that there is insufficient evidence of agricultural need for the proposal. The detail of the consultant’s report is included within the following paragraphs:

Details of the Holding:

Location: The holding is in open countryside, in a rural location, just to the south of the Llansamlet.

Tenure: The applicant owns the holding, which comprises 8.49ha. No other land is held. The agent was the former owner until 2004. The applicant does not farm and has no intention of doing so. A draft tenancy agreement exists, subject to consent being issued for the proposal, to a third party. This document has not been seen and the third party is not identified.

Buildings: There are no buildings on the holding. The proposed barn would be side opened and of 446sq.m floor area, providing a volume to eaves of 2,720 cu. Thirty open fronted pig arcs are also proposed.

Land: The land is principally laid to permanent pasture. The former owner kept horses on the land, but it is currently un-stocked. The land is not yet organic.

Dwellings:There are no dwellings on the holding. The applicant lives in Swansea, but it is not known where the potential tenant lives, or would live.

Enterprise:There are no current enterprises on the holding. The supporting report (very briefly) sets out the potential enterprise intended on the holding but does not go so far as to estimate the numbers of livestock proposed for the outdoor pig rearing enterprise. There is a table provided by the Soil Association, giving recommended maximum stocking rates. AREA 1 DEVELOPMENT CONTROL COMMITTEE – 18TH AUGUST 2009

ITEM 1 (CONT’D) APPLICATION NO. 2008/2128

Agricultural Need:

This is a group of paddocks, not yet a small holding. There is no existing enterprise on the site. The proposal relies on a third party, who has no valid tenure over the land. The proposal offers no detail on the number of proposed stock, nor any detail on the reasons why a barn of the size proposed would be needed for the ‘straw, fodder and feed’. With so little information, it is quite impossible to assess the storage needs of such an enterprise, but using the traditional model and standard statistics, we can find no basis of need for a barn of this sixe for the purposes indicated. It is not clear either how the outdoor pig unit would be run using the thirty pig arcs proposed. They are fairly standard arcs but they would be inappropriate without adaptation for housing weaners.

There is insufficient information to show an agricultural need for the proposal.

Conclusion

In our opinion, there is insufficient evidence of an agricultural need for the proposal.

Pollution Control Division: Insufficient information has been provided in support of this application to enable an opinion to be given.

Amended Plans (dated 18th March 2009)

The application was re-advertised on site and SIXTEEN neighbouring properties were consulted. FOUR LETTERS OF OBJECTION were received which repeated some of the concerns mentioned above and raised the following additional points:

1. There have been horses on this land for many years and its change of use would impinge on our quality of life. 2. The land has been uses for generations of local families as a leisure resource. The public rights of way are well used and the residential area has limited open space for families. 3. The land is green belt and we have been told that no building is allowed on the fields. 4. The applicant has still not declared that the proposed site is within a SSSI or Nature Reserve and the topography of the land drains towards this area. 5. The number of suggested pig arcs is still 30 yet the number of pigs at any time can be in excess of 1040 pigs. 6. The land slopes significantly and it is impractical to position 30 pig arcs safely. 7. CCW has opposed this planning application; 8. The Committee should consider the business experience of the application in setting up a pig farm. 9. Animals would require a full time worker to live on site to make the project viable. At present there is no dwelling provision and this should be considered in relation to the viability of the plan. 10. If in the future a dwelling application should be made, has the land been intended for such use given its history? 11. Does the applicant have provision for the support needed for pig farming i.e. water, access, heating in winter, energy supplies and land drainage? Is there provision for rotation of the land? AREA 1 DEVELOPMENT CONTROL COMMITTEE – 18TH AUGUST 2009

ITEM 1 (CONT’D) APPLICATION NO. 2008/2128

Environment Agency: Offer no objection to the proposal, and given the size of the proposal, the applicant does not require any Environment Permits from the Environment Agency.

Countryside Council for Wales: Maintain original objection to the proposal.

Agricultural Consultant: The amended scheme shows precisely the same business proposal as submitted with the original application, except that the main building is smaller and in a different position. My concerns in assessing the original application were essentially that there was no enterprise on the bare land to justify any buildings. That remains the case and I conclude that there is no proven need for any building.

APPRAISAL

This application is reported to Committee for decision at the request of Councillors June Evans and Penny Matthews.

This application has been submitted as a determination under Part 6 of the Town & Country Planning (General Permitted Development) Order 1995. The proposal is permitted development if it is considered to be reasonably necessary for the purposes of agriculture within the unit and subject to an application to the Council (as the local planning authority) for a determination as to whether prior approval is required for the siting, design and external appearance of the proposed development.

The legislation states that within 28 days of the receipt of the application, the Local Planning Authority must advise the applicant whether prior approval is required. If the Local Planning Authority does not respond within this period the applicant can proceed with the proposal.

The applicant was informed by letter dated 10th December 2008 that the prior approval of the Local Planning Authority is required in this case, in order for the Council to assess the agricultural need for the proposed building and a period of consultation followed. The Local Planning Authority must now determine whether to refuse or give approval to the siting, design and appearance of the proposed development

Description

This application seeks prior approval for the siting, design and external appearance of an agricultural barn at Talycoppa Isaf Farm, Heol Cae Glas, Llansamlet. It should be noted that the stocking of pigs on the land does not require planning permission and the pig arcs are moveable structures which similarly do not require a formal permission. The only aspect for determination under this planning application therefore is the agricultural barn.

Talycoppa Isaf Farm is located in an area of established Green Wedge land on the edge of the urban area of Llansamlet.

Amended plans have been received during the course of the processing of the planning application. The original application was for an open sided building of 446sq.m. The proposed building is smaller and measures 8.96m by 13.7metre. The building is steel framed constructed with wood and natural grey fibre cement cladding. The building is to be used for the storage of straw, fodder and feed for use with the livestock. AREA 1 DEVELOPMENT CONTROL COMMITTEE – 18TH AUGUST 2009

ITEM 1 (CONT’D) APPLICATION NO. 2008/2128

The revised plans show that the proposed building be relocated further away from dwelling in that it is to be sited within the north of the application site approximately 130m to the east of the nearest dwellings of Old Farm Court, Maes Yr Haf.

With respect to the pig arcs, it is proposed that the pigs will be housed in 30 off movable pig arcs of timber construction. The dimensions of the pig arcs are 2.43 x 2.43metres. The arcs are moveable and are proposed to be rotated around the 8 hectare holding. As noted above, these, and the stocking of pigs on the land do not require planning permission and therefore it is only the barn which is the subject of determination under this planning application.

Issues

The main issues for consideration in respect of this application relates to the impact of the proposed building on the visual amenities of the surrounding landscape and environment, impact on residential amenity, and whether the proposal is a justified form of development having regard to prevailing Development Plan Policy. It is not considered that the provisions of the Human Rights Act raise any additional issues.

Policy EV23 of the Unitary Development Plan designates the land as forming part of a Green Wedge, the purpose of which is to contain the existing urban form, and to prevent any development that would contribute towards the coalescence of settlements. It is therefore important to retain their open character. Within green wedges development will only be permitted if deemed appropriate development. Appropriate development comprises inter alia justified development in association with agriculture.

Policy EC14 deals specifically with agricultural developments and states that agricultural development requiring planning permission or prior approval should give proper consideration to the protection of natural heritage and the history environment and be sympathetically sited, designed and landscaped.

Policy EV21 restricts development in the open countryside, except where it is essential for the rural economy, or it can be demonstrated to meet the social or economic needs of the local community. The above policies require acceptable development to be in keeping with the landscape and character of the area and not include any new building development that would either individually or cumulatively significantly harm the landscape.

As required by the above Unitary Development Plan Policies and National Planning Guidance, new development in the open countryside must have a proven need. Moreover, National Planning Guidance advises that Local Planning Authorities need to be satisfied that any stated agricultural intentions in the open countryside area genuine, are reasonably likely to materialise, are capable of being sustained for a reasonable period and would be economically viable.

Justification

There are no current enterprises on the holding. On the basis of the information submitted, it is not considered that the principle of the proposed development has been justified in terms of agricultural need. AREA 1 DEVELOPMENT CONTROL COMMITTEE – 18TH AUGUST 2009

ITEM 1 (CONT’D) APPLICATION NO. 2008/2128

In this particular case, there is no enterprise currently in operation therefore there is insufficient information to show that there is an actual agricultural need for the proposal. The proposal is therefore contrary to Policies EV21, EV23 and EC14 of the City and County of Swansea Unitary Development Plan.

Visual Amenity

The site is located immediately adjacent to the urban edge within an established area of Green Wedge, and as such, it would appear as an undesirable encroachment into the countryside. Given that the site is located within the Green Wedge, it is considered that the building would appear as an over-dominant incongruous feature set within open land/fields which will represent a visual intrusion onto the wider landscape to the detriment of the open character of the countryside. As such the application is considered to be unacceptable in this regard, and contrary to Policies EV1, EV2, EV23 and EC14 of the City and County of Swansea Unitary Development Plan.

Residential Amenity

The closest residential properties on the Old Farm Courtyard, Maes Yr Haf, are located approximately 130m away to the west of the siting of the proposed agricultural barn. Given that the use is proposed to be agricultural storage for straw, fodder and livestock feed, it is unlikely to give rise to noise and disturbance and therefore unlikely to have an unacceptable impact upon the residential amenities of the neighbouring occupiers.

Response to Consultation

It is acknowledged that a number of letters of objection and a petition of objection have been received in respect of the proposed operation of a pig farm at this location, the concerns of local residents, and whether there is sufficient infrastructure in particular foul and storm drainage to cope with such an operation. However, and as indicated above, it is only the agricultural barn that is subject of determination under this planning application, as the keeping of pigs, and associated pig arcs does not require planning permission of the local planning authority. The letters of concern are noted, however, the agricultural need has not been demonstrated and it is on this point of principle that the proposal is deemed to be unacceptable and contrary to the provisions of Unitary Development Plan Policy.

Conclusion

In conclusion, having regard to all material planning considerations, including the provisions of the Human Rights Act, the proposal is considered to be an unacceptable form of development as the applicant has not adequately demonstrated an agricultural need for the proposed building. Furthermore the siting of the proposed building within an area of designated green wedge would cause a significant adverse impact on the visual amenity of the local area and would be detrimental to the open character of the countryside. Moreover, it would set an undesirable precedent for the consideration of other similar applications. The proposal is therefore considered to be contrary to Policies EV1, EV2, EV21, EV23 and EC14 of the City and County of Swansea Unitary Development Plan. AREA 1 DEVELOPMENT CONTROL COMMITTEE – 18TH AUGUST 2009

ITEM 1 (CONT’D) APPLICATION NO. 2008/2128

RECOMMENDATION

PRIOR APPROVAL IS REFUSED for the following reasons;

1 The applicant has failed to demonstrate an agricultural need for the proposed agricultural building. The siting of the proposed building within an area of designated green wedge would cause a significant adverse impact on the visual amenity of the local area, eroding and undermining the open form and function of the green wedge contrary to Policies EV1, EV2, EV21, EV23 and EC14 of the City and County of Swansea Unitary Development Plan.

2 Approval of this application would set an undesirable precedent for the consideration of other similar applications, the cumulative effect of which would be sporadic and visually intrusive development, detrimental to the character and appearance of the open landscape, contrary to the provisions of Policies EV1, EV2, EV21, Ev23 and EC14 of the City and County of Swansea Unitary Development Plan.

INFORMATIVES

PLANS

Site location plan, pig arc details received 5th December 2008. Amended plans block plan and proposed barn details received 18th March 2009

AREA 1 DEVELOPMENT CONTROL COMMITTEE – 18TH AUGUST 2009

ITEM 2 APPLICATION NO. 2008/1005 WARD: Area 1 Landore

Location: Land to the rear of 338 Neath Road Plasmarl Swansea SA6 8JN Proposal: Detached dwelling Applicant: Mr Mark Nicholls

BACKGROUND INFORMATION

This application was DEFERRED AT THE APPLICANT’S REQUEST at the Area 1 Development Control Committee on 17th February 2009 to allow for the consideration of an amended scheme which had been prepared in an attempt to overcome the reasons for refusal.

Previously the application had again been DEFERRED AT THE APPLICANT’S REQUEST at the meeting on 19th August 2008 to allow for the submission of an amended scheme in an attempt to overcome the recommended reasons for refusal.

The amended scheme no longer includes the raised terraced area to the rear, which overcomes the previous concerns about loss of privacy to neighbouring properties. However, it is considered that the proposal remains unacceptable due to inadequate off-street parking.

The recommendation therefore remains for refusal.

POLICIES

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

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

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

AREA 1 DEVELOPMENT CONTROL COMMITTEE – 18TH AUGUST 2009

ITEM 2 (CONT’D) APPLICATION NO. 2008/1005

SITE HISTORY

None

RESPONSE TO CONSULTATIONS

ORIGINAL PLANS

The application was advertised on site and THREE neighbouring properties were individually consulted. FOUR LETTERS OF OBJECTION and a PETITION OF OBJECTION containing 27 signatures was received. The objections are summarised as follows:

• It would add to an already problematic parking issues and encourage the development of the adjoining land; • Loss of privacy and daylight to the adjacent property; • Loss of views

Highways Observations - The application is for full planning consent for a detached dwelling on land which is currently used as a parking area and garden. The site is located and accessed off Dinas Street. There is no parking included within the current proposal.

Dinas Street mainly relies on on-street parking due to the terraced nature of the residences and the area has had `residents parking only’ schemes brought in to Dinas Street and the surrounding areas to control the on street parking. The proximity to the Liberty Stadium increases the popularity of the available parking spaces.

It is recommended that this application be refused as the development will remove existing parking provision, and fails to provide parking to cater for the new dwelling, resulting in additional on street parking potentially to the detriment of highway safety and the freeflow of traffic.

AMENDED PLANS (November 2008)

Amended plans received in an attempt to address concerns regarding potential overlooking and subsequent loss of privacy from the raised terrace to the rear.

Four individual properties were consulted. THREE letters of objection were received. The objections raise the same points as the previous letters together with the following additional objections:

• The proposal would devalue neighbouring properties. • The proposal would make maintenance to the side elevation of the neighbouring property very difficult. AREA 1 DEVELOPMENT CONTROL COMMITTEE – 18TH AUGUST 2009

ITEM 2 (CONT’D) APPLICATION NO. 2008/1005

Highway Observations – The application is for full planning consent for a detached dwelling on land which is currently used as a parking area and garden. The site is located and accessed off Dinas Street. There is no parking included within the current proposal.

Dinas Street mainly relies on on-street parking due to the terraced nature of the residents and the area has had ‘residents parking only’ schemes brought into Dinas Street and the surrounding areas to control the on-street parking. The proximity to Liberty Stadium increases the popularity of the available parking spaces.

The applicant has submitted a parking survey which he commissioned to attempt to demonstrate that the on street parking provision can accommodate the additional parking generated by the proposal, namely the loss of the existing parking provision for number 137 Dinas Street and the extra parking generated by the new dwelling which fails to provide any off street car parking. The survey covered Dinas Street and a number of other adjacent streets. It should be noted however that Residents parking permits will only be issued for residents of that particular street, thus the reports on the surrounding streets are somewhat irrelevant.

The size of the property is such that up to three parking spaces would be required in accordance with our adopted parking guidelines, and together with the loss of parking for number 137 this will result in an additional 4-5 cars requiring parking spaces on street. As the survey also points out there is a large length of undeveloped land currently as wasteland/garaging that could potentially be developed in a similar style to this proposal. If consent if given for this development then a precedent would be set which would make it difficult to refuse later developments.

Whilst I do accept that the survey shows that there is some element of parking availability I consider that to approve this application would be detrimental to parking provision on Dinas Street, a fact re-enforced by the local objections that have been raised concerning parking in the area. It would also make refusing any further development without parking provision more difficult if this application is consented, which would further exacerbate parking problems in the area.

2nd AMENDED PLANS (March 2009)

Further amended plans received in an attempt to address the highway concerns previously raised. The revised plans include an integral garage with space for two cars. The inclusion of this garage has resulted in a re-configuration of the ground and lower ground floor accommodation and a subsequent change in the visual appearance of the dwelling onto Dinas Street. The first floor accommodation remains unchanged.

Four individual properties were consulted. One letter of objection was received which raised the same points as in previous letters. AREA 1 DEVELOPMENT CONTROL COMMITTEE – 18TH AUGUST 2009

ITEM 2 (CONT’D) APPLICATION NO. 2008/1005

Highway Observations – The plans now indicate an integral garage for two car parking spaces. Previous concerns were raised due to the lack of parking provision for the new dwelling and displacement parking issues as the site is currently used as a parking area. The first issue has now been addressed by the inclusion of a garage. It is now not felt that displacement parking would alone be a sustainable reason for refusal on highways grounds. On balance I recommend that no highway objections are raised to the proposal subject to:

1. The provision of a 2m wide footpath along the site frontage to Highway Authority Standards and Specification (under a Section 278 Agreement); 2. The construction of a vehicle crossing to Highway Authority Specification; 3. The garage remaining for parking purposes only and not to be converted to living accommodation.

3rd AMENDED PLANS (June 2009)

Further amended plans received reverting back to those previously submitted in November 2008, as such the garage proposed in the previous amended plans (March 2009) has been deleted and the accommodation at lower ground floor level has been removed.

Four individual properties were consulted. One letter of objection has been received which raised the same points as in the previous letter together with the following further concerns:

• The bus stop for the Metro Bus has removed 10 parking spaces on Neath Road therefore residents of Neath Road now park on Dinas Street. • The introduction of a new dwelling would be detrimwntal to residents and to children’s safety travelling to and from Plasmarl School, which is 50 yards from the proposed development.

Highways Observations - The parking element has now been withdrawn therefore my original recommendation of refusal is valid.

There is no parking included within the current proposal.

The net effect of this proposal would be to lose existing car parking provision, and also place increased demand on the existing on street facilities by virtue of no parking being provided for the new dwelling. The site is such that similar developments could be submitted thus exacerbating the situation further due to 'precedent' having been set.

It is recommended that this application be refused as: 1. The development will remove existing parking provision, 2. Fails to provide parking to cater for the new dwelling, resulting in additional on street parking potentially to the detriment of highway safety and the freeflow of traffic. AREA 1 DEVELOPMENT CONTROL COMMITTEE – 18TH AUGUST 2009

ITEM 2 (CONT’D) APPLICATION NO. 2008/1005

3. Sets a precedent that would be difficult to resist should further similar applications be submitted.

APPRAISAL

This application is reported to Committee for decision at the request of Councillor Rob Speht.

Full planning permission is sought for the construction of a detached dwelling on land to the rear of 338 Neath Road, Plasmarl. Accommodation will comprise a lounge/dining room and kitchen at ground floor level with two bedrooms and a study at first floor level. The site is located and accessed off Dinas Street.

The application site comprises a rectangular plot of land measuring approx. 7m in width fronting onto Dinas Street with a depth of approx. 24m to its rear boundary with No. 338 Neath Road. The land is currently overgrown and the part fronting onto Dinas Street is currently used for off street parking. The land slopes away from Dinas Street to Neath Road to the rear.

The main issues for consideration in this instance relate to the suitability of the site for the purposes of residential infill having regard to visual and residential amenity and highway safety in the context of prevailing development plan policies EV1, EV2, HC2 and AS6. There are in this instance no additional overriding issues for consideration under the provisions of the Human Rights Act.

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

It is considered that the principle of developing the site for one residential dwelling is in accordance with the above policies and as such the application is considered to be acceptable in this regard.

Visual Amenity

The siting of the house would be 1m from the back of the pavement, on a similar building line to the terrace of Nos 139-137 Dinas Street. The proposed house would be sited approx 0.8m from the main side elevation of No. 137 Dinas Street and would have a similar ridge height to this dwelling.

The proportions of the house are similar to neighbouring dwellings, measuring approximately 6 metres in width, a maximum of 11 metres in depth and 8.6 metres in height from the front elevation.

The house would follow a traditional design to broadly echo the front elevation of No. 137, albeit the ground floor windows are double windows as opposed to traditional single openings. The main ridge of the dwelling would run parallel with the road with an extension to the rear that projects approximately 3.3 metres from the main back wall. AREA 1 DEVELOPMENT CONTROL COMMITTEE – 18TH AUGUST 2009

ITEM 2 (CONT’D) APPLICATION NO. 2008/1005

There is a drop in levels through the site from front to back, as such the rear projection would be three storey when viewed from the back of the house. No accommodation is proposed at lower ground floor level, therefore there is approximately 2.5 metres of dead work. It is noted that neighbouring dwellings are also three storey to the rear, albeit with lower ground floor accommodation. Therefore, in visual terms, the physical mass and appearance of the proposal from the rear is considered to be satisfactory.

In terms of the design and siting of the house, the application is considered to be acceptable in terms of its impact upon the street scene, and it would not appear as an incongruous or overintensive form of development. The front elevation echoes the design elements and proportions of the existing terraced house at No. 137 Dinas Street and the rear elevation has a modest rear projection that is comparable in size to the neighbouring properties.

In view of the above it is considered that the siting of the proposed dwelling on this plot is acceptable and would be consistent with the established pattern of development within the area in accordance with Policies EV1, EV2 and HC2 of the City and County of Swansea Unitary Development Plan.

Residential Amenity

The proposed house would be located approx 0.8m from the main side elevation of the existing house at No 137. This distance would increase to 4.5m between the proposed rear projection and the existing rear projection of the neighbouring property. Within the side elevation of the rear projection of No. 137 is a window and doorway which serve a kitchen. The door leads to steps which serve a lower patio area to the rear of the dwelling. It is acknowledged that this window is the only window which serves the kitchen of No. 137, with no windows in the ground floor rear elevation. Subject to appropriate boundary treatment, however it is not considered the proposed dwelling would have an unacceptable overbearing impact on the existing window at No. 137, given the proposed distance to the separation distance of approx. 4.5m. Furthermore, the proposed dwelling would not breach a 45 degree line taken from the ground and first floor windows in the main rear elevation of No. 137. Therefore whilst there would be some overbearing and overshadowing impacts upon the residential amenities of the occupiers of this dwelling, it is not considered the impacts would be sufficiently harmful to recommend the refusal of the application for this reason.

The plans have been amended to delete the raised terrace area to the rear, which would have afforded raised views in close proximity to the neighbouring property at No. 137, to the detriment of the living conditions of the occupiers of this dwelling. Following the removal of this element, it is not considered that the scheme would have any significant adverse residential amenity impact on the occupiers of No. 137 Neath Road.

In terms of the impact on No. 338 Neath Road, there is a separation distance of approximately 30m, which is considered to be sufficient not to cause loss of privacy or an overbearing impact to the occupiers of this property. The application drawings have indicated a landscaped rear boundary to further improve this relationship and, if approved, it is recommended that a condition is attached to the permission to ensure that an appropriate tree screen is provided to the rear boundary to further improve this relationship. AREA 1 DEVELOPMENT CONTROL COMMITTEE – 18TH AUGUST 2009

ITEM 2 (CONT’D) APPLICATION NO. 2008/1005

In view of the above the proposal is considered to be acceptable in terms of residential amenity in accordance with Policies EV1 and HC2 of the Unitary Development Plan.

Access & Highway Safety

The applicant has submitted a parking survey in an attempt to demonstrate that the on street parking provision can accommodate the additional parking generated by the proposal, namely the loss of the existing parking provision for number 137 Dinas Street and the extra parking generated by the new dwelling, which fails to provide any off street car parking.

The survey covered Dinas Street and a number of other adjacent streets. It should be noted however that residents parking permits will only be issued for residents of that particular street, thus the reports on the surrounding streets are somewhat irrelevant.

The size of the property is such that up to three parking spaces would be required in accordance with our adopted parking guidelines, and together with the loss of parking for number 137 this will result in an additional 4-5 cars requiring parking spaces on street. As the survey also points out there is a large length of undeveloped land currently as wasteland/garaging that could potentially be developed in a similar style to this proposal. If planning permission is granted for this development then a precedent could be set, which would make it difficult to refuse later developments on parking grounds.

Whilst it is acknowledged that the survey does show that there is some element of parking availability it is considered that to approve this application would be detrimental to parking provision on Dinas Street, a fact re-enforced by the local objections that have been raised concerning parking in the area. It would also make refusing any further development without parking provision more difficult if this application is granted permission, which would further exacerbate parking problems in the area.

The application is therefore recommended for refusal on parking grounds.

Other Issues

The occupiers of the neighbouring dwelling have expressed concern that it would be difficult to maintain the flank wall of their dwelling which faces the application site. A suitable gap of approximately 0.8 metres is provided between the dwellings that would allow maintenance of this side elevation.

With regards to other concerns, a potential loss in property value and loss of view are not material planning considerations that would affect the determination of this application.

Conclusion

In conclusion, having regard to all material planning considerations, including the provision of the Human Rights Act the proposal is considered to be a satisfactory in terms of visual amenity and residential amenity, however the proposal would result in the removal of existing parking provision and fails to provide parking for the new dwelling, resulting in additional on street parking potentially to the detriment of highway safety and the freeflow of traffic. The proposal therefore fails to comply with Policies EV1, HC2 and AS6 of the City and County of Swansea Unitary Development Plan. AREA 1 DEVELOPMENT CONTROL COMMITTEE – 18TH AUGUST 2009

ITEM 2 (CONT’D) APPLICATION NO. 2008/1005

RECOMMENDATION

REFUSE, for the following reason:

1 The proposal will remove existing parking provision, and fails to provide parking to cater for the new dwelling, resulting in additional on street parking to the detriment of highway safety and the freeflow of traffic. The proposal therefore fails to comply with Policies EV1, HC2 and AS6 of the City and County of Swansea Unitary Development Plan.

INFORMATIVES

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

PLANS

Site location and site survey received 14th May 2008. Amended plans, proposed site layout, proposed elevations, proposed floor plans, proposed sectional side elevation and site layout plan received 1st June 2009.

AREA 1 DEVELOPMENT CONTROL COMMITTEE – 18TH AUGUST 2009

ITEM 3 APPLICATION NO. 2009/0769 WARD: Area 1 Morriston

Location: 63 Bwllfa Road Ynystawe Swansea SA6 5AL Proposal: Detached garage/store Applicant: Mr & Mrs C Thomas

BACKGROUND INFORMATION

This application was DEFERRED FOR A SITE VISIT at the Area 1 Development Control Committee on the 28th July 2009 in order to consider highway conditions along Bwllfa Road and at the application site.

POLICIES

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

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

SITE HISTORY

App No. Proposal A00/0831 PART TWO STOREY/PART SINGLE STOREY SIDE EXTENSION, TWO STOREY REAR EXTENSION, SINGLE STOREY SIDE EXTENSION SINGLE STOREY FRONT EXTENSION INCLUDING NEW ENTRANCE PORCH & RETENTION OF HARDSTANDING Decision: *HGPC - GRANT PERMISSION CONDITIONAL Decision Date: 31/10/2000

RESPONSE TO CONSULTATIONS

Seven individual properties were consulted and ONE LETTER OF OBJECTION has been received, which can be summarised as follows:

1. Hardstanding created in 2000 without permission significantly increased the width, depth, shape and height achieved by the low level shed previously sited at this location. 2. Walls around part of the property had been extended by previous owners so road is even narrower than appears on documents. 3. The solid concrete ramp built in 2000 encroaches out on to the road reducing further the width of the road. The applicants were advised of this at a site visit by enforcement officer and told not to proceed. AREA 1 DEVELOPMENT CONTROL COMMITTEE – 18TH AUGUST 2009

ITEM 3 (CONT’D) APPLICATION NO. 2009/0769

4. The hardstanding contains block walls and pillars and its raised height has diverted water down to my property casing damage and problems with mud. The proposed garage/store would increase this problem. 5. The raised height of the hardstanding means I can now see their vehicles and the walls/pillars, which is visually intrusive. The proposed garage/store and its increased height and solidity would create even more visual intrusiveness. 6. If the proposed garage/store is built, the increased height and solidity would lead to a detrimental affect on my property. 7. The hardstanding has been built significantly in front of the building. The rear of the proposed garage would also be in front of this line therefore the front of the garage would obviously greatly exceed the building line. 8. The road is narrow and the double garage doors would open out onto the road. In addition the occupants would not be able to drive directly into or out of the garage resulting in my exit being blocked overtime the proposed garage was used. 9. My garage and drive have been legally built, with the drive being wider at the top to enable safe vision and so as not to obstruct the road during use. If the proposed plans are approved my exit and access would become hindered and unsafe. 10. The owners have an original drive and parking area which requires care during use to avoid accidents. The proposed garage is on a different site, nearer my property and would increase the danger to users. 11. My youngest son has special needs and no awareness of danger. There is a real danger that people using the proposed garage would endanger anyone leaving/entering my property. 12. I am registered disabled and unable to leave my property without a car. The use of the proposed garage would block my exit and entrance causing me great difficulty. 13. Visibility is limited when entering/exiting the hardstanding. The proposed garage/store would mean visibility being totally compromised endangering anyone using our narrow road and greatly compromising the safety on entering and leaving my property. 14. When using the proposed garage/store the road would be blocked and access to council vehicles would be prohibited. The narrow road means that only smaller council vehicles can be used. 15. When using the proposed garage/store the road would be blocked and access to emergency vehicles would be prohibited. 16. My youngest son has school transport and an escort and use of the garage/store would block their exit/entrance and endanger both him and them. 17. My youngest son has NCH and Social Services workers on a regular basis, and use of the garage/store would block their exit/entrance and endanger both him and them. 18. The road is narrow and unlit and that heightens the objections in the previous points. 19. The windows at the top of the proposed garage/store would look directly into my property, exacerbated by its siting in front of the building line, invading my privacy. 20. The pitched roof will further heighten it, making point 19 more applicable. 21. During construction, the persons mentioned in points 14 – 17 above would be unable to access my home. 22. Similarly, during construction I would be virtually housebound as I would not be able to access or exit my home via my drive. 23. During construction the very narrow road would be totally blocked, resulting in safety issues due to poor visibility, and making building very dangerous to all road users.

Pollution Control – Have no observations to make on the application under consideration. AREA 1 DEVELOPMENT CONTROL COMMITTEE – 18TH AUGUST 2009

ITEM 3 (CONT’D) APPLICATION NO. 2009/0769

Head of Transportation and Engineering Services – This proposal is to construct a detached garage at 63 Bwllfa Road. The garage site is currently a hard standing area which is in addition to the main access drive of the dwelling. The provision of a garage structure over the hard standing will not generate traffic movements where currently none exist as the proposal merely results in the enclosure of the hard standing.

The front face of the garage is being set-back so its doors when open or being opened do not project into the lane and therefore there are no highway safety implications that would result specifically due to the proposed garage.

Reason: To ensure that any door does not project into the lane in the interest of highway safety.

APPRAISAL

This application is brought to Committee for decision at the request of Councillor Michael Hedges.

Full planning permission is sought for a detached garage with store above, to be sited atop an existing hardstanding area situated to the north-east of a large detached property known as No.63 Bwllfa Road, Ynystawe.

The application proposes the construction of a garage measuring 6m wide by a maximum of 6.3m deep and achieving a ridge height of 5.5m at the front (4.1m at the rear). The front elevation of the upper store is set back approximately 1m from that of the garage, by means of a monopitch roof, and the pitched roof will contain two no. rooflights in its side planes. External walls are to be rendered and the roof covered in flat concrete tiles, whilst rainwater goods and external doors/windows will be white uPVC.

The application falls to be considered under the terms of Policies EV1 and HC7 of the adopted City & County of Swansea Unitary Development Plan (2008), along with the further guidance provided in the recently published `A Design Guide for Householder Development' (2008).

Policy EV1 of the UDP seeks to foster good design in new development by ensuring that it accords with the objectives laid out under that policy. These objectives include being appropriate to context in terms of scale, design and materials; integration with adjacent spaces and the public realm; and not resulting in significant detrimental impact on local amenity in terms of visual impact, loss of light or privacy, disturbance and traffic movements.

Policy HC7 of the UDP refers to the assessments to be made of proposals to extend or alter residential properties, including their relationship to the existing dwelling by virtue of size, design and materials; impact on the character and appearance of the street scene; affect on neighbouring properties with particular reference to physical impact, overshadowing/loss of light and privacy; and impact on car parking. AREA 1 DEVELOPMENT CONTROL COMMITTEE – 18TH AUGUST 2009

ITEM 3 (CONT’D) APPLICATION NO. 2009/0769

‘A Design Guide for Householder Development' stems from these two policies and provides further detailed guidance in this respect. Part 7 of the document refers specifically to domestic garages and outbuildings and sets out the key design principles to be followed when undertaking such a development.

The proposed garage/store is to be sited toward the north-eastern end of Bwllfa Road, a narrow, partly unmade road along the hillside above the main Clydach Road in Ynystawe. The road effectively ends at a point some 5m north of the proposed garage with a small area allowing restricted turning for vehicles. The area surrounding the site is quite heavily wooded and mature vegetation is evident along much of the road frontage, with driveways, hardstandings/parking areas and pedestrian access ways dotted along its length. A variety of house sizes and designs exist along Bwllfa Road and nearby Spionkop Road many of which, along with their garages, are rendered or of stone construction. In these circumstances, the garage/store proposed is of a size and design, and utilises materials which are appropriate both in relation to the application property itself and within the wider local context. The proposal is therefore considered acceptable in visual amenity terms and will not result in an adverse impact upon the character and appearance of the street scene or the wider surrounding area.

The garage/store is to be constructed on the site of an existing hardstanding present in the curtilage of the application property and almost directly opposite the hardstanding for No 58 Bwllfa Road, which property is set down below the road level at this point. A distance of at least 17m is achieved between the proposal and the house at No.58 and, whilst the difference in levels is noted, it is not considered that the garage would result in a significant detrimental impact upon that property in terms of visual impact. Nor, because of their juxtaposition and siting in relation to sun/daylight would the garage/store result in any overshadowing or loss of light to that property. Similarly, because of the nature of the development and the lack of any windows facing towards No.58, it will not result in a loss of privacy to the occupiers of that property.

No indication is given on the submitted plans or forms of the type of garage door to be utilised in the proposal but given the concerns expressed by the objector and the minimal set back of the proposed garage from the road (which is dictated by the topography of the area), it is considered appropriate in this instance to attach a condition to any grant of planning permission to restrict the type of garage door to be used to ensure that it does not open over the narrow road and cause obstruction.

The Head of Transportation and Engineering Services confirms that the garage site is currently a hard standing area which is in addition to the main access drive of the dwelling. The provision of a garage structure over the hard standing will not generate traffic movements where currently none exist as the proposal merely results in the enclosure of the hard standing. The front face of the garage is being set-back so its doors when open or being opened do not project into the lane and therefore there are no highway safety implications that would result specifically due to the proposed garage.

As the parking area already exists there are no grounds for an objection for highway safety reasons and I therefore recommend that no highway objections are raised subject to the provision of an up and over type door to ensure that any door does not project into the lane in the interest of highway safety. AREA 1 DEVELOPMENT CONTROL COMMITTEE – 18TH AUGUST 2009

ITEM 3 (CONT’D) APPLICATION NO. 2009/0769

Whilst the objector has raised many points in their letter, they refer to matters of design, siting and impact on highway conditions/accessibility to their property, all of which have been discussed in the appraisal above. Concerns relating to the possibility of restricted vehicular movements during construction are not material to the consideration of this application.

Conclusions

In conclusion, the proposed garage/store is considered to be of a size and design, and sited in relation to neighbouring properties, such that it will not result in an adverse impact in terms of visual or residential amenity; and concerns regarding possible highway obstruction can be addressed by means of suitable conditions. Having regard to all material planning considerations, including the Human Rights Act, the proposal is considered to represent an acceptable form of development, complying with the criteria of Policies EV1 and HC7 of the adopted City & County of Swansea Unitary Development Plan (2008) and the guidance contained in the recently published `A Design Guide for Householder Development' (2008).

RECOMMENDATION

APPROVE, subject to the following conditions;

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

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

3 Notwithstanding the details submitted, prior to the beneficial use of the garage/store hereby approved, the applicant shall submit details of the garage door to be utilised for the written approval of the Local Planning Authority. The scheme shall ensure that the door in question shall not open out over Bwllfa Road at this point and the development shall be completed in accordance with such approved details. Reason: In the interests of highway safety.

4 The garage indicated in the submitted plans shall be retained for the parking of vehicles and purposes incidental to that use and the garage/store indicated in the plans shall not be used as or converted to domestic living accommodation. Reason: To ensure adequate on site car parking provision in the interests of highway safety, and residential and visual amenity. AREA 1 DEVELOPMENT CONTROL COMMITTEE – 18TH AUGUST 2009

ITEM 3 (CONT’D) APPLICATION NO. 2009/0769

INFORMATIVES

1 The development plan covering the City and County of Swansea is the City and County of Swansea Unitary Development Plan. The following policies were relevant to the consideration of the application: Policies EV1 and HC7 of the adopted City & County of Swansea Unitary Development Plan 2008 and the guidance contained in the recently published Supplementary Planning Guidance document `A Design Guide for Householder Development' (2008).

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

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

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

PLANS

Drng.No.HG.09.13.P02- plans, section & elevations as existing, HG.09.13.P03- plans, sections & elevations as proposed received 21st May 2009; Amended Drwg.No. HG.09.13.P01- site location plan, received 2nd June 2009

AREA 1 DEVELOPMENT CONTROL COMMITTEE – 18TH AUGUST 2009

ITEM 4 APPLICATION NO. 2009/0674 WARD: Area 1 Uplands

Location: 26 Ernald Place, Uplands, Swansea, SA2 0HN Proposal: Conversion of property into two self contained flats with fenestration alterations Applicant: Mr Enrico Sartori

BACKGROUND INFORMATION

This application was DEFERRED FOR A SITE VISIT at the Area 1 Development Control Committee on the 28th July 2009 to assess car parking standards and refuse storage arrangements in accordance with Policy HC6.

POLICIES

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

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

Policy HC6 Proposals for the conversion of larger dwellings and vacant or underutilised commercial and industrial buildings to flats or similar will be permitted subject to a set of defined criteria including the effect upon residential amenity; overintensive use of the dwelling or building, effect upon the external appearance of the property and the locality; effect on local car parking and highway safety; and adequate refuse storage arrangements. (City & County of Swansea Unitary Development Plan 2008)

SITE HISTORY

None

RESPONSE TO CONSULTATIONS

TWO neighbouring properties were consulted and the proposal was advertised on site. NO RESPONSE.

Since the application was last reported to committee, a late letter of objection has been received which is summarised as follows:

1) There are a significant number of HMO on this street already. 2) We have litter problems from the students. 3) Anti-social behaviour occurs in the street. 4) Parking problems. 5) The development will result in noise issues. AREA 1 DEVELOPMENT CONTROL COMMITTEE – 18TH AUGUST 2009

ITEM 4 (CONT’D) APPLICATION NO. 2009/0674

6) The proposal will devalue my house. 7) Why was there no written notification of the proposal to local residents.

Highway observations – This proposal is to convert 26 Ernald Place in to 2 flats. The existing dwelling is a large 4 bedroom property which requires 3 car parking spaces and a garage exists at the rear of the property which will accommodate some of the existing parking requirement.

The proposed conversion requires 2 parking spaces per flat and these are to be provided at the rear by demolishing the garage and creating a parking area for 4 cars. The spaces will be located more than 10m from the entrances to the both flats and therefore does not comply with this aspect as recommended in guidelines. However, this is the case with the existing property and often the case in this type of layout where rear parking is provided for properties with rear lane access. This is not a matter that would in itself render the proposal unacceptable.

I recommend no highway objection subject to the rear parking area being completed and ready for use prior to occupation of the converted property.

APPRAISAL

This application is reported to committee for decision at the request of Councillor Stuart Rice.

Full planning permission is sought for the conversion of 26 Ernald Place from a single dwelling into two self contained flats with external alterations. The application site is a mid- terraced property. The alterations consist of the removal of a rear glazed porch area, the replacement of an existing rear door with a window, and the insertion of a new door in the rear of the existing rear wing.

The main issues for consideration relate to the acceptability of the proposed conversion, having regard to Policies EV1 and HC6 of the City and County of Swansea Unitary Development Plan. There are in this case considered to be no additional overriding considerations arising from the provisions of the Human Rights Act.

Policy HC6 of the UDP states that proposals for the conversion of larger dwellings and vacant or underutilised commercial and industrial buildings to flats or other self contained units of accommodation will be permitted subject to the satisfaction of the following criteria.

1. Current use is no longer viable; 2. Impact on residential amenity; 3. Intensity of use; 4. Impact on visual amenity; 5. Parking provision; 6. Refuse storage;

The application property is a two storey, mid terraced dwelling house. There is a single garage at the rear, which is to be demolished to provide four off street parking spaces that are accessed off a rear lane. AREA 1 DEVELOPMENT CONTROL COMMITTEE – 18TH AUGUST 2009

ITEM 4 (CONT’D) APPLICATION NO. 2009/0674

The proposed floor plans indicate the provision of one two-bed flat on the ground floor and one two-bed flat on the first floor, with a communal entrance at the front of the property. The ground floor flat would comprise a kitchen/dining room, bathroom, living room and two bedrooms, and the first floor flat will comprise the same level of accommodation. There are no proposed changes to the front elevation, with the only external alterations being the replacement of a door with a window on the rear, the insertion of a new door on the rear wing elevation, and the removal of a glazed porch area to be replaced with a window.

In terms of the principle of use of the property as two flats, the property is located within the Uplands area of Swansea which is characterised by a mix of private dwellings, flats, and HMOs, and contains a large student population. Along this stretch of Ernald Place there are currently three properties that have been converted into flats, and several other dwellings in use as HMOs. A previous application (ref: 99/0643) was approved in July 1999 for the conversion of No. 13 Ernald Place into two flats, and so a precedent has been set for this form of development on this stretch of Ernald Place. The other two dwellings do not have planning permission, but have been in use as flats for over 10 years. In light of this, and considering the high number of dwellings in the immediate vicinity in use as HMOs and flats, it is considered that the principle of conversion into flats is acceptable in this instance.

The rear outdoor amenity area is considered small and will predominantly be taken up with the parking spaces, although there is space for the provision of a bin storage area. Whilst only the ground floor flat has direct access to the rear amenity area and parking provision, it is only a short walk around the corner from the front to the rear area (approx. 50m) as the building is located near the end of the terrace. This is considered to accord with the criteria set out in Policy AS6 of the UDP which seeks accessible off-street parking provision in such developments. It is considered that the number of units and albeit provision of a small outdoor amenity space will not result in an over intensive form of development. Therefore the proposal is considered to represent an acceptable form of development in this respect, having particular regard to the criteria set out in Policies EV1 and HC6 of the Unitary Development Plan.

In terms of visual amenity, the only external alterations proposed relate to the insertion and alteration of windows and doors to the rear of the dwelling. In light of these minor changes and as the proposed alterations cannot be viewed from any public vantage point, it is considered that the proposed fenestration alterations are acceptable. It is therefore considered that the proposal would not have any adverse impact upon the character and appearance of the original dwelling, nor wider street scene.

Turning to residential amenity, and with regard to the impact of the proposal on the residential amenity of the occupiers of the neighbouring properties, the proposal will accommodate a total of 4 bedrooms and the existing single dwelling also provides 4 bedrooms. Thus, there is no net increase in the level of accommodation being provided within the building envelope. Whilst it is acknowledged that there may be some increase in general noise and disturbance emulating from within the property due to two households within the building envelope, it is considered that the intensification in use of the property will not increase to a level that is unacceptable in this instance. Therefore, it is considered that the use of this property as two flats would not have a detrimental impact upon the occupiers of the adjoining properties by virtue of general noise and disturbance. AREA 1 DEVELOPMENT CONTROL COMMITTEE – 18TH AUGUST 2009

ITEM 4 (CONT’D) APPLICATION NO. 2009/0674

In terms of highway safety, the Head of Transportation has raised no objection to the proposal subject to the car parking provision to be completed prior to the occupation of the converted property.

In response to the late letter of objection, points 1 to 5 have been addressed above. Point 6 is not a material planning consideration and therefore cannot be taken into consideration when determining this application. With regard to point 7, the statutory consults were carried out, the proposal was advertised on site, and all adjoining properties were consulted by letter.

In conclusion therefore, and having regard to all material planning considerations including the Human Rights Act, the proposal is considered to represent an acceptable form of development having particular regard to Policies EV1 and HC6 of the City and County of Swansea Unitary Development Plan. Approval is therefore recommended.

RECOMMENDATION

APPROVE, subject to the following conditions:

2 Prior to the beneficial occupation of the property as flats, the parking layout, as indicated on drawing no.001, shall be completed in accordance with the approved plans. Reason: In the interest of highway safety.

3 Prior to the occupation of any part of the development hereby permitted, bin-stores and a drying area shall be provided within the curtilage of the site, details of which shall be submitted to and approved by the Local Planning Authority in writing before the development commences. Reason: To safeguard the visual amenity of the locality and the residential amenities of future occupiers.

INFORMATIVES

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

2 The development plan covering the City and County of Swansea is the City and County of Swansea Unitary Development Plan. The following policies were relevant to the consideration of the application: Policies EV1, AS6, and HC6 of the City and County of Swansea Unitary Development Plan, 2008. AREA 1 DEVELOPMENT CONTROL COMMITTEE – 18TH AUGUST 2009

ITEM 4 (CONT’D) APPLICATION NO. 2009/0674

PLANS 001 Site location & block plan, 002 existing floor plans, 003 existing elevations, 004 proposed floor plans, 005 proposed elevations received 5th May 2009

AREA 1 DEVELOPMENT CONTROL COMMITTEE – 18TH AUGUST 2009

ITEM 5 APPLICATION NO. 2007/1793 WARD: Area 1 Clydach

Location: East End Garage, Pontardawe Road, Clydach, Swansea Proposal: Demolition of existing garage and construction of a supermarket (Class A1) and associated car parking and landscaping Applicant: C K's Supermarkets

BACKGROUND INFORMATION

Relevant Planning Policies

National Planning Policy Guidance

Planning Policy Wales (2002) Wales Spatial Plan Update (2008) Technical Advice Note 4 – Retailing and Town Centres Technical Advice Note 11 – Noise Technical Advice Note 12 – Design Technical Advice Note 18 – Transport Ministerial Interim Planning Policy Statement – Planning for Retailing and Town Centres (MIPPS – 02/2005)

City and County of Swansea Unitary Development Plan (UDP) a. UDP Part 1:

Objective 2.e To improve the range, choice and quality of shopping opportunities accessible for all sections of the community and visitors to the area

Objective 2.f To resist further out of centre/town retail development

Objective 5.a To support development at accessible and safe locations

Objective 5.b To reduce the need to travel and reduce reliance on the private car

Strategic Policy SP1 Development designed to a high quality and standard will be favoured.

Strategic Policy SP6 New retail development that is best located within the City Centre, District or Local Centres will not generally be supported at out-of- centre sites. Additional edge of centre shopping should be restricted to that which would not prejudice established shopping centres. Strategic Policy SP14 New development will be favoured in areas that are highly accessible by public transport, walking and cycling, and where they minimise dependency on the private car. b. UDP Part 2:

Policy EV1 Development must accord with key objectives for achieving good design. AREA 1 DEVELOPMENT CONTROL COMMITTEE – 18TH AUGUST 2009

ITEM 5 (CONT’D) APPLICATION NO. 2007/1793

Policy EV2 Development must be sited appropriately, having regard to key issues such as the physical character of the site and its relationship with surroundings. Preference is given to the use of previously developed land.

Policy EC4 All new retail development will be considered against key criteria including: sequential suitability; impact on vitality & viability of existing shopping centres; and accessibility.

Policy EC6 Appropriate small scale local shopping provision will be encouraged in areas of acknowledged deficiency in order to meet local need. Mayhill/Townhill is identified as an area of deficiency in this regard.

Policy EC9 Retail development at out-of-centre locations will generally be resisted.

Policy HC31 Protect the development and enhancement of the inland waterway network.

Policy AS1 New retail development should be located in areas that are currently highly accessible by a range of transport modes or in areas where this can realistically be achieved.

Policy AS2 The design and layout of new developments should: promote the use of public transport; facilitate sustainable travel choices; provide suitable facilities for pedestrians, cyclists and other non-motorised modes of transport; allow for the safe, efficient and non intrusive movement of vehicles; and comply with the principles of accessibility for all.

Policy AS4 Ensure existing and proposed Public Access Routes are protected from development and that proposals do not prejudice their provision or use.

Policy AS5 Development proposals should consider the access requirements for pedestrians and cyclists and provide appropriate facilities/infrastructure to encourage their use.

Policy AS6 Parking provision to serve development will be assessed against adopted standards.

Response to Consultations

ORIGINAL PLANS

The application was advertised in the press and on site as a Departure from the Development Plan and 13 neighbouring properties were consulted individually. TWO LETTERS OF OBJECTION were received which raised the following points:

1. Concern that all existing retail businesses in Clydach will suffer if this proposal is allowed. 2. A more appropriate redevelopment of this site would be for housing perhaps first time buyers as such properties are needed. 3. Concern that the application has applied only for a new building and not for a change of use. AREA 1 DEVELOPMENT CONTROL COMMITTEE – 18TH AUGUST 2009

ITEM 5 (CONT’D) APPLICATION NO. 2007/1793

4. Welcome redevelopment of the site which is currently disuse and an eyesore, and the fact that a new supermarket will bring 5 jobs for the village, however, concerns that the development will greatly impact on the way neighbour lives and their quality of life. 5. The proximity of the building to neighbouring home suggests that there will be noise pollution and light deprivation. 6. There would be no objection if the proposed car park area and new building were changed so the car park was next to neighbour’s home. 7. Concern that the building will be taller and wider than neighbouring house and will cut light off from the lounge, kitchen, back bedroom , or garden. 8. List of questions submitted including what the building will be built of; questions relating to door openings on the south elevation; will the security fence be retained; whether there will be forklift trucks operating on the public footpath, loading times, various heath and safety issues re unsold food, refuse storage, as well as shop opening hours; what will happen to the existing underground fuel storage tanks; where will exhaust air from in store bakery leave the building; where will air conditioning units be sited. 9. Further questions regarding road safety and suggestion that the car park access is sited further away from road junction; impact on environmental health due to concerns that there will be an increase in rats; public safety if public footpath is used by forklift trucks.

Environment Agency Wales – The development is within an area classified as minor aquifer of high vulnerability, as defined by the ‘Policy and Practice for the Protection of Groundwater’ (Environment Agency, 1998). This aquifer potentially provides base flow to surface water features in the area and/or is a resource supply in the area. The site also lies adjacent to the Swansea Canal. Given the sensitive setting of the site with respect to controlled waters, we would ask that a number of conditions be included on any planning permission granted.

We note that the site is a former garage and there is evidence of a petrol pump within the development site boundaries. There is no information provided in relation to the presence of underground tanks. As the previous use may have caused some land contamination, we would ask that a number of conditions be included.

British Waterways – Object to the proposed development as summarised as follows:-The new retail unit immediately adjoins the towpath of the Swansea Canal and would block out much of the light presenting a 9 metre high unattractive blank frontage to the waterway, harming its amenity to an unacceptable degree, and detracting from this green corridor within the urban area.

Should you be minded to grant permission for the development, because of the very close proximity of the towpath ask that an informative is added requiring the developer to contact the British Waterways Engineer. There is a water abstraction pipe running under the site to a factory across the road and it is essential this is not harmed during development. Also request that a section 106 agreement or planning condition should make provision to improvements to the towpath.

Highway Observations – Request for more information, 4/09/07 - The size of the development does not warrant a full Transport Assessment but a Transport Statement will be required in order to assess the impact that the development will have on the local area. AREA 1 DEVELOPMENT CONTROL COMMITTEE – 18TH AUGUST 2009

ITEM 5 (CONT’D) APPLICATION NO. 2007/1793

In addition request for clarification of the servicing arrangements, in particular how the vehicles will turn and how the loading bay will be managed.

Glamorgan Gwent Archaeological Trust – No objection to the determination of the application, for the following reasons:-

Part of the land was occupied by a lime kiln of post mediaeval date that was demolished and a smithy connected with Mond works built, these have been demolished and houses occupied the site by the 3rd edition of Ordnance Survey. The subsequent demolition of these and use of the site as a bus garage would have destroyed or seriously damaged any remains of these and we know of no other archaeological features in the area. The record is not definitive, however, and unrecorded or unknown archaeological features or finds may still be located during the development. Should this occur please contact this Division of the Trust.

Dwr Cymru Welsh Water – Observations summarised as follows:-

Sewerage – Improvements are planned to the existing public sewerage system by 1st April 2008. Request condition regarding this date. Other conditions and informatives regarding foul and surface water discharges, and public sewer which crosses site, required.

Health and Safety Executive – The HSE does not advise, on safety grounds, against the granting of planning permission in this case.

Environmental Protection & Management – There is a potential for ground contamination so land contamination condition advised.

AMENDED PLANS

The application was advertised on site and 13 neighbouring properties were consulted individually. TWO LETTERS OF OBJECTION (one resident) have been reiterated previous concerns and raised the following points:-

1. Neighbour prefers the new building to the original proposal, since the building is not going to be so high and will not overwhelm neighbouring house in quite the same way, and has therefore answered previous light concerns. 2. However remaining concern that previous questions have not been answered. 3. All previous health and safety issues remain as serious worries, including the road risk from siting the junction close to the roundabout. 4. Concern that the bins will be sited close to canal and neighbouring house and will attract rats.

Glamorgan Gwent Archaeological Trust – No material change since original letter.

British Waterways – Objects for the following reasons, summarised as follows :-

• The new retail unit would block out light to towpath and degrade the existing appearance of the site detracting from attractive ‘green ‘corridor. A much longer run of towpath would be hemmed in by tall walls. Concern that the design is changed to present a more complementary aspect to the canal. AREA 1 DEVELOPMENT CONTROL COMMITTEE – 18TH AUGUST 2009

ITEM 5 (CONT’D) APPLICATION NO. 2007/1793

• Concern that doorway opens onto towpath, and large trees and shrubs would be growing in towpath on British Waterways land. • Concern regarding reference to soakaway and possible contamination of canal. Developer needs to discuss Surface Water Drainage into the canal. • Request that developer enters into a legal agreement to make provision for towpath improvements. Improvements could consist of a two metre wide resurfaced multi user routeway from Vardre Road to the depot about 230m to the east. • Concern that development would prevent crane access to the canal which is needed periodically. • Bins should be moved away from boundary with towpath reducing the problem of odours. • Concern that the development encroaches onto British Waterways land. • Request that if granted approval that an informative is added advising developer to contact British Waterways Engineer. • Advise that there is a water abstraction pipe and culvert crossing the site.

Highway Observations -

This proposal is to demolish the former East End Garage on Pontardawe Road, Clydach and erect a 316 Sq M retail food store in its place. The site is located just off the mini roundabout at the junction of Ynys Penllwch Road and Pontardawe Road. Access into the site would be provided at both ends which will accommodate parking for 15 vehicles. This level of parking accords with adopted guidelines which suggests between 8 and 16 spaces. A service lay-by is intended along the frontage and this will necessitate the relocation of the footway to run behind the new lay-by.

The proposed store is not of a size likely to generate a significant amount of customer traffic and as for its position near the mini roundabout, it must be borne in mind that the site has been used as a commercial garage for many years and traffic past the site has reduced since the by-pass was constructed.

On balance, I consider that customer and staff parking is sufficient for the proposal and suitable servicing facilities are being accommodated.

I recommend no highway objection subject to the following;

1. All access alterations shall be carried out to Highway Authority specification in accordance with details to be submitted and approved.

2. The footway along the entire site frontage shall be re-laid in accordance with details to be submitted and approved.

3. Within 12 Months of consent, a Travel Plan shall be submitted for approval and the Travel Plan shall be implemented on beneficial use of the development commencing.

Note 1: The Travel Plan shall include details of car reduction initiatives and methods of monitoring, review and adjustment where necessary. Advice on Travel Plans can be obtained from Jayne Cornelius, SWWITCH Travel Plan Co-ordinator Tel 07796 275711. AREA 1 DEVELOPMENT CONTROL COMMITTEE – 18TH AUGUST 2009

ITEM 5 (CONT’D) APPLICATION NO. 2007/1793

Note 2: The Developer must contact the Network Manager City and County of Swansea, Highways Division, Players Industrial Estate, Clydach, Swansea, SA6 5BJ. Tel 01792 841601 before carrying out any work.

FURTHER AMENDED PLANS

Minor amendments including the re-sting of the bin store and fire door have been advertised through consultation with neighbours and objectors. Any further responses will be reported verbally to Committee.

APPRAISAL

This application is reported to Committee because it was considered to constitute a departure to the Development Plan.

The application site is located at the former East End garage complex fronting onto Pontardawe Rd, Clydach, immediately adjacent to the former Swansea Canal towpath between the canal and Pontardawe Road, Clydach. The 0.14 hectare site is comparatively flat and linear in shape and is currently occupied by a large two storey building (currently vacant) that housed a car showroom on the ground floor with part of the ground floor being used for the sale of confectionary and petrol sales. There was a ramped access to the first floor that comprised primarily a storage area and an area for car valeting, and minor repairs both used in association with the car sales on the ground floor. There was a small petrol sales area to the frontage, with an open area for car parking to the south west and a car parking compound to the north east.

The site benefits from a Certificate of Proposed Lawful Development Certificate for the use of the ground floor part of the building for A1 retail sales, the first floor for storage and plant together with facilities for staff including toilets and rest room (2004/0311 refers). Whilst the certificate does not carry the same weight as a grant of planning permission, and has not been acted upon, it does nevertheless constitute a material consideration, and constitutes a ‘fall back’ position for the provision of approximately 256 square metres of retail floor space within the existing unit. This is discussed in more detail below.

The current application seeks planning permission for the demolition of the existing buildings and removal of petrol sales, and the construction of a retail supermarket (Class A1). An amended design and layout for the new retail scheme has been submitted during the course of the application which now proposes a single retail unit, which will be sited towards the eastern side of the site, with associated car parking , access and landscaping.

The amended scheme has reduced the building to single storey with a split level roof, maximum ridge height of 7.7 metres and minimum ridge height of 6.95 metres, and a footprint width of approximately 12 metres wide and 40 metres in length. The plans indicate external finishes in render with brick features.

The proposed store will have vehicle access to the main public car park at the western end of the site (similar to the existing access off Pontardawe Road), and includes a car parking layout of 11 no. car spaces laid out to the front entrance of the store. A service yard, bin stores, and 4 no. additional parking spaces will be provided to the rear of the store via a separate access off Pontardawe Road. AREA 1 DEVELOPMENT CONTROL COMMITTEE – 18TH AUGUST 2009

ITEM 5 (CONT’D) APPLICATION NO. 2007/1793

Issues

The main issues for consideration with this application are the principle of development having regard to National Planning Policy and the Development Plan; the transport impact of the proposal; the impact of the development on the character and appearance of the area; the impact of the proposal on the residential amenities of neighbouring occupiers; and any environmental implications. There are in this instance considered to be no additional issues arising from the provisions of the Human Rights Act.

The Principle of Development

The Town and Country Planning Act 1990 (as amended) requires all planning applications to be determined in accordance with the provisions of the Development Plan, unless material considerations indicate otherwise. The Development Plan for the area comprises the City and County of Swansea Unitary Development Plan (UDP), which was adopted in November 2008. Also of relevance are National planning policy as set out in Planning Policy Wales (March 2002), and Ministerial Interim Planning Policy Statement 02/2005 Planning for Retailing and Town Centres (November 2005).

National Planning Policy

National planning policy guidance on retail policy is set out in the Ministerial Interim Planning Policy Statement (MIPPS) 02/2005, which replaces sections 10.1 to 10.3 of Planning Policy Wales (PPW). The guidance makes clear that town, district and local centres are the most appropriate locations for retailing, in the interests of sustaining communities, enhancing accessibility and safeguarding the vitality and viability of established shopping centres. The critical factors for determining a planning application for a retail scheme best located in a town centre are identified as: the need for the development; the sequential approach to site selection; the impact on existing centres; accessibility and transport implications; and compatibility with the development plan.

In terms of the sequential test, developers are required to demonstrate that all potential in-centre locations have been thoroughly assessed before edge and out of centre sites are considered, requiring a flexibility of approach from both the developer and planning authority. The guidance makes clear that the retailer must be innovative about the format, design and scale of the proposed store, which should be tailored to fit local circumstances. In establishing the need for the development, the retailer is required to demonstrate quantitative need, in precedence of any qualitative need. Fundamentally, the MIPPS makes clear that the scale, type and location of out-of-centre retail developments should not be such as to be likely to undermine the vitality, attractiveness and viability of those town centres that would otherwise serve the community well.

Also relevant, TAN 4 Retailing and Town Centres (1996) sets out the requirement for applications outside defined centres to satisfy the relevant tests of need and sequential assessment.

Development Plan Policy

The City and County of Swansea Unitary Development Plan (UDP) was formally adopted in November 2008. AREA 1 DEVELOPMENT CONTROL COMMITTEE – 18TH AUGUST 2009

ITEM 5 (CONT’D) APPLICATION NO. 2007/1793

The retail policies of the UDP reflect the above national planning policy guidance, and are generally aimed at supporting the maintenance and enhancement of the established shopping structure, focussing investment within district and local shopping centres, and aims to prevent the dispersal of major retail investment to locations outside these established centres where such development would serve to undermine their appeal and success.

Strategic Policy SP6 emphasises that out of centre retailing will not generally be supported in the interests of the above stated aims. This is amplified by Policy EC9 which states that retail development at out of centre sites will be resisted except for certain exceptional forms, which includes small scale shopping facilities required to meet local needs (Policy EC6 refers).

Small scale is defined as a maximum 1000 sq.m. Aside from the exceptions stipulated, Policy EC9 does also acknowledge that an out-of-centre retail scheme in excess of local needs provision may be considered appropriate if a clear deficiency in shopping provision exists and there are no sequentially preferable sites available. The key criteria against which all significant retail proposals are considered are set out in Policy EC4. As well as the standard tests of need and sequential suitability, the policy emphasises that schemes must not adversely impact on the vitality and viability of established centres; must be compatible with the function, scale and character of the centre near to which it is located; and be sited in a highly accessible location.

The Council commissioned specialist retail planning consultants Roger Tym & Partners (RT&P) to undertake a Retail Capacity Study in 2005, the findings of which were used to inform UDP policy formation and were based on a robust, evidence based assessment of retail provision within the County. In general terms the 2005 study advised that there is little quantitative need for the development of further convenience goods floorspace within the City and County looking forward to 2016. Whilst the Council’s 2005 retail capacity study provides an important evidence base to inform the determination of the proposal, it is accepted that the work is dated and that there have been changes in the retail market since the report was published.

However, preventing retail development that is likely to have an unacceptable adverse impact on established shopping centres remains a key objective of planning policy at both local and national level. The City Centre and all district and local shopping centres within Swansea are recognised as vital to the retail hierarchy and significant to the social and economic fabric of community life. The enhancement of these centres is important to sustain communities, support other essential services, and provide combined shopping facilities.

In addition, consideration has been given to the design and siting of the store in respect of UDP policies EV1, EV2, and the need to protect the line of the neighbouring canal as required by Policy HC31, as well as the requirements of the various access and highways policies AS1, AS2, AS4, AS5 and AS6. AREA 1 DEVELOPMENT CONTROL COMMITTEE – 18TH AUGUST 2009

ITEM 5 (CONT’D) APPLICATION NO. 2007/1793

Need for the store

In view of the above, and given the location of the proposed development outside the established District Shopping Centre of Clydach, the proposal is therefore considered to be at variance with national policy guidance and Development Plan polices, in that it seeks the creation of a retail outlet in an out of centre location that is physically divorced from the shopping centre, where no sequential test or need has been demonstrated. As such in policy terms it was considered that retail development at this out of centre location would fail to comply with the Unitary Development Plan policies for the area that seek to resist out of centre development and accordingly the application was advertised as a Departure from the Development Plan.

The above analysis provides the policy framework relevant to determining the scheme. However, in addition consideration has to be given to any other material planning considerations, which may or may not be sufficient to override the normal policy requirements.

Other Material Considerations

In this particular case, as highlighted above, the Authority accepts that a Certificate of Lawfulness granted in 2005 establishes a fall back position for an A1 foodstore with 256m2 of retail floorspace in the existing building. The remainder of the building provides 218m2 of storage and 38m2 of toilets and restroom (approximately 512m2 total floorspace).

In contrast the proposed new retail store would provide approximately 316m2 net retail floorspace, with approximately 114m2 of ancillary floorspace including storage and in house bakery and butcher (approximately 480m2 total floorspace).

This means that the overall floorspace for the proposed building is less than the existing building, and the quantum of retail floorspace proposed is only slightly higher than the fall back position with a small increase of 60m2 additional retail floorspace.

Having regard to this fall back argument, it is considered on balance that the proposed new retail provision is sufficiently small that it would not have a significant adverse impact upon the vitality, viability or attractiveness of the nearby Clydach district centre. In addition, on this basis, it is considered that such a small increase would not need to be justified by an analysis of need and a sequential assessment of alternative sites would not be required in this case, In conclusion, it is considered that this proposal is permissible on retail policy grounds.

Highway and Parking Issues

The site is located just off the mini roundabout at the junction of Ynys Penllwch Road and Pontardawe Road. Access into the site would be provided at both ends which will accommodate parking for 15 vehicles. This level of parking accords with adopted guidelines which suggests between 8 and 16 spaces. A service lay-by is intended along the frontage and this will necessitate the relocation of the footway to run behind the new lay-by. AREA 1 DEVELOPMENT CONTROL COMMITTEE – 18TH AUGUST 2009

ITEM 5 (CONT’D) APPLICATION NO. 2007/1793

On balance, the Head of Transportation and Engineering considers that customer and staff parking is sufficient for the proposal and suitable servicing facilities are being accommodated. There is no highway objection subject to all access alterations being carried out to Highway Authority specification, and the footway along the entire site frontage being re-laid. In addition, within 12 Months of consent, a Travel Plan shall be submitted for approval and the Travel Plan shall be implemented on beneficial use of the development commencing.

On this basis, it is considered that the proposal meets the criteria of the necessary access, car parking and sustainability issues required by the relevant UDP transport policies.

Impact upon the Character and Appearance of the Area

In land use terms the surrounding area is mixed with predominantly established residential development to the east along Pontardawe Road and established industrial and commercial areas to the west at Inco and the Clydach District Centre respectively. The site bounds the Swansea canal to the rear with the existing building sited abutting the adjoining towpath. The application site has a mixed history, but in character there still remains a strong element of its past aswell as its recent industrial/commercial use. On balance, it is considered that the planning history of this ‘brownfield’ site therefore dictates that the proposed use is compatible with the surrounding locality.

Moreover, it is considered that the revised design and siting of the building has addressed previous officer concerns regarding its design and layout. The revised scheme has sited the store in the eastern section of the site and would be approximately 150m walking distance from the nearby Clydach district shopping centre.

The store orientation faces towards the west and the route that pedestrians would use to approach from the district centre, bus stops and from the main residential areas of Clydach to the north. The entrance is clearly legible and accessible without walking through the car park. Cycle parking is also provided in a convenient and well overlooked location.

The design of the store successfully breaks down the massing and creates interest on Pontardawe Road through use of large windows, engaged pillars, feature gables, stepped roof form, changes of materials and planting. The effect is similar on the canal elevation less the windows. In terms of the street elevation, it is important to ensure that the windows are kept clear to allow views into the store and not covered with window displays.

The car park is well defined by a low stone wall and the curved wall will be a feature at the site entrance. The additional wall should be natural stone to tie in with the existing wall on the opposite side of the road, and this can be controlled by condition. The service yard is screened from the street by a wall and separated from adjacent residential property by planting buffer. AREA 1 DEVELOPMENT CONTROL COMMITTEE – 18TH AUGUST 2009

ITEM 5 (CONT’D) APPLICATION NO. 2007/1793

In response to concerns raised by British Waterways who own and manage the adjacent canal and towpath, the fire escape door has been moved from the northern (canal facing) elevation to the south (Pontardawe road facing) elevation, to ensure that there is no conflict with site boundaries. This does not significantly affect the general appearance of this elevation. In addition the siting of the bin stores has been relocated to the front of the

On this basis, it is not considered that the proposed development would have a significant adverse impact upon the character and appearance of this section of Pontardawe Road or the neighbouring canal, in line with the objectives of UDP Policies EV1 and EV2.

Residential Amenity

It is not considered that the proposed revised scheme would give rise to any significant harmful impact on the residential amenities of the nearest neighbouring residential properties.

The maximum roof height of the eastern end gable of the store facing the nearest neighbouring house at No. 15 Pontardawe Road will be 7.7m at ridge height which is comparable with a modest sized dwelling house. Moreover, the proposed building will be sited approximately 10m from the boundary with No.15, and this is considered to represent a satisfactory separation distance to ensure that there is no unacceptable physical overbearing/overshadowing and there is no overlooking impacts.

Whilst the proposal includes four car parking spaces in close proximity to the boundary with No.15 Pontardawe Road, these are intended for staff and can by satisfactorily screened by a suitable boundary enclosure, supplemented by planting in front, the details of which can be controlled by condition.

Other properties to the east of No.15 Pontardawe Road would be less affected by the proposed development than this property, and the nearest properties on the other side of the canal are more than 60m away, and are therefore unlikely to be affected in residential amenity terms.

Concerns have been expressed in public representation regarding the siting of bins and as a result these have been re-sited away from the original siting near the canal boundary to safeguard against vermin problems.

In addition, concerns raised regarding opening hours and delivery times can be addressed by condition controlling these aspects in the interest of residential amenity.

Overall, however, it is considered that the revised scheme will not have any unacceptable adverse impact on the residential amenities of neighbouring properties in line with the requirements of UDP Policy EV1. AREA 1 DEVELOPMENT CONTROL COMMITTEE – 18TH AUGUST 2009

ITEM 5 (CONT’D) APPLICATION NO. 2007/1793

Environmental Considerations

As the site has previously used as a garage there is potential for ground contamination, and accordingly the Head of Environmental Management and Protection requires a Land Contamination condition to cover a desk top study, detailed investigation of the site and remediation strategy where applicable. Similarly, the Environment Agency Wales (EAW) has raised no objection to the proposed development subject to the imposition of various conditions and informatives regarding pollution control, the removal of petrol tanks on site etc., which are also recommended.

Dwr Cymru Welsh Water (DCWW) originally raised objection if the development was brought into beneficial use before the upgrading of the existing public sewerage system, programmed to be completed by 1st April 2008. As this date has now passed the developer will be advised via informative to verify the current situation with DCWW and adhere to the other informatives recommended by the Agency.

British Waterways (BW) concerns raised a number of concerns including water pollution, but as advised above surface water drainage can be controlled by appropriate conditions required by the above agencies. A soakaway is advised by EAW.

On this basis, it is considered that sufficient control can be achieved via planning conditions to ensure that there is no adverse impact on the surrounding residential area and water environment.

Other material considerations

The main issues raised in public representation, including neighbour concerns regarding the design and siting of the development and operational details, and need for this additional retail store are covered in the main body of the report. As detailed above other matters raised such as access and road safety matters have been considered by the Head of Transportation. Similarly environmental matters such as pollution control and the removal of petrol tanks have been considered by the Head of Environmental Management and Protection and Environment Agency Wales, with conditions required where necessary. Disposal of unsold food and vermin control are not material planning considerations but the developer has re-sited the bin store so that it is not near the canal.

Other concerns raised by British Waterways regarding encroachment of their land and related matters have been considered. The applicant’s agent is aware of the abstraction pipe and culvert crossing the site and has advised that the developer will be adhering to the ‘Code of practice for Works affecting British Waterways’ during the development. Following further examination of the deeds plans, however, the applicant’s agent has confirmed that the development does not encroach onto the canal or towpath, nor affect any known rights of access, (including crane access to the canal). On this basis, it is not considered reasonable to seek any further redesign of the scheme. Similarly, with regard to the request for towpath improvements, it is not considered reasonable or necessary for these to be sought through financial contribution from the developer as the development does not encroach beyond the existing site which has an established commercial use. AREA 1 DEVELOPMENT CONTROL COMMITTEE – 18TH AUGUST 2009

ITEM 5 (CONT’D) APPLICATION NO. 2007/1793

Whilst Glamorgan Gwent Archaeological Trust has clarified that there are no known features of archaeological interest, but the developer will be advised via informative to contact the Trust if any are found during development.

Conclusion

For the reasons discussed in the main body of the report and having regard to the fall back position, it is considered on balance that the proposed new retail provision is sufficiently small that it would not have a significant adverse impact upon the vitality, viability or attractiveness of the nearby Clydach district centre. Moreover, the proposal will provide a small scale retail store providing a complimentary retail offer to the neighbouring district centre shops, which are within walking distance, thereby retaining investment within the Clydach area and reducing the length of shopping trips. Furthermore, it is considered that the proposed development would secure the redevelopment of a vacant, highly visible and accessible edge of district centre site which should help to further enhance the character and appearance of the surrounding commercial and residential areas.

In conclusion, and having regard to all material considerations, it is considered that the proposal represents a satisfactory form of retail development at this brownfield site, that would not be prejudicial to highway safety or detract from the character and appearance of the area, the amenities of neighbouring residents or any other interests of acknowledged importance, and approval of planning permission is recommended, subject to conditions.

RECOMMENDATION

That the application be REFERRED TO PLANNING COMMITTEE with a recommendation of APPROVAL.

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

3 Samples of all external finishes shall be submitted to and approved by the Local Planning Authority in writing before the development is commenced. The scheme shall be implemented in accordance with the approved details. Reason: In the interests of visual amenity. AREA 1 DEVELOPMENT CONTROL COMMITTEE – 18TH AUGUST 2009

ITEM 5 (CONT’D) APPLICATION NO. 2007/1793

4 The applicant shall submit a phased scheme, comprising three progressively more detailed reports, detailing measures to be undertaken in order to investigate the presence of land contamination, including relevant gas and vapour related risks, at the proposed site. Where the initial investigations indicate the presence of such contamination, including the presence of relevant gas/vapour, subsequent reports shall indicate the extent of the contamination and the measures to be undertaken in order to remediate the contamination identified. The reports shall be submitted individually.The provision of Phase 2 and Phase 3 reports will be required only where the contents of the previous report indicate to the Local Planning Authority that the next phase of investigation/ remediation is required.

Phase 1 report: Desk Top Study this should : • Provide information as to site history, setting, current and proposed use. • Include a conceptual model to establish any potentially significant pollutant linkages in the source-pathway-receptor human health and environmental risk assessment. • Identify if further investigation or remediation is required. In the event that the Local Planning Authority is then of the opinion that further investigation/ information is required the applicant shall submit a detailed site investigation [Phase 2] report to the Local Planning Authority, viz:

Phase 2: Detailed Investigation this should : • Provide detailed site-specific information on substances in or on the ground, geology and groundwater. • Provide for a more detailed investigation of the site in order to confirm the presence or absence of those potentially significant source-pathway-receptor pollutant linkages identified in Phase 1. In the event that the need for remediation is identified the applicant shall submit a subsequent detailed [Phase 3] report to the Local Planning Authority, viz:

Phase 3: Remediation Strategy/Validation Report this should: • Indicate all measures to be taken to reduce the environmental and human health risks identified in Phase 1 and Phase 2 to an acceptable level, in a managed and documented manner, to best practice and current technical guidance. • Give an undertaking that a validation report will be submitted on completion of the remediation works that will demonstrate that the works have been carried out satisfactorily and remediation targets have been achieved. Reason: To ensure that any site contamination is satisfactorily dealt with in the interests of public safety and amenity.

AREA 1 DEVELOPMENT CONTROL COMMITTEE – 18TH AUGUST 2009

ITEM 5 (CONT’D) APPLICATION NO. 2007/1793

5 No infiltration of surface water drainage into the ground is permitted other than with the express written consent of the Local Planning Authority, which may be given for those parts of the site where it has been demonstrated that there is no resultant unacceptable risk to controlled waters. Reason: To prevent pollution of the water environment

6 Prior to being discharged into any watercourse, surface water sewer or soakaway system, all surface water drainage from parking areas and hardstandings shall be passed through an oil interceptor designed and constructed to have a capacity and details compatible with the site being drained. Roof water shall not pass through the interceptor. Roofwater drainpipes should by connected to the drainage system either directly or by means of back inlet gullies provided with sealing plates instead of open gratings. Reason: To prevent pollution of the water environment.

7 No development approved by this permission shall be commenced until a Method Statement detailing all necessary pollution prevention measures for the construction phase of the development is submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The Method Statement shall identify, as a minimum • storage facilities for all fuels, oils and chemicals • construction compounds, car parks, offices, etc • details of surface water drainage arrangements to be installed to intercept and treat contaminated surface water run-off • details of measures to ensure no polluting discharge from haul roads / disturbed areas • details of the nature, type and quantity of materials to be imported on to the site • measures for dealing with any contaminated material (demolition waste or excavated waste) • identification of any buried services, such as foul sewers, so that they are protected • Details of emergency contacts, for example the Environment Agency Pollution Hotline 0800 807060. The Method Statement should then be efficiently communicated to all contractors and sub-contractors (for example, via toolbox talks), and any deficiencies rectified immediately. Reason: Prevention of pollution

8 Within 12 Months of consent, a Travel Plan shall be submitted for approval and the Travel Plan shall be implemented on beneficial use of the development commencing. Reason: In the interest of promoting sustainable travel objectives.

AREA 1 DEVELOPMENT CONTROL COMMITTEE – 18TH AUGUST 2009

ITEM 5 (CONT’D) APPLICATION NO. 2007/1793

9 All access alterations shall be carried out to Highway Authority specification prior to the beneficial use of the store in accordance with details to be submitted and approved by the Local Planning Authority before the development commences. Reason: In the interests of highway safety.

10 The footway along the entire site frontage shall be re-laid prior to the beneficial use of the store in accordance with details to be submitted and approved by the Local Planning Authority before the development commences. Reason: In the interests of highway safety.

11 The development hereby permitted shall not be open to customers and no deliveries shall be taken at or dispatched from the site outside the hours of 0.800 to 20.00, nor at any time on Sundays, Bank or Public Holidays. Reason: In the interests of residential amenity.

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

13 A detailed scheme for the eradication of Japanese Knotweed shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority, and shall be implemented prior to the commencement of work on site. Reason: In the interests of the ecology and amenity of the area.

INFORMATIVES

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

3 The applicant's attention is drawn to the requirements of the Chronically Sick and Disabled Persons Act 1970, the Disability Discrimination Act, 1995 and to the provisions of Part M of the Building Regulations. The document "Designing an Accessible Environment" provides guidance for developers on designing an accessible environment for disabled persons and is available from the Building Control Section of the Environment and Health Department at the Guildhall, Swansea. AREA 1 DEVELOPMENT CONTROL COMMITTEE – 18TH AUGUST 2009

ITEM 5 (CONT’D) APPLICATION NO. 2007/1793

4 i. The applicant is requested to contact the Head of Environmental Health Services prior to the commencement of any works on site in order to identify any statutory controls which may be required in relation to the specific works being carried out and the hours of working on the site.

ii. The applicant's attention is drawn to the requirements of the Highways Act not to cause obstruction to the users of the public highway nor to allow soil, and or other materials to be deposited onto the street, and to obtain consent for the storage of building materials on the public highway. The applicant should contact the Director of Technical Services to advise on the requirements of the Act and the penalties for non-compliance.

5 The developer is advised by the Environment Agency Wales, as follows 1) Follow the risk management framework provided in CLR11, Model Procedures for the Management of Land Contamination when dealing with land affected by contamination. 2) Refer to the Environment Agency Guidance on Requirements for Land Contamination Reports for the type of information that we require in order to assess risks to controlled waters from the site. The Local Authority can advise on risk to other receptors, e.g. human health. This information is available at environment agency website www.environment- agency.gov.uk In addition, the Environment Agency recommends the applicant to refer to the relevant pollution prevention guidance PPG27, which can be viewed at our website. 3) The applicant should also note that any waste excavation material or building waste generated in the course of the development must be disposed of satisfactorily and in accordance with section 34 of the Environmental Protection Act 1990 and that carriers transporting waste from the site must be registered waste carriers. 4) If controlled wastes are to be utilised for construction purposes the developer must register the activity with the Environment Agency Wales. The Duty of Care Regulations apply to all movements of controlled waste. 5) It should be noted that the site appears to be located over the abstraction intake to INCO from the Swansea Canal. The Agency is aware that INCO have a couple of intakes and it is possible that this one may no longer be in use. We would advise that INCO be contacted for further information.

6 The applicants attention should be drawn to the document Land Contamination - a Guide for Developers and its associated briefing note which can be found on the Pollution Control Contaminated Land pages of the City & County of Swansea website http://www.swansea.gov.uk/index.cfm?articleid=1084

7 The developer is advised to contact Glamorgan Gwent Archaeological Trust on tel. no. 01792 655208 if any unrecorded or unknown archaeological features or finds are located during development.

8 The developer is advised to contact British Waterways, Wales and Border Counties, Kevin Schumm (Third Party Works Engineer) , in order to ensure that any necessary consents are obtained and that the works comply with the 'Code of Practice for Works affecting British Waterways'.. Tel. No. 01606 723800. AREA 1 DEVELOPMENT CONTROL COMMITTEE – 18TH AUGUST 2009

ITEM 5 (CONT’D) APPLICATION NO. 2007/1793

9 The developer is advised to contact Dwr Cymru Welsh Water's Network Development Consultants on Tel. 01443 331155 if a connection is required to the public sewerage system. (N.B. The developer is advised to contact Dwr Cymru , regarding the capacity of the existing public sewerage system. Improvements were planned for completion by 1st April 2008. No buildings should be brought into beneficial use earlier than the completion of this upgrading to avoid overloading the public sewerage system and ensure the local community and environment are not unduly compromised.)

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

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

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

13 To protect the integrity of the public sewer and avoid damage thereto, the developer is advised that the proposed development is crossed by a public sewer with the approximate position being marked on the Statutory Public Sewer Record. Under the Water Industry Act 1991 Dwr Cymru Welsh WAter has rights of access to its apparatus at all times. No part of the building will be permitted within 3 metres either side of the centreline of the public sewer.

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

15 The Travel Plan shall include details of car reduction initiatives and methods of monitoring, review and adjustment where necessary. Advice on Travel Plans can be obtained from Jayne Cornelius, SWWITCH Travel Plan Co-ordinator Tel 07796 275711.

16 The Developer must contact the Network Manager City and County of Swansea, Highways Division, Players Industrial Estate, Clydach, Swansea, SA6 5BJ. Tel 01792 841601 before carrying out any work.

PLANS

Amended plans 100 Rev A site layout and location plans, 102 Rev A proposed floor plans, 103 Rev A proposed elevations and section received 17th July, 2009

AREA 1 DEVELOPMENT CONTROL COMMITTEE – 18TH AUGUST 2009

ITEM 6 APPLICATION NO. 2008/2009 WARD: Area 1 Uplands

Location: 67-69 St Helens Avenue Swansea SA1 4NN Proposal: Change of use of first floor from retail warehouse (Class B8/A1) to offices (B1) Applicant: Gabriel Lofts Ltd

BACKGROUND INFORMATION

POLICIES

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

SITE HISTORY

App No. Proposal 2008/2011 Retention of the change of use of the ground floor only from a retail warehouse (Class B8/A1) to retail use (Class A1) front canopy, new shopfront and demolition and replacement of the single storey rear extension and 3no condensing units and 2no air conditioning units and external ducting Decision: Perm Subj to S106 Agree Decision Date: 16/06/2009

96/4010/S CHANGE OF USE FROM CARPET RETAIL OUTLET (CLASS A1) TO THERAPY WORKSHOP (CLASS D1) Decision: *HGPC - GRANT PERMISSION CONDITIONAL Decision Date: 21/02/1996

96/0210 AMENDMENT TO CONDITIONS 02, 03 AND 04 OF PLANNING PERMISSION 96/4010/S DATED 21/02/96 FOR USE AS A THERAPY WORKSHOP Decision: *HRP - REFUSE PERMISSION Decision Date: 20/08/1996

94/0748 USE AS WHOLESALE WAREHOUSE (CLASS B8), INCLUDING TRADE SALES AND STORAGE. (APPLICATION FOR CERTIFICATE OF LAWFULNESS) (FIRST SCHEDULE) Decision: *HWL - WAS LAWFUL Decision Date: 21/09/1994

AREA 1 DEVELOPMENT CONTROL COMMITTEE – 18TH AUGUST 2009

ITEM 6 (CONT’D) APPLICATION NO. 2008/2009

2008/0361 Change of use from retail warehouse (Class B8/A1) to 4 no. office units (Class B1) and 9 no. live/work units (Class C3) Decision: Withdrawn Decision Date: 16/10/2008

2008/2006 Change of use of first floor from retail warehouse (Class B8/A1) to a dance studio (Class D2) Decision: Withdrawn Decision Date: 06/02/2009

2009/0543 Retention of two externally illuminated fascia signs Decision: Grant Advertisement Consent (C) Decision Date: 10/07/2009

RESPONSE TO CONSULTATIONS

Forty Four neighbouring properties were directly consulted and the application was advertised on site. NO RESPONSES HAVE BEEN RECEIVED.

Highway Observations - The application is for a change of use from a retail warehouse (class A1/B8) on the first floor to office units (class B1).

There is a small area of land in private ownership to the St Helens Avenue boundary which is capable of being used to park between three and four cars but this has been identified in a separate application (2008/2011) as being for use by the ground floor proposed retail use (A1). For the purposes of this application that parking area has therefore been ignored. The applicant has indicated that no dedicated parking will be provided for the office units although he has also said that 10 additional staff will be working in the offices.

The applicant has provided supporting statements which highlight the central location of the site plus its accessibility. It also states that parking will be able to be accommodated on the surrounding streets.

However parking in the area is in high demand due to the popularity of the area for houses in multiple occupation and the lack of off-street parking facilities due to the mainly terraced nature of the streets. In addition the site’s proximity to the Guildhall means that the unrestricted areas that are available are oversubscribed.

In accordance with our parking guidelines the development is short with regard to provision of the offices (between 9 and 12 spaces short). The shortfall in provision of off street parking spaces would be detrimental to highway conditions in the area of St Helens Avenue and Francis Street. Even taking into consideration the fall back position of the retail/warehouse use it is still felt the proposal will have a negative impact on highway safety, particularly as the proposed use of office will now coincide with the existing residential/office workers demand for daytime parking. It could potentially lead to vehicles parking illegally in the designated residents’ permit parking bays, to the detriment of parking availability for the residents, or parking in restricted areas causing an obstruction to visibility and free-flow of traffic. AREA 1 DEVELOPMENT CONTROL COMMITTEE – 18TH AUGUST 2009

ITEM 6 (CONT’D) APPLICATION NO. 2008/2009

It is recommended that this application be refused as the development will result in additional on street parking thereby exacerbating existing on street conditions, to the detriment of highway safety and parking provision for the residents.

The applicant has responded to the above with the following points:

• The site is highly accessible, being located close to the city centre and with good access to a number of public transport links. It is therefore considered likely that any employees will visit the site via public transport / walking / cycling. Consequently, the number of cars associated with the use will be minimal. • As shown within our parking report, submitted with the application, there is a significant amount of unrestricted parking spaces available in the vicinity of the site, early in the morning and evening. It is likely that any office employees will be arriving at the site early in the morning and will therefore be able to make use of these spaces. • There are also a number of restricted resident permit holder spaces in the vicinity of the site. As the office tenants will be unable to use these areas, it is considered that there will be sufficient parking available for local residents during the daytime. • As discussed the existing use class of the buildings would have a certain baseline level of traffic flow in any event (which is obviously not present at the moment, due to the building being vacant). This point has been raised in the supporting highways supporting statement submitted in support of the application. This is a significant material consideration in support of the application which highways need to consider in detail. • I understand that you have not received any objections from local residents, despite undertaking a much more comprehensive and wider consultation exercise than would normally be required. This indicates that local residents are not concerned with regards to vehicle movements / parking which may result from the proposal. This needs to be considered in detail by highways as it is also a material consideration in the context of their response. It is therefore considered that the proposed office use will not negatively impact on the car parking within the vicinity of the site

Further Highway Officer Comments A further analysis of the parking requirements utilising the recently published ‘Wales Parking Standards 2008’, as yet not adopted by the Council, indicates a reduction in car parking requirements for the development to 6 spaces, but not a zero provision as the developer proposes.

Pollution Control - In terms of noise disturbance to local residents office use on the first floor would be preferable. No Objections raised.

APPRAISAL

The application is reported to Committee for decision at the request of Councillor Rob Speht.

Full planning permission is sought for the change of use of the first floor to offices (Class B1)

The existing building is an attractive two storey Victorian property located on the junction of St Helens Avenue and Francis Street. The building has frontages to both roads. AREA 1 DEVELOPMENT CONTROL COMMITTEE – 18TH AUGUST 2009

ITEM 6 (CONT’D) APPLICATION NO. 2008/2009

The access to the ground floor Spar shop is from St Helens Avenue and the access to the first floor is from Francis Street. Opposite the site on St Helens Avenue is an A3 café and residential houses. To the rear and side of the site are a block of flats and residential houses. The site is located in close proximity of the Guildhall, Victoria Park, Patti Pavilion, St Helens Cricket / Rugby ground, the beach and a large number of residential dwellings within Brynmill.

The 1st floor of the building is currently vacant but was formally used as a non-food shop and before that as a carpet retail warehouse.

The main issues for consideration in this instance relate to the suitability of the site for a B1 office use, its impact upon residential and visual amenity and impact upon highway safety having regard to policy EV1 of the Adopted Unitary Development Plan. There are no overriding issues with regard to the Human Rights Act.

There are no specific policies relating to changes of use to offices within the UDP. In terms of EV1, the use of the upper floor of the building as offices (B1) is considered to be acceptable. B1 office uses are defined within the Use Classes Order as “Offices, research and development, light industry appropriate in a residential area”

The use of the upper floor of the building as offices is considered to be an appropriate use of the site in land use terms, and will bring back in to use the upper floor of this fine Victorian building, which has remained vacant for a considerable period of time. The ground floor is now occupied as an A1 shop (Spar)

There are no external alterations proposed as part of this application.

In terms of impacts upon residential amenity, as mentioned above, B1 uses are considered to be appropriate for residential areas, and as such the application is not likely to cause detriment to residential amenity. Pollution control have no objections to the B1 use.

With regard to highways, objections have been raised with regard to this application (see previous Highway Observations above) due to the lack of off-street parking provision.

Notwithstanding the highway objections, it is considered that as the building is existing, and not creating any additional new-build space, and given the site’s sustainable location within close proximity to good levels of public transport and reasonably close distance to the City Centre, an office use of the upper floor is considered to be an appropriate use for the building.

It is considered that if an office use or similar use is not allowed due to the lack of off- street parking facilities, it is very likely that the upper floor will remain vacant leading to a deterioration of this fine Victorian building.

It is also noted that the upper floor could be re-used for a wholesale warehouse (B8) with trade sales (A1) and storage without planning permission – a fall back position which would potentially have significant negative impacts on residential amenity as a result of heavy traffic movements due to deliveries and customers. AREA 1 DEVELOPMENT CONTROL COMMITTEE – 18TH AUGUST 2009

ITEM 6 (CONT’D) APPLICATION NO. 2008/2009

It is also possible (although an end user for the offices has not yet be identified) that the offices could be occupied by local people who live locally within the large residential area surrounding the site, thus reducing the need for off-street parking. As such it is considered necessary to add a condition requiring the submission of a Travel Plan should permission be granted so that any future occupier can take steps to ensure that future staff are aware of travel to the office by other means of transport than the car.

In conclusion, having regard to all material planning considerations, including the provisions of the Human Rights Act, the B1 office use of the first floor of this building is considered to be an appropriate use for this location as it would bring back into beneficial use the upper floor of this fine Victorian building, notwithstanding the objection raised by Highways Officers due to the lack of off-street parking and would not harm the amenity of neighbouring properties. On balance, it is recommended that the application be granted permission for the reasons given above. The application in this instance the application is considered to partially comply with Policy EV1 of the City & County of Swansea Unitary Development Plan 2008.

RECOMMENDATION

APPROVE for the following reason:

2 Prior to the use hereby approved commencing a Travel Plan for the future occupiers of the 1st floor shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The development shall then operate in accordance with the details thereby approved, unless otherwise approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. Reason: To encourage sustainable forms of transport and in the interests of local amenity

INFORMATIVES

1 The applicant's attention is drawn to the requirements of the Chronically Sick and Disabled Persons Act 1970, the Disability Discrimination Act, 1995 and to the provisions of Part M of the Building Regulations.

The document "Designing an Accessible Environment" provides guidance for developers on designing an accessible environment for disabled persons and is available from the Building Control Section of the Environment and Health Department at the Guildhall, Swansea.

AREA 1 DEVELOPMENT CONTROL COMMITTEE – 18TH AUGUST 2009

ITEM 6 (CONT’D) APPLICATION NO. 2008/2009

2 The applicant is advised of the need to obtain separate consent under the Town and Country Planning (Control of Advertisements) Regulations 1992 for any advertisements requiring express consent which it is intended to display on the premises.

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

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

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

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

PLANS

0S-1000- site location plan, P(1)-01-1000 - proposed ground floor plan, P(2)-02-1000 - proposed first floor plan, S-01-1000 - floor plans and elevations received 9th October 2008

AREA 1 DEVELOPMENT CONTROL COMMITTEE – 18TH AUGUST 2009

ITEM 7 APPLICATION NO. 2008/2240 WARD: Area 1 Cwmbwrla

Location: 10 Manselton Road, Manselton, Swansea, SA5 8PG Proposal: First floor rear extension Applicant: M A Barroccu

BACKGROUND INFORMATION

POLICIES

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

SITE HISTORY

App No. Proposal 2002/0552 First floor rear extension Decision: Appeal Dismissed Decision Date: 17/09/2002

RESPONSE TO CONSULTATIONS

Two neighbouring properties were consulted: No response.

Highway Observations – No highway objection.

APPRAISAL

This application is reported to Committee for decision at the request of Councillor Peter Black.

Full planning permission is sought for the construction of a first floor extension at 10 Manselton Road, Manselton, Swansea. A previous application (2002/0552 refers) involved an identical proposal submitted by the same applicant. That application was refused for the following reason: AREA 1 DEVELOPMENT CONTROL COMMITTEE – 18TH AUGUST 2009

ITEM 7 (CONT’D) APPLICATION NO. 2008/2240

“The proposed extension, by reason of its excessive rearward projection from the main back wall of the property at first floor level, would cause an unacceptable loss of light and overshadowing to the adjoining property at No.12 Manselton Road and, as such, would have an unacceptable impact upon residents within that property, contrary to the supplementary planning guidance document entitled `Household Extensions – A Design Guide’.”

An appeal was subsequently made against the decision which was dismissed by the Planning Inspectorate on 17th September 2002. The Inspector in that instance indicated that the extension would deprive the “residents of (no.12) of sunlight and daylight …” which “… would adversely affect the living conditions of those residents contrary to the provisions of …” the prevailing development plan policy at the time. In his decision letter, the Inspector refers at paragraph 5 “to the rear facing windows (of No.12) in both the main wall of the house and in the projecting first floor extension”. Whilst the windows in the main wall of that house are situated behind the existing two storey rear projection of that house they would be additionally affected by the proposed extension to No.10.

The application property is a mid terraced dwellinghouse which has an existing part two storey, part single storey rear extension. It is proposed to construct a first floor extension above the existing single storey kitchen extension. The extension will measure 3.8 metres in length by 3.75 metres in width and will extend to a height of 5.35 metres to eaves level and 6.7 metres to ridge level. However, whilst the proposal measures 3.8m in length, its siting to the rear of an existing two storey extension dictates that it will project a total of 8.6m from the main back wall of the dwelling. The extension will be constructed from blockwork with a pebble dash finish and concrete roof tiles to match existing. A single window will be sited on the rear elevation of the extension and will serve an extended bedroom.

The main issues for consideration with regard to this application relate to the impact upon visual and residential amenity having regard to prevailing planning policies, supplementary planning guidance and the planning history of the site. There are in this case considered to be no additional overriding considerations arising from the provisions of the Human Rights Act.

The extension incorporates a design and use of materials to match the existing dwellinghouse and as a result it is considered that the proposed extension will not detract from the visual amenity of the property to which it relates nor will it affect the character and appearance of the surrounding area.

Turning to the impact upon residential amenity, Policy HC7 of the adopted City & County of Swansea Unitary Development Plan (2008) identifies a number of criteria which should be considered when assessing household extensions. These include the relationship to the existing dwelling, impact upon the character and appearance of the streetscene, affect on neighbouring properties with particular reference to physical impact, overshadowing/ loss of light and privacy, and impact on car parking.

These criteria are expanded upon in the recently published `A Design Guide for Householder Development' (2008) which indicates that in order to safeguard the residential amenities of adjoining properties, first floor extensions to terraced properties should not exceed 4m when measured from the main back wall of the property. AREA 1 DEVELOPMENT CONTROL COMMITTEE – 18TH AUGUST 2009

ITEM 7 (CONT’D) APPLICATION NO. 2008/2240

In this instance, whilst the proposed extension measures 3.8 metres in length, its siting on the rear of an existing two storey extension dictates that it will project a total distance of 8.6m from the main back wall of the property, which is clearly contrary to the design guide. The design guide goes on to state that, where the properties on both sides of a dwelling have already been extended beyond 4m, an extension may be allowed to the same length.

In this case, whilst the adjoining property at No.8 has been extended to a similar length as that currently proposed, the first floor extension to the adjoining property at No.12 does not extend beyond 4 metres. Both ground and first floor rear elevations of the existing extensions at No.12 Manselton Road contain windows, kitchen and bedroom respectively, in a similar manner to the application property. Furthermore, as No.12 Manselton Road is located to the north of the application site, the first floor window of that property would be affected by an unacceptable loss of light and overshadowing by the proposed extension.

With regard to highway safety, there are no highway implications as a result of this application and The Head of Transportation and Engineering therefore raises no highway objection.

In view of the above it is considered that the proposed extension would result in an unacceptable overshadowing and loss of light to the first floor rear window of the adjoining property at No.12 Manselton Road, with a resultant impact upon the residential amenities of its occupants. As such, the proposal is contrary to the requirements of Policies EV1 and HC7 of the adopted City & County of Swansea Unitary Development Plan (2008) and the recently published guidance document `A Design Guide for Householder Development' (2008).

RECOMMENDATION

REFUSE, for the following reason:

1 The proposed extension, by virtue of its excessive rearward projection from the main back wall of the property at first floor level, would cause an unacceptable loss of light and overshadowing to the adjoining proprty at No.12 Manselton Road, and, as such, would have an unacceptable impact upon the occupiers of that property. The proposal is therefore contrary to the requirements of Policies EV1 and HC7 of the adopted City & County of Swansea Unitary Development Plan (2008); and the recently published guidance document `A Design Guide for Householder Development' (2008).

INFORMATIVES

AREA 1 DEVELOPMENT CONTROL COMMITTEE – 18TH AUGUST 2009

ITEM 7 (CONT’D) APPLICATION NO. 2008/2240

PLANS

Site location plan, existing & proposed block plan, existing floor plans, proposed floor plans, existing elevations, proposed side elevations, proposed rear elevation & cross section received 12th November 2008

AREA 1 DEVELOPMENT CONTROL COMMITTEE – 18TH AUGUST 2009

ITEM 8 APPLICATION NO. 2009/0137 WARD: Area 1 Landore

Location: Land south of and adjacent to Liberty Stadium, Morfa Retail Park, Landore, Swansea Proposal: Construction of MOT/service centre for class 4 motor vehicles with car valet facility and a restaurant (Class A3 - food and drink) with associated car parking and landscaping Applicant: In 'n' Out Services Ltd

BACKGROUND INFORMATION a. Relevant Planning Policies

Swansea Unitary Development Plan

Policy EV1 The development must accord with key objectives for achieving good design

Policy EV2 The development must be sited appropriately, having regard to key issues such as the physical character of the site and its relationship with surroundings

Policy EV3 Proposals for new development will be required to be accessible to all

Policy EV4 Development of public realm

Policy AS1 New development associated with housing, employment, shopping, leisure and service provision should be located in areas that are currently highly accessible by a range of transport modes in particular public transport, walking and cycling, or in areas where a good level of such provision can realistically be achieved

Policy EV34 Development proposals that may impact upon the water environment will only be permitted where it can be demonstrated that they would not pose a significant risk to the quality and or quantity of controlled waters.

Policy EV35 Development should not have an adverse impact on the water environment due to surface water run-off

Policy EV38 Development proposals should incorporate measures to deal with the risk of site contamination b. Relevant Planning History

2002/1192 Construction of two detached restaurants (Class A3) with associated carparking and landscaping (Outline) Planning Permission August, 2002 AREA 1 DEVELOPMENT CONTROL COMMITTEE – 18TH AUGUST 2009

ITEM 8 (CONT’D) APPLICATION NO. 2009/0137

2007/0204 Construction of two detached restaurants (Class A3) with associated carparking and landscaping (outline) variation of condition 02 of planning permission 2002/1192 to allow for the submission of reserved matters until 29th August 2008 Planning Permission March, 2007

2008/1694 Construction of two detached restaurants (Class A3) with associated carparking and landscaping (outline) variation of condition 02 of planning permission 2002/1192 to allow for the submission of reserved matters until 29th August 2009 Planning Permission September, 2008 c. Response to Consultations

ORIGINAL PROPOSAL

The application was advertised on site. No response.

AMENDED PROPOSAL

The application was re-advertised on site. No response.

Highway Observations -

The siting of the MOT centre and restaurant have now been switched and the vehicular accesses narrowed to single width to protect pedestrians using the footway which leads to the stadium.

In terms of highway safety priority will given to the pedestrian movements that will now have to cross a single width access at a time as opposed to the previous double width accesses.

Any vehicles waiting to access either of the sites have a large length of internal unadopted road to queue on, thus there is unlikely to be any impact on the adjacent highway network due to obstruction being caused.

Motorcycle and cycle parking has still not been included and this should be addressed.

The car parking area to the north of the site is available for parking at all times except for match days. It is therefore recommended that a car parking management scheme be drafted to ensure that parking within the curtilage for the both uses is maintained at all time.

I recommend that no highway objections be raised to the proposal subject to:

1. The disabled spaces being laid out in accordance with the relevant British Standard. AREA 1 DEVELOPMENT CONTROL COMMITTEE – 18TH AUGUST 2009

ITEM 8 (CONT’D) APPLICATION NO. 2009/0137

2. Adequate cycle and motorcycle provision being provided in accordance with details to be submitted for approval to the Highway Authority, prior to beneficial occupation.

3. A car parking management scheme be drafted to manage the parking provision, particularly on match days.

APPRAISAL

The application is reported to Committee at the request of Councillor Speht.

The application site consists of a prominently located parcel of land immediately to the south of the Liberty Stadium, which formerly accommodated the construction compound for the Morfa development. Outline planning permission has previously been granted on the site for two detached restaurants (Class A3) with associated car parking and landscaping (Ref:2002/1192). This permission has effectively renewed by Refs: 2007/204 & 2008/1694 by extending the date to submit the reserved matter (currently to 29 August, 2009). The permission for the two Class A3 restaurants was originally envisaged to compliment the use of the stadium. Since then the stadium, the commercial development and associated infrastructure including the site access, car parking and pedestrian boulevard have been completed, and it is not considered that the principal of the development has materially changed.

This current detailed proposal is for the construction of two detached buildings consisting of a MOT/ light servicing centre for class 4 motor vehicles associated car valet facility and a restaurant (Class A3 - food and drink) with associated car parking and landscaping. Vehicular access to the site will be gained from the existing access from the roundabout on Normandy Road / Brunel Way and the existing car parking area immediately to the north will be incorporated into the proposal. This was a similar arrangement under the existing outline planning permission.

It is indicated that the MOT service centre would constitute a new concept where drivers are encouraged to drive in without booking and would operate on a “while you wait” service. The centre would incorporate a lounge area which allows the customer to view the working area. It is indicated that the service element is purely related to replacement lights, filters and washer blades and topping up liquids. The MOT is purely an MOT and carries no works of repair, alteration or replacement to the car, which would have to be done by other garages. The applicants indicate that they would be prepared to accept planning conditions precluding tyre and exhaust use, and car repairs such as panel beating.

As indicated above, outline planning permission has previously been granted for two detached restaurants on the site, which were seen as complimentary uses to the Morfa Stadium. The principal issues for consideration therefore relate to whether the proposed MOT / servicing centre would be an acceptable use at this location. There are considered to be no additional issues arising from the provisions of the Human Rights Act. AREA 1 DEVELOPMENT CONTROL COMMITTEE – 18TH AUGUST 2009

ITEM 8 (CONT’D) APPLICATION NO. 2009/0137

The layout of the proposal as originally submitted involved the siting of the MOT station building and car valet canopy at the entrance to the site, with the result that the most prominent corner of the site adjacent to the roundabout on Brunel Way was laid out as a car park and vehicle circulation area and as such there was no attempt to define the corner with a new building. Moreover, the functional design and appearance of the MOT building would have failed to provide a high quality commercial and leisure development complementing the iconic structure of the Liberty stadium at this prominent corner location. In order to address these concerns, the siting of the two buildings have been reversed so that the restaurant building is now sited along the main frontage to the Brunel Way roundabout allowing the incorporation of soft landscaping along the frontage. In addition, the designs of the restaurant and MOT buildings have been enhanced with the addition of a building fascia overhang feature which improves their appearance. The design of both buildings would consist of modern, contemporary structures incorporating areas of glazing along the Brunel Way frontage. The steel framed buildings would incorporate trapezoidal / composite cladding panels indicated to be coloured a combination of light / dark grey. Whilst the contemporary design and elevations of the proposed buildings may be deemed to be acceptable at this location, it is considered that the precise details and colours of the external finishes should be controlled through a planning condition to ensure that they are compatible to the existing stadium development, which is principally white in colour. This would be particularly relevant for the finishes of the car valet company. Whilst the signage is indicated for illustrative purposes only, a condition is attached specifically to control the signage on the building. Overall, the revised layout, design and external appearance of the proposal would be compatible to the approved development aspirations for the Morfa regeneration scheme and would be compatible to the development aspirations under Policy EV1 of the Swansea Unitary Development Plan.

The proposed MOT / service centre would incorporate two service bays, and based on experience of their operations, the applicants anticipate that on average the numbers of cars serviced would be in the region of 35 – 40 per day. The existing car parking area within the application site boundary, provides approx. 40 spaces, and it is proposed to remodel this area to allow vehicular access to cross the existing pedestrianised boulevard and in total 58 car parking spaces (including disabled bays) would be provided to serve both operations which would satisfy the Council’s parking guidelines and UDP Policy AS1. The Head of Transportation indicates that the proposal would operate without causing any overspill onto the adjacent highway subject to the disabled spaces being laid out in accordance with the relevant British Standard and also subject to adequate cycle and motorcycle provision being provided. The Head of Transportation acknowledges that the car parking area to the north of the site is available for parking at all times except on match days and therefore recommends that a condition is imposed requiring the implementation of a car parking management scheme to ensure that adequate car parking is maintained at all times.

The nearest existing residential areas in Landore and Copper Quarter, are situated approx. 200 metres away and the affect of the proposed MOT centre and restaurant are therefore unlikely to have any discernible impact on residential amenity through vehicular traffic, noise, odour or hours of opening having regard to separation distance and ambient traffic noise along the A4067 Neath Road and cross valley link road. The development would therefore accord with Policy EV2 of the Swansea UDP, and whilst the restaurant would be served by a modern fume extraction system, a condition is attached to ensure this issue is adequately controlled. AREA 1 DEVELOPMENT CONTROL COMMITTEE – 18TH AUGUST 2009

ITEM 8 (CONT’D) APPLICATION NO. 2009/0137

The application has been accompanied by a preliminary risk assessment and conceptual model having regard to the previous history of industrial development and potential ground contamination issues. It is concluded that the potential pollution linkages may be adequately dealt and recommends an intrusive ground investigation is undertaken. The Environment Agency (EA) raise no objections to the proposed development subject to the imposition of planning conditions relating to further site investigations in order to identify the remedial options to deal with the risks posed to controlled waters by the potential contamination of the site.

The EA recommends that surface water flows should be kept separate from the main sewerage system to avoid overloading and the potential risk of pollution. It is further advised that the applicant should investigate the use of sustainable drainage systems (SUDS). The applicants have since indicated that it is proposed for surface water to pass through a petrol interceptor which will be alarmed and vented, and it is intended to use a sustainable drainage system. Conditions are therefore imposed accordingly to deal with the surface water drainage from the site.

In conclusion, having regard to all material considerations, including the Human Rights Act., the proposal would represent a satisfactory form of development which complies with the policies of the Unitary Development Plan and would have an acceptable impact on the amenities of the area. Approval is therefore recommended.

RECOMMENDATION

APPROVE, subject to the following conditions:

2 The premises shall be used as an MOT station / light servicing centre for Class 4 motor vehicles and associated car valet facility only and for no other purpose (including any other purpose in Class B2 (General Industry) of the Schedule to the Town and Country Planning (Use Classes) Order 1987, or in any provision equivalent to that Class in any statutory instrument revoking and re-enacting that Order with or without modification). The premises shall not operate as a general vehicular repair garage (Class B2) and shall exclude paint spraying and panel beating uses and as use as a tyre or exhaust fitting centre. Reason: The development hereby approved is such that the Council wish to retain control over any future development being permitted in the interests of visual amenity and the surrounding amenities of the area.

AREA 1 DEVELOPMENT CONTROL COMMITTEE – 18TH AUGUST 2009

ITEM 8 (CONT’D) APPLICATION NO. 2009/0137

3 Notwithstanding the details indicated in the application, samples of all external finishes shall be submitted to and approved by the Local Planning Authority in writing before the development is commenced. The car valet canopy structuring shall be finished in a paint finish rather than galvanised steel as indicated, the colour to be agreed with the Local Planning Authority. The scheme shall be implemented in accordance with the approved details. Reason: In the interests of visual amenity.

4 Notwithstanding the provisions of the Town & Country Planning General (Permitted Development) Order or any superseding legislation, no means of enclosure shall be erected except in accordance with details to be submitted to and agreed with the Local Planning Authority before those works are commenced. Reason: In the interests of visual amenity.

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

6 Notwithstanding the provisions of the Control of Advertisement Regulations no advertisements shall be erected on the buildings or within the site without the express consent of the Local Planning Authority. Reason: In the interests of visual amenity and to prevent advertisement clutter.

7 Prior to the use of the restaurant commencing, a method of ventilation and fume extraction shall be implemented in accordance with a scheme to be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. Reason: To prevent any nuisance from fumes and/or cooking odours to the occupiers of neighbouring premises.

8 Foul water and surface water discharges must be drained separately from the site and no surface water shall be allowed to connect (either directly or indirectly) to the public sewerage system. No land drainage run-off will be permitted, either directly or indirectly, to discharge into the public sewerage system. Reason: To prevent hydraulic overloading of the public sewerage system and pollution of the environment.

AREA 1 DEVELOPMENT CONTROL COMMITTEE – 18TH AUGUST 2009

ITEM 8 (CONT’D) APPLICATION NO. 2009/0137

9 The development hereby permitted shall not be commenced until such time as a scheme to dispose of 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 of the water environment and to reduce the increased risk of flooding by ensuring the provision of a satisfactory means of surface water disposal.

10 No infiltration of surface water drainage into the ground is permitted other than with the express written consent of the Local Planning Authority, which may be given for those parts of the site where it has been demonstrated that there is no resultant unacceptable risk to controlled waters. Reason: There is an increased potential for pollution of controlled waters from inappropriately located infiltrations systems such as soakaways, unsealed porous pavement systems or infiltrations basins.

11 The indicated BS8300 standard blue badge car parking spaces shall be laid out within the proposed car parking area prior to the beneficial use of the development and shall be retained as such unless otherwise agreed by the Local Planning Authority. Reason: To provide an adequate level of accessible car parking.

12 Details of cycle and motorcycle parking shall be submitted to and approved by the Local Planning Authority and shall be implemented prior to beneficial occupation of the development. Reason: In the interests of sustainability and in order to encourage cycling.

13 Prior to the commencement of development approved by this planning permission, the following components of a scheme to deal with the risks associated with contamination of the site shall each be submitted to and approved, in writing, by the local planning authority:

1. A preliminary risk assessment which has identified: - all previous uses - potential contaminants associated with those uses - a conceptual model of the site indicating sources, pathways and receptors - potentially unacceptable risks arising from contamination at the site.

2. A site investigation scheme, based on (1) to provide information for a detailed assessment of the risk to all receptors that may be affected, including those off site.

3. The site investigation results and the detailed risk assessment (2) and, based on these, an options appraisal and remediation strategy giving full details of the remediation measures required and how they are to be undertaken. AREA 1 DEVELOPMENT CONTROL COMMITTEE – 18TH AUGUST 2009

ITEM 8 (CONT’D) APPLICATION NO. 2009/0137

4. A verification plan providing details of the data that will be collected in order to demonstrate that the works set out in (3) are complete and identifying any requirements for longer-term monitoring of pollutant linkages, maintenance and arrangements for contingency action.

Any changes to these components require the express consent of the local planning authority. The scheme shall be implemented as approved. Reason: The controlled waters at this site are of high environmental sensitivity (River Tawe) and contamination is known/strongly suspected, due to the sites previous uses as smelters for various metals and spoil / slag heaps associated with these.

14 Prior to beneficial use of any part of the development, a verification report demonstrating completion of the works set out in the approved remediation strategy and the effectiveness of the remediation shall be submitted to and approved, in writing, by the local planning authority. The report shall include results of sampling and monitoring carried out in accordance with the approved verification plan to demonstrate that the site remediation criteria have been met. It shall also include any plan (a "long-term monitoring and maintenance plan") for longer-term monitoring of pollutant linkages, maintenance and arrangements for contingency action, as identified in the verification plan, and for the reporting of this to the local planning authority. Reason: To demonstrate that the remediation criteria relating to controlled waters have been met and (if necessary) to secure longer-term monitoring of groundwater quality. This will ensure that there are no longer remaining unacceptable risks to controlled waters following remediation of the site.

15 Reports on monitoring, maintenance and any contingency action carried out in accordance with a long-term monitoring and maintenance plan shall be submitted to the local planning authority as set out in that plan. On completion of the monitoring programme a final report demonstrating that all long-term site remediaton criteria have been met and documenting the decision to cease monitoring shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the local planning authority. Reason: To ensure that longer term remediation criteria relating to controlled waters have been met. This will ensure that there are no longer remaining unacceptable risks to controlled waters following remediation of the site.

16 If, during development, contamination not previously identified is found to be present at the site then no further development (unless otherwise agreed in writing with the Local Planning Authority) shall be carried out until the developer has submitted, and obtained written approval from the Local Planning Authority for, an amendment to the remediation strategy detailing how this unsuspected contamination shall be dealt with. Reason: Given the complexity of the site uses it is considered possible that there may be unidentified areas of contamination at the site that could pose a risk to controlled waters if they are not remediated.

AREA 1 DEVELOPMENT CONTROL COMMITTEE – 18TH AUGUST 2009

ITEM 8 (CONT’D) APPLICATION NO. 2009/0137

17 Piling or any other foundation designs using penetrative methods shall not be permitted other than with the express written consent of the Local Planning Authority, which may be given for those parts of the site where it has been demonstrated that there is no resultant risk to groundwater. The development shall be carried out in accordance with the approved details. Reason: There is an increased potential for pollution of controlled waters from inappropriate methods of piling and new pathways may be opened for the hydrocarbon contamination suspected on site.

18 A car park management scheme for the development shall be submitted to and approved by the Local Planning Authority prior to the beneficial use of the development and implemented in accordance with the approved details. Reason: In order to prevent potential parking obstruction of the highway (particularly during match days) due to the proximity of the Morfa Stadium in the interests of highway and pedestrian safety.

INFORMATIVES

2 The applicant's attention is drawn to the requirements of the Chronically Sick and Disabled Persons Act 1970, the Disability Discrimination Act, 1995 and to the provisions of Part M of the Building Regulations. The document "Designing an Accessible Environment" provides guidance for developers on designing an accessible environment for disabled persons and is available from the Building Control Section of the Environment Department at the Civic Centre, Swansea.

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

4 The proposed development is crossed by a trunk / distribution watermain along the site frontage to Brunel Way. No structure shall be within 3 metres from the centre line of the pipe. You are advised to contact Drw Cymru Welsh Water to establish the precise location of the apparatus.

PLANS

Site location plan, existing site plan, proposed site plan, proposed restaurant elevations, proposed restaurant floor plan, proposed south facing street scene, restaurant roof plan, proposed floor plan, service centre car valet canopy, proposed roof plan, service centre refuge storage enclosure, proposed elevations (Amended plans received 7th July 2009

AREA 1 DEVELOPMENT CONTROL COMMITTEE – 18TH AUGUST 2009

ITEM 9 APPLICATION NO. 2009/0291 WARD: Area 1 Castle

Location: George Hotel 30 Walter Road Swansea SA1 5NN Proposal: Side canopy Applicant: Mr Dean Yeoman

BACKGROUND INFORMATION

POLICIES

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

SITE HISTORY

App No. Proposal 2009/0445 One externally illuminated fascia sign, one externally illuminated panel, two amenity boards, one double sided projecting sign, 2 lanterns, 5 floodlights and externally illuminated lettering to three elevations Decision: Grant Advertisement Consent (C) Decision Date: 21/05/2009

92/0216 FORMATION OF EXTERNAL DRINKS AREA WITHIN FORECOURT Decision: *HRP - REFUSE PERMISSION Decision Date: 29/04/1992

79/1215/03 ALTERATIONS AND ADDITIONS TO PUBLIC HOUSE Decision: *HGPC - GRANT PERMISSION CONDITIONAL Decision Date: 25/10/1979

93/0881 ALTERATIONS TO EXISTING BAY WINDOWS ON FRONT ELEVATION AND ADDITION OF NEW BAY WINDOW ON FIRST FLOOR LEVEL Decision: *HGPC - GRANT PERMISSION CONDITIONAL Decision Date: 25/08/1993

93/6043 ERECTION OF ILLUMINATED FASCIA SIGN, AND NON- ILLUMINATED PROJECTING SIGN AND SPOT LIGHTS Decision: *HGCC - GRANT CONSENT WITH CONDITIONS Decision Date: 02/08/1993

99/6084 ERECTION OF EXTERNALLY ILLUMINATED PROJECTING SIGN Decision: *HGCC - GRANT CONSENT WITH CONDITIONS Decision Date: 15/10/1999 AREA 1 DEVELOPMENT CONTROL COMMITTEE – 18TH AUGUST 2009

ITEM 9 (CONT’D) APPLICATION NO. 2009/0291

RESPONSE TO CONSULTATIONS

The application has been advertised via direct neighbour consultation to one adjacent property and via a site notice. NO RESPONSE.

Health Promotion Team - No objections subject to the widows below the canopy not being opened in order to prevent smoke from entering the building.

Highway observations - This application is for a canopy adjacent to the side entrance to no 30 Walter Road (The George Hotel). The side entrance is located on Duke Street and this application proposes the erection of a canopy extending above 3 existing windows adjacent to the side entrance door. The principle of a canopy is acceptable however the level of detail provided with the canopy needs to be increased. Any structure over the highway needs to be licensed and therefore there will be a need for the applicant to secure this. The license will include the details required to ensure the structural integrity of the canopy.

I recommend no highway objection subject to no work commencing on site until the necessary license has been obtained.

APPRAISAL

The application is reported to Committee for decision at the request of Councillor Alan Lloyd.

Planning permission is sought for the construction of a glazed canopy to the left hand side of the Duke Street entrance of the George Hotel. The application site is an end of terrace public house located within Walter Road. The canopy would be a permanent feature that is not retractable, measuring 4.3m in length and projecting 1.2m from the side elevation of the building at a height of 2.4m above ground level.

The main issues for consideration relate to the visual appearance of the proposed canopy, its impact on residential amenity and highway safety having regard to Policy EV1 of the City and County of Swansea Unitary Development Plan. There are in this case considered to be no additional overriding considerations arising from the provisions of the Human Rights Act.

With regard to visual amenity, the proposed glazed canopy is modest in scale and is of a traditional design with a metal frame with a glazed panel roof. It is considered that the design of the canopy would complement the visual appearance of the existing building and it would not introduce an incongruous feature with the street scene. The proposal is therefore considered to be in accordance with Policy EV1 of the Unitary Development Plan (November 2008).

In terms of residential amenity, the proposal is small in scale and due to its siting and the distance between the proposal and the nearest residential dwellings (approx 30m), it not considered to have a detrimental impact on the amenities of the neighbouring residential units. AREA 1 DEVELOPMENT CONTROL COMMITTEE – 18TH AUGUST 2009

ITEM 9 (CONT’D) APPLICATION NO. 2009/0291

In terms of highway safety, the Head of Transportation and Engineering has raised no objection to the propose scheme, subject to the necessary license being gained to allow the structure of overhang the highway. With regard to the possible obstruction of the pavement, highway officers have commented that the canopy is only to be used as a smoking shelter and that patrons would only spend a minimal amount of time using it, and also that it would be used primarily in the evenings when the surround streets and pavements are quieter.

The Council’s Smoking Team do not raise any concerns as the proposed canopy complies with the current regulations for smoking shelters.

Conclusion

Having regard to all material planning considerations, including the Human Rights Act, the proposed canopy is considered to relate well to the host building and wider street scene and would not cause a detriment to residential amenity or highway safety. As such the application is considered to comply with the criteria set out in Policy EV1 of the City and County of Swansea Unitary Development Plan 2008.

RECOMMENDATION

APPROVE, subject to the following conditions:

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

INFORMATIVES

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

AREA 1 DEVELOPMENT CONTROL COMMITTEE – 18TH AUGUST 2009

ITEM 9 (CONT’D) APPLICATION NO. 2009/0291

3 The Developer must contact the Network Manager City and County of Swansea, Highways Division, Players Industrial Estate, Clydach, Swansea, SA6 5BJ. Tel 01792 841601 before carrying out any work.

PLANS

Site location plan, 202 block plan, 040 existing plans, 240 proposed plans received 27th February 2009.Additional plan external canopy structural details received 15th June 2009.

AREA 1 DEVELOPMENT CONTROL COMMITTEE – 18TH AUGUST 2009

ITEM 10 APPLICATION NO. 2009/0654 WARD: Area 1 Pontarddulais

Location: Land adjacent to Bolgoed Isaf Farm Bolgoed Road Pontarddulais Swansea SA4 8JP Proposal: Detached dwelling (amendment to planning permission 2008/0277 granted 10th October 2008) Applicant: Mr David Copp

BACKGROUND INFORMATION

The application was DEFERRED at the meeting on 28th July 2009 to further assess the information provided within the report. The landscaping condition has been amended to state that the age, species and numbers of trees to be planted shall be agreed with the Local Planning Authority. An informative has also been added regarding light pollution. The recommendation for approval is unchanged.

POLICIES

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

SITE HISTORY

App No. Proposal 2004/1249 Residential development (outline) Decision: Appeal Allowed Decision Date: 23/02/2005

2008/0200 Variation of condition 02 of planning permission 2004/1249 granted on appeal 23rd February 2005 to extend the period of time in which to submit the reserved matters application Decision: Approve Conditional (S73) Decision Date: 09/06/2008 AREA 1 DEVELOPMENT CONTROL COMMITTEE – 18TH AUGUST 2009

ITEM 10 (CONT’D) APPLICATION NO. 2009/0654

2008/0277 Detached dwelling Decision: Grant Permission Conditional Decision Date: 10/10/2008

RESPONSE TO CONSULTATIONS

ORIGINAL PLANS

The application was advertised on site and 6 neighbouring properties were individually consulted. SIX LETTERS OF OBJECTION have been received from five neighbouring properties together with one letter of observation from Pontarddulais Town Council. The letters can be summarised as follows:

• Part of the red line of the application site is outside of the ownership of the applicant. No formal notice has been served by the developer that he intends to build on land that is not within his ownership. The erection of a boundary wall/fence on this land would constitute criminal damage. • The proposal would overlook neighbouring properties resulting in a loss of privacy. • The proposal would have an unacceptable overshadowing and overbearing physical impact upon neighbouring properties. • The proposal will affect the value of neighbouring properties. • No objections to the previous application were made as the neighbours were not consulted. • The proposal would involve the removal of several thousands of tons of earth, the removal of this soil from the site along a single track raises concerns in terms of damage to the road and properties and pedestrian/vehicular safety. • The proposed development, by virtue of its size, would be visually out of keeping with the area. • The increased traffic and parking for the proposal would result in access restrictions to existing dwellings at 142-150 Bolgoed Road. • The proposed garage would overshadow the back lane to 146 Bolgoed Road.

AMENDED PLANS

The red line boundary and access were amended and the dwelling moved approximately one metre to the south.

Six neighbouring properties were individually consulted. FIVE LETTERS OF OBJECTION have been submitted from four neighbouring dwellings. The above objections remain together with the following additional objections:

• The applicant has removed two trees from the development, these were part of the original consent. • The proposal is more akin to a nursing home. The developer may be trying to sneek a commercial development through the back door. The developer will be working from home which will increase traffic to the development. • The developer intends to relocate an electricity pole into the middle of the privately owned access lane. This would block access and the poles would be sited on land not belonging to the developer. AREA 1 DEVELOPMENT CONTROL COMMITTEE – 18TH AUGUST 2009

ITEM 10 (CONT’D) APPLICATION NO. 2009/0654

Highways Observations – This application is for a detached dwelling and seeks amendments to a previous consent ref 2008/0277

The existing land is agricultural, and its current use is for a stable and paddock. The site will be access from an existing unadopted and unnamed road, just off Bolgoed Road, Pontarddulais. Visibility splays and road width at the junction with Bolgoed Road are acceptable from a highways safety point of view.

Adopted car parking guidelines require a minimum of 3 car parking spaces. The applicant has proposed a garage for the site, which is acceptable in terms of its dimensions and has indicated a further 3 car parking spaces together with 1 disabled space. Car parking is therefore more than adequate.

The proposed driveway into the site is also adequate, indicating a splayed access normally associated in rural and semi rural locations such as this and sufficient turning space is also proposed. No longitudinal sections of the driveway have been provided thus the gradient cannot be assessed at this time. However, this is a point of detail that can be condition for subsequent submission and approval

I recommend no highway objections be raised to the application subject to-:

1. The submission gradient details for the drive (which should be a maximum of 1:9) for prior approval by the Highways Authority.

2. The garage remaining for residential parking use only.

APPRAISAL

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

This application seeks planning permission for a detached dwelling on land that currently forms part of Bolgoed Isaf Farm, Pontardulais. The application site measures some 45 metres in width and 45 metres in depth and is accessed off Bolgoed Lane, a narrow unadopted lane off Bolgoed Road that serves some 9 dwellings. The site is bounded to the north east by residential dwellings and to the south east by Bolgoed Isaf farm and open agricultural land.

The application site is a greenfield site comprising of agricultural land, however the site forms part of a larger application site (2004/1249) that was granted outline planning permission in February 2005 by a Welsh Assembly Planning Inspector. Construction is underway on the ‘Cae Rebbecca’ site currently being developed by Redrow Homes which is located to the north of the application site.

At the time the appropriateness of the site for residential development was assessed by the Planning Inspector against Policies C1 and C5 of the West Glamorgan Structure Plan and Policies H1, H6 and EQ6 of the Southern Lliw Valley Local Plan, which seek to preserve the countryside, restrict unjustified development and consolidate existing settlements. In light of the Planning Inspector’s decision to approve the application, the site is now included within the Unitary Development Plan as part of a wider housing allocation site under policy HC1 (122). AREA 1 DEVELOPMENT CONTROL COMMITTEE – 18TH AUGUST 2009

ITEM 10 (CONT’D) APPLICATION NO. 2009/0654

More recently planning permission was granted at Area 1 Development Control Committee for a single detached dwelling (ref 2008/0277) and this application seeks amendments to the design of the dwelling, the site access and the application site boundary.

When the previous application for a detached dwelling was submitted on the site concerns were expressed by officers regarding the appropriateness of the proposal is so far as it would represent an inefficient use of the land that could potentially jeopardise the feasibility of fully developing the housing allocation in a sustainable manner in the future.

In order to address the concerns of the Authority the applicant submitted a letter from Redrow Homes (the developer of the wider allocation site) which stated that Redrow Homes were always aware that the application site would not be available for purchase. They went on to state that they were supportive of the proposal and that it would not prejudice the future development of the site.

Furthermore it was noted that the site can only be accessed via the unadopted Bolgoed Lane, as such this restricts the form of development that could take place at the site if it was not to form part of the wider Redrow site. As such the previous application was considered under Policies for infill development within urban area as it is located within the settlement boundary of Pontarddulais as outlined in the Unitary Development Plan.

It was acknowledged in the previous report that whilst the proposal would represent an inefficient use of part of a housing allocation site, given the specific circumstances of the site outlined above it was not considered that the proposal would prejudice the overall design, layout and number of dwellings that could be achieved at the allocated site.

Visual Amenity

In terms of visual amenity the scheme proposes one large 6 bedroom house with a detached garage set within a generous plot. The dwelling measures some 24 metres in width, 17 metres in depth and 7 metres in height and is to be finished in white render with upvc windows/doors and artificial or natural roof slates.

The application proposes minor alterations to the previously approved application, these include a small lobby to the front elevation, alterations to the gable details, solar panels to the south facing roof, minor changes to the fenestration, the provision of a chimney/flue, an increase in the thickness of the walls and an increase in ridge height by approximately 0.5 metres.

The built form in the immediate area is notably mixed ranging from the existing farm house which has been extended together with bungalows and two storey dwellings. The proposed dwelling would also be viewed in context with the development of the remainder of the housing allocation site, although a planning application for the phase of development that would cover the area nearer the application site has not yet been submitted.

The site is accessed from the south east corner via a driveway leading along the western boundary to the proposed garage to the rear of the site. The garage/store is designed with a hipped roof and would measure approximately 6 metres in width and 8 metres in depth with a ridge height of approximately 4 metres. AREA 1 DEVELOPMENT CONTROL COMMITTEE – 18TH AUGUST 2009

ITEM 10 (CONT’D) APPLICATION NO. 2009/0654

The applicant has submitted a number of photographic and 3D computer images together with a supporting statement to demonstrate that the building has been designed to reduce its impact on the surrounding area and to take into consideration the amenities of neighbouring properties.

The proposal is orientated on a north/south axis, which would not entirely relate to the existing bungalows which sweep around the lane, as such the frontage of the proposal is splayed away from the lane. Notwithstanding this the orientation of the dwelling would benefit from both solar gain and views over the open countryside and it is not considered that its orientation and relationship to the existing dwellings on the lane would result in significant visual harm that would justify the refusal of the application.

The property has been specifically designed to accommodate at least 7 people according to the needs of the applicant. In order to minimize the visual impact of a dwelling of this size it has been designed with a central spine and a number of small modules with gable roofs projecting from this central element. This modular approach, together with the upper floor accommodation being located mainly within the roof void enables the roof height to be reduced (although it is 0.5 metres higher than the previous approval) and would break up the overall mass of the dwelling. The design would also have the advantage that, from a distance, the roofscape would appear as a number of smaller dwellings rather than one large building. Furthermore the proposal has been cut into the site so the finished floor level of the dwelling would be some 1.5 metres below that of the neighbouring bungalow properties above.

It is acknowledged that a plot of this size can accommodate a large dwelling and the applicant has submitted additional information to address officer concerns and justify the design concept for the proposal. The dwelling would undoubtedly have a larger footprint than the surrounding buildings, however the design seeks to reduce the massing of the dwelling. The modular design approach together with the relatively low ridge height and the reduction in land levels would result in a dwelling that, whilst being larger than surrounding properties, would not appear visually dominant or overbearing. Whilst it would be preferable if the design embraced a more modern architectural approach, on balance, it is not considered that the proposal can be justifiably refused on the grounds of its size or design and the alterations to the original scheme would not result in any significant visual harm to the proposed dwelling or the visual qualities of the surrounding area.

Residential Amenity

In terms of residential amenity the proposal has been designed to reduce the impact on neighbouring dwellings by incorporating a relatively low ridge height and by reducing the land level to improve the relationship with the existing bungalows adjoining the site. The dwelling has also been moved approximately 1 metre to the south to further improve the relationship with neighbouring properties.

Balconies have been provided to serve all five upper floor bedrooms, on the west side of the dwelling these balconies would overlook the adjoining farmland. To the east side the balcony serving bedroom 3 would allow some oblique views towards the rear elevation of No. 150 Bolgoed Road at a distance some 17 metres. This relationship is considered to be satisfactory to mitigate any significant overlooking of the habitable room windows and rear amenity area of this dwelling. AREA 1 DEVELOPMENT CONTROL COMMITTEE – 18TH AUGUST 2009

ITEM 10 (CONT’D) APPLICATION NO. 2009/0654

Furthermore it should also be noted that there are currently unrestricted views of the rear elevation of this dwelling from the rear access lane, as such the privacy of the rear windows and rear amenity space of this dwelling would not be significantly compromised. The application drawings have included an illustrative landscaping scheme that includes a row of trees on the east boundary of the application site that would further screen views from the application site towards this dwelling. It is recommended that, if approved, a condition is added to the permission to ensure a landscaping scheme is submitted and to ensure that a tree screen is provided on the east boundary.

Turning to the garage, this would be sited approximately 15 metres to the west of the rear elevation of No. 148. This distance together with the low ridge height and the reduced levels at the site would ensure that the garage would not result in any significant harm by way of overbearing, overshadowing or overlooking impacts upon neighbouring occupiers.

Access and Highways

In terms of highway safety the garage dimensions are acceptable and satisfactory parking is included within the application site. Access and visibility splays are provided at the site and are sufficient from a highways safety point of view. As such there are no highway safety issues arising from this proposal.

Trees and Ecology

The original application included the retention of one ash tree and one sycamore tree on the southern boundary of the site, however both trees have now been removed.

According to the applicant the ash was badly diseased and was removed in February 2009. The sycamore, which was shown to be retained on the first set of plans submitted with the application, was removed in June 2009.

The applicant has provided information to outline the circumstances that led to the removal of the sycamore including a letter from a consultant arborist which states that the tree had a “structural” defect and given its siting overhanging the road, the tree would pose a serious risk to road users. Therefore the decision was taken by the applicant to remove the tree.

Whilst the removal of both trees is regrettable there were no tree preservation orders on either tree therefore the applicant did not require permission for their removal. The applicant has provided clear justification for their removal and there is no evidence to suggest that the conclusions of the applicant’s arborist are incorrect.

The applicant has expressed a willingness to replace the trees that were removed with ornamental species and this can be conditioned as part of the landscaping scheme for the site.

Turning to ecological impacts there is an existing building on the site that is currently used as a stable for the paddock. A protected species survey was submitted with the original application which found no bat or owl activity. The Planning Ecologist has recommended an informative relating to potential bird activity at the site. AREA 1 DEVELOPMENT CONTROL COMMITTEE – 18TH AUGUST 2009

ITEM 10 (CONT’D) APPLICATION NO. 2009/0654

Other Matters

Concerns raised by objectors regarding the impact of the proposal on property values and disputes regarding land ownership are not material planning considerations. Similarly any damage to private property resulting from the construction of the development is a civil matter between the applicant and any affected parties. Furthermore any disturbance to neighbouring properties from the construction of the development is not a material consideration.

Concerns have also been expressed that neighbours were not consulted on the previous application. The previous application was advertised by way of a site notice and 4 neighbouring properties were individually consulted as such the application was advertised in accordance with Article 8 of the Town and Country Planning (General Development Procedure) Order 1995.

Finally concerns have been expressed that the proposal would be used for commercial purposes. The application is being considered as a residential development and any material change of use to a commercial use would require planning permission.

Conclusion In conclusion and having regard to all material planning considerations, including the provisions of the Human rights Act it is considered that the proposed development is satisfactory in accordance with Policies EV1, EV2 and HC2 of the City and County of Swansea Unitary Development Plan. The application is therefore recommended for conditional approval:

RECOMMENDATION

APPROVE, subject to the following conditions:

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

AREA 1 DEVELOPMENT CONTROL COMMITTEE – 18TH AUGUST 2009

ITEM 10 (CONT’D) APPLICATION NO. 2009/0654

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

4 The materials used for the external surfaces of the development shall be in accordance with details and samples to be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority before the development is commenced. The development shall then be completed in accordance with the details thereby approved. Reason: In the interests of visual amenity.

5 The garage indicated in the submitted plans shall be retained for the parking of vehicles and purposes incidental to that use and shall not be used as or converted to domestic living accommodation. Reason: To ensure adequate on site car parking provision in the interests of highway safety, residential amenity and visual amenity.

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

7 Prior to the commencement of development on that part of the site, details of the drive gradients (which should be a maximum of 1:9 ) shall be submitted and approved by the Local Planning Authority and shall be completed in accordance with the approved details. Reason: In the interests of highway safety.

INFORMATIVES

1 Any external lighting within the site should be the minimum required for security and safety and shall be designed to minimise potential obtrusive light from glare or light spillage/trespass.

AREA 1 DEVELOPMENT CONTROL COMMITTEE – 18TH AUGUST 2009

ITEM 10 (CONT’D) APPLICATION NO. 2009/0654

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

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

5 West Glamorgan Act 1987 - Section 26 Please note that because this development may involve the construction of a retaining wall above 1.5m height, an application may have to be made to the Director of Technical Services for a permission in accordance with Section 26 of the West Glamorgan Act 1987.

6 Please note that this consent is specific to the plans and particulars approved as part of the application. Any departure from the approved plans will constitute unauthorised development and may be liable to enforcement action. You (or any subsequent developer) should advise the Council of any actual or proposed variations from the approved plans immediately so that you can be advised how to best resolve the matter.

In addition, any conditions that the Council has imposed on this consent will be listed above and should be read carefully. It is your (or any subsequent developers) responsibility to ensure that the terms of all conditions are met in full at the appropriate time (as outlined in the specific condition).

The commencement of development without firstly meeting in full the terms of any conditions that require the submission of details prior to the commencement of development will constitute unauthorised development. This will necessitate the submission of a further application to retain the unauthorised development and may render you liable to formal enforcement action.

Failure on the part of the developer to observe the requirements of any other conditions could result in the Council pursuing formal enforcement action in the form of a Breach of Condition notice.

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

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

AREA 1 DEVELOPMENT CONTROL COMMITTEE – 18TH AUGUST 2009

ITEM 10 (CONT’D) APPLICATION NO. 2009/0654

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

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

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

PLANS

Amended plans: Sheet No. 1- site location plan, No.2- site plan (1:500), No.3- site plan (1:250), No.4- proposed floor plans, No.5-proposed elevations, No.6-site sketch view, No.7-site sketch view, No. 8- sketch views, No.9- site sections, No.10-site sections, No.11- garage received 15th June 2009

AREA 1 DEVELOPMENT CONTROL COMMITTEE – 18TH AUGUST 2009

ITEM 11 APPLICATION NO. 2009/0779 WARD: Area 1 Castle

Location: 43 Heathfield, Swansea, SA1 6EJ Proposal: Conversion of dwelling into 5 self contained flats with fenestration alterations Applicant: Mr Paul Dendle

BACKGROUND INFORMATION

POLICIES

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

SITE HISTORY

App No. Proposal 2009/0101 Conversion of dwelling into 5 self contained flats with fenestration alterations and front balcony Decision: Refuse Decision Date: 24/04/2009

RESPONSE TO CONSULTATIONS

THREE neighbouring properties were consulted and the proposal was advertised on site. TWO LETTERS OF OBJECTION have been received which are summarised as follows:

1) There will be too many cars on site and this will cause disturbance and overspill into the street. 2) The balcony is not appropriate for the dwelling to which it relates and will overlook our property. 3) Trees are important to prevent landslip and for wildlife. Their removal will cause problems.

Highway Observations - This application has been considered previously and consent was refused on both Planning and Highway grounds. AREA 1 DEVELOPMENT CONTROL COMMITTEE – 18TH AUGUST 2009

ITEM 11 (CONT’D) APPLICATION NO. 2009/0779

My recommendation previously was for refusal as the proposal did not include adequate parking and this could result in additional on-street parking placing more strain on limited resident parking facilities which on Heathfield are minimal.

This current proposal is to convert the property into 5 flats and the applicant has submitted details showing access to a parking facility that will accommodate 6 parking spaces of standard dimensions and sufficient room for turning within the site. Adopted parking guidelines recommend a range of parking for converted properties of 1 - 2 spaces per unit. This range is intended to reflect the size of the units and their location. In this instance, the proposed flats are made up of 3 one bedroom units and 2 two bedroom units. The site is located near to the city centre where parking ratios are reduced due to the presence of local facilities. In this instance the site is within 230m of a regular bus route of better than 10 min frequency and within 360m of shopping facilities. Guidelines suggest that a frequent bus route should be within 400m. I therefore consider that there is justification to accept the proposed level of parking, which by maximum standards is only 1 space short. Adopted guidelines also suggest that where conversion is for less than 6 units, visitor parking on-site is not required.

On balance therefore, as parking proposals are acceptable, I do not consider that there are sufficient grounds for a highway objection to this revised application.

I recommend no highway objection subject to the following;

1. The parking area shall be completed and ready for use prior to the development being occupied and retained as such in perpetuity.

2. Access into the site shall be provided at a width of 5.5m

3. The construction of a vehicular crossing to Highway Authority Specification.

APPRAISAL

This application has been called to committee for decision at the request of Councillor Alan Lloyd.

Full planning permission is sought for the change of use of 43 Heathfield, Swansea from an 8 bedroom single dwelling to 5 self contained flats, consisting of 3 one bed flats and two 2 bed flats, therefore providing a total of 7 bedrooms. A previous application (ref: 2009/0101) was recently refused at committee for the following reasons :

1) The proposed balcony and associated fenestration alteration on the front elevation would have a detrimental impact upon the character and appearance of this dwelling, the adjoining property and the streetscene contrary to Policy EV1 of the City and County of Swansea Unitary Development Plan, 2008.

2) The proposal fails to provide adequate parking facilities for the proposed use which would lead to an increase in on street parking and demand for residents' only spaces to the detriment of the free flow of traffic, contrary to Policies EV1 and HC6 of the City and County of Swansea Unitary Development Plan, 2008. AREA 1 DEVELOPMENT CONTROL COMMITTEE – 18TH AUGUST 2009

ITEM 11 (CONT’D) APPLICATION NO. 2009/0779

3) The development would place increased demand on the `Residents Parking permit scheme in operation by virtue of 2 permits per flat being allowed (making 10 in total), compared to the current provision of 2 permits for the single dwelling to the detriment of highway safety, contrary to Policies EV1 and HC6 of the City and County of Swansea Unitary Development Plan 2008.

This application seeks to overcome previous concerns through the omission of the fenestration alterations and balcony on the front elevation and the provision of an amended parking layout to satisfy highway authority specification.

The application property is a large three storey semi-detached property with additional accommodation in the basement. The property currently lies vacant and is in a state of disrepair. The site is unusual in that the house is located at the rear of the plot with access from Heathfield. The house has a large front garden which slopes down towards Carlton Terrace, with pedestrian access from Carlton Terrace.

The proposed change of use includes minor fenestration alterations: an additional window inserted on the rear elevation at first floor level, a small low level window inserted at lower ground floor level to provide increased natural light to the bedroom to the front, and the replacement of a rear doorway and window with a single window within the side elevation at ground floor level. It is also proposed to install bin storage and cycle storage facilities with the rear garden area of the site.

The main issues for consideration with regard to this application relate to visual impact, the acceptability of providing flats at this location, highway and parking provision and residential amenity having regard to Policies EV1 and HC6 of the City and County of Swansea Unitary Development Plan. There are no overriding considerations arising from the Human Rights Act.

Policy HC6 of the Unitary Development plan presumes in favour of the conversion of larger dwellings into self contained flats subject to the satisfaction of a number of criteria which include: impact on residential amenity; intensity of use; off street parking provision; traffic generation; refuse storage arrangements; sound insulation and the effect on the external appearance of the property and the character of the locality.

Policy EV1 is a more general policy seeking development to be appropriate to its local context, having particular regard to elevational treatment, payout, form, mix, visual impact, loss of light and or privacy, and traffic movement.

As indicated above, the property currently provides accommodation including 8 bedrooms. As with the previous application, it is not considered that the use of the building as 5 self contained flats with a total of seven bedrooms would lead to a significant increase in noise and disturbance to neighbouring properties which would warrant refusal of the application. In relation to the fenestration alterations, it is not considered that these would give rise to overlooking over and above that currently experienced, due to their location and outlook over the application site, and as such the proposal is considered not to have a detrimental impact on the amenities of adjacent occupiers.

With regard to visual amenity, it is noted that within the previous application, a balcony and larger 2nd floor window were refused permission, and this application has now deleted these elements from the proposal. AREA 1 DEVELOPMENT CONTROL COMMITTEE – 18TH AUGUST 2009

ITEM 11 (CONT’D) APPLICATION NO. 2009/0779

As such the proposal is considered to be acceptable and the minor fenestration alterations proposed would not harm the visual appearance of the existing house or the wider street scene.

With regard to the amended parking layout, three spaces are to be provided on the western boundary of the site, and three on the eastern boundary. Following negotiations with the applicant, it is proposed to install a 2m high boundary wall along the eastern boundary and a 1 metre wide planting area. The 2m high stone wall to the western boundary is to remain. It is considered that these provisions are sufficient to prevent any adverse impact upon the residential amenities of the occupiers of the adjoining property (No. 41). Furthermore, it is proposed to install a 1m wide planting area to the western elevation of the rear wing to reduce levels of disturbance from vehicular activity.

Turning to highway safety, the proposed layout has been amended to include satisfactory numbers of parking spaces, with adequate turning facilities to allow vehicles to enter and exit the site in a forward gear. Therefore, the Head of Transportation has raised no objection to this scheme subject to

With regard to the letters of objection, the points regarding the balcony (which has been removed) and the parking situation have been discussed in the previous paragraphs. With regard to the trees, the site is not located within a conservation area and the trees are not covered by Tree Preservation Orders. The applicant has provided a tree survey which identifies that 4 leyland cypress trees are in poor condition and should be felled. The remaining 8 trees are to remain in situ. The trees are located to the south of the house within the front garden area. The Local Authority’s Tree Officer has no observations to make.

In conclusion and having regard to all material planning considerations including the Human Rights Act, the proposed change of use of the property to 5 self contained flats is considered to represent an acceptable form of development, having particular regard to the criteria outlined within policies EV1 and HC6 of the City and County of Swansea Unitary Development Plan, 2008.

RECOMMENDATION

APPROVE, subject to the following conditions:

AREA 1 DEVELOPMENT CONTROL COMMITTEE – 18TH AUGUST 2009

ITEM 11 (CONT’D) APPLICATION NO. 2009/0779

2 A crossing over the footpath/verge in the existing highway shall be completed before the development is brought into use in accordance with details to be submitted to and approved by the Local Planning Authority. Reason: In the interests of highway safety.

3 The parking area, as indicated on drawing no. 11 A05, shall be completed and ready for use prior to the development being occupied and retained as such unless otherwise agreed in writing by the Local Planning Authority. Reason: In the interest of highway safety.

4 Access into the site shall be provided at a width of 5.5m and shall remain as such unless otherwise agreed in writing by the Local Planning Authority. Reason: In the interest of highway safety.

5 Prior to the occupation of any part of the development hereby permitted, bin / recycling stores and a bicycle storage area shall be provided within the curtilage of the site, full details of which shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority in writing before the development commences. The development shall then be completed in accordance with the details thereby approved, and maintained as such unless the prior written approval of the Local Planning Authority has been obtained. Reason: To safeguard the visual amenity of the locality and the residential amenities of future occupiers.

INFORMATIVES

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

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

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

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

AREA 1 DEVELOPMENT CONTROL COMMITTEE – 18TH AUGUST 2009

ITEM 11 (CONT’D) APPLICATION NO. 2009/0779

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

PLANS

01 existing and proposed ground floor, 02 existing and proposed first floor plan, 3 A01 existing and proposed second floor plan, 07 A04 proposed east side elevation, 08 existing east side elevation, 09 existing and proposed rear elevation, received 22nd May 2009. Amended plans 11 A05 site location and block plan, 04 existing west side elevation, 05 A02 proposed west side elevation, 06 A03 existing and proposed front elevation, 10 existing and proposed basement plan received 14th July 2009

AREA 1 DEVELOPMENT CONTROL COMMITTEE – 18TH AUGUST 2009

ITEM 12 APPLICATION NO. 2008/2265 WARD: Area 1 St Thomas

Location: 32E St Leger Crescent, St Thomas, Swansea, SA1 8EU Proposal: Retention and completion of a two storey detached dwelling house with single storey garage Applicant: Mr John Toms

BACKGROUND INFORMATION

POLICIES

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

SITE HISTORY

App No. Proposal 86/0430/11 DEVELOPMENT OF TWO DETATCHED DWELLINGS Decision: *HGPC - GRANT PERMISSION CONDITIONAL Decision Date: 06/05/1986

85/1713/11 CONTINUATION OF USE AS BUILDER YARD,STORES AND WORKSHOPS. Decision: Withdraw Decision Date: 27/10/1986

2008/0441 Retention of detached dwelling and attached garage Decision: Withdrawn Decision Date: 20/11/2008

AREA 1 DEVELOPMENT CONTROL COMMITTEE – 18TH AUGUST 2009

ITEM 12 (CONT’D) APPLICATION NO. 2008/2265

88/0527/07 APPLICATION FOR AN ESTABLISHED USE CERTIFICATE FOR: BUILDING AND MAINTENANCE YARD. Decision: *HUNE - USE NOT ESTABLISHED Decision Date: 03/05/1988

2003/0506 Construction of detached dwelling Decision: Grant Permission Conditional Decision Date: 09/09/2003

RESPONSES TO CONSULTATIONS

TWO LETTERS OF OBJECTION have been received from one person within St Leger Crescent. The objections raised are as follows:

1. Building work appears to revolve around the construction of two storey flats / apartments rather than conventional housing which is not in keeping with the surroundings 2. We are unhappy about the positioning of such a building which seems to be entirely inappropriate. Our gardens will be in full sight of the occupants, therefore creating a breach of privacy.

APPRAISAL

Background

Full planning permission is sought for the completion and retention of a two storey detached house and garage on land to the rear of St Leger Crescent.

Full planning permission was granted on the 9the September 2003 for a detached dwelling (2003/0506).

However, following the determination of this application, the building was constructed not in accordance with the approved plans.

An enforcement notice was served on the 12 April 2007, and an appeal was subsequently submitted.

The appeal was dismissed on the 26/09/07, the Inspector coming to the following conditions;

• The building has been erected closer to both the northern and eastern boundaries that the consented dwelling • The building is approx 1m higher to the ridge than the approved scheme, but it is evident that the ground levels have been reduced by a metre, its height relative to neighbouring properties is similar to that approved. • The building is somewhat larger than that approved and contains several more openings including the first floor doors. AREA 1 DEVELOPMENT CONTROL COMMITTEE – 18TH AUGUST 2009

ITEM 12 (CONT’D) APPLICATION NO. 2008/2265

• The parties agreed at the hearing that as the building has been constructed in a materially different position to that approved, the breach of planning control was more accurately described as the “erection of a new dwelling” • The main issue in this case is the effect of the development on the living conditions of neighbouring residents, in particular in terms of any overbearing impact or overlooking. • Whist the appeal building affects the outlook of the occupiers of the nearest St Leger Crescent properties, I consider the separation distances is sufficient to ensure that it does not have an unacceptable intrusive effect on the neighbouring residents. • The main outlook from the proposed dwelling in the adjacent site to the north would not face the appeal building, its future occupiers would not be caused any unacceptable visual intrusion by the building. • Regarding overlooking, several of the additional openings contained within the appeal building are within the northern and eastern elevations, which are closer to neighbouring properties than the approved scheme and are mostly clear glazed. • The proximity of windows intended to serve habitable rooms on the east facing elevation means that the degree of overlooking of the adjacent rear gardens and the rear windows is intrusive. For the same reason, I consider that the overlooking from the north facing windows over the rear part of the adjacent residential plot would be unacceptable, especially as this area is the only land that could serve as its private outdoor amenity space • In my opinion, the impact of the dwelling on the privacy of existing and future neighbouring residents unacceptably affects the living conditions that they can legitimately expect to enjoy and that such harm cannot be mitigated by reasonable planning conditions.

These conclusions are important material considerations for the determination of the current application.

Description The property as built is a 2 storey detached house with an additional floor in the attic space. The detached garage shown on the plans has not been constructed. The site lies between houses within St Leger Crescent and Sebastopol Street to the east and west, and to the north of the site is a large plot which has planning permission for 1 detached house. (Outline permission 2006/0019 & reserved matters permission 2006/2761)

The site is accessed from an existing lane from St Leger Crescent.

Visual and Residential Amenity In terms of the visual appearance of the house as built, it does not significantly vary in style from that previously approved. The Inspector noted that the house as built is approx 1m higher to the ridge than the approved scheme, however the excavation of the land results in the actual roof height in comparison with surrounding properties being similar to that approved, and in this regard the application is considered to be acceptable. It is noted however, that the height of the approved house was 7.4m to the ridgeline, and the submitted plans for the retention of the house as built show the height to be 8.9m to the ridgeline, some 1.5m higher than that which was previously approved. This is discussed in more detail below. AREA 1 DEVELOPMENT CONTROL COMMITTEE – 18TH AUGUST 2009

ITEM 12 (CONT’D) APPLICATION NO. 2008/2265

The design of the house is functional and does not contain any particular architectural features. As the site is located in a ‘back-land’ site, it does not form part of the streetscene in any of the surrounding streets, and in this instance it is not considered that it detracts from the visual appearance of the area and in this regard, and as such is considered to be acceptable.

With regard to overbearing impacts, the Inspector noted that he considered the separation distances to be sufficient not to have an overbearing impact on residents in St Leger Crescent and the new residential plot to the north. Within the Inspector’s decision, he noted that the house was approximately 1m higher than that which was approved.

Further amended plans have now been received which accurately show the house as built, and it is noted that the house is 1.5m taller than previously approved. The original approved plans did not specify site levels nor require them to be approved. It was noted by the Inspector that site levels had been reduced and he was satisfied that “its height relative to neighbouring properties is similar to that approved”. It is not clear how much the site levels have been reduced but it is not considered that the latest plans change the context in which he considered the appeal as the building was in situ at the time. It is not considered that the Inspector misdirected himself when referring to “approximately 1 metre” when the difference in height was, more accurately, 1.5 metres.

Within the approved application, the house would have been situated between 9 – 10.6m away from the boundary with St Ledger Crescent. The house as built is located between 3.05m – 4.7m from the boundary resulting in it being between 5.9m and 4.8m closer to the existing houses in St Ledger Crescent.

It is important to note however that the building has been constructed at the time of the Appeal Inspectors site visit and it is only reasonable to assume that his conclusions were based on his assessment of the building in situ. He acknowledges in his decision letter the disputed differences in opinion between the Council and the appellant in relation to siting but concluded that “this point is not significant to my findings in any of the grounds of appeal”.

It is noted that the existing rear gardens of the houses in St Ledger Cres are approx 11- 12m in depth. The actual distance between the rear elevations of the houses in St Ledger Cres and the side elevation of the house therefore measures between 15.7m – 16.2m.

This distance is in excess of the minimum recommended between the rear of properties and the side element of others in the Householder Design Guide for house extensions, which is 12m. The new house is also set at a lower level to the properties in St Ledger Crescent. It is not considered therefore that the conclusions of the Inspector in respect of the effect of the development on the rears of the properties in St Ledger Crescent can be challenged. It is not considered therefore that the development will have an unacceptable overbearing effect on neighbouring properties, particularly when fully rendered.

With regard to overlooking, the applicant has addressed this issue, by an internal reconfiguration of rooms and the removal of the first floor windows within the eastern and northern elevations. Within the northern elevation, the only first floor window (facing the new residential plot to the north) is an obscurely glazed window serving a shower room. In this regard, the dwelling as built would not overlook the new development plot to the north. AREA 1 DEVELOPMENT CONTROL COMMITTEE – 18TH AUGUST 2009

ITEM 12 (CONT’D) APPLICATION NO. 2008/2265

With regard to the eastern elevation facing properties in St Leger Crescent, the first floor and attic windows have been removed from the elevation.

With regard to the impact upon houses in Sebastopol Street, the Inspector did not comment, and given the separation distance of approx 20.3m and intervening rear garden walls, it is considered that the house as built would not cause an unacceptable overlooking impact to houses in Sebastopol Street. It is noted that the attic window serving bedroom 5 has been removed from the scheme.

With regard to the layout and accommodation within the house as built, it is shown to be a 6 bed house with bedrooms 1 & 2 on the ground floor, bedrooms 3 and 4 on the first floor and bedrooms 5 and 6 in the attic space. All of the rooms within the house are of a sufficient size and all have natural light.

These internal arrangements have not been approved under the Building Regulations and will need to be amended to provide internal fire protection to the stairwell arrangements. However, all of the habitable rooms have natural light, clear glazed windows and are naturally ventilated and it is not considered that these will be compromised by any internal fire protection measures required under the Building Regulations so as to affect the external elevations or the living conditions of future residents. A condition removing permitted development rights is however considered necessary to prevent new window openings being formed in the eastern or northern elevations of the dwelling, with a resultant loss of privacy.

Access and Highway Safety Highway officers consider that although no parking details have been indicated, the plot is of a sufficient size to provide adequate parking, and therefore, no highway objections are raised.

Conclusions It is considered that having regard to all material considerations, the amendments now included in the current application have addressed the sole grounds of concern expressed by the Inspector when he dismissed the previous appeal i.e. that of overlooking and loss of privacy. Whilst it is regrettable that the development has not been built in accordance with the originally approved plans the current application must be determined on its merits. In that respect it is not considered the development would have an unacceptable overbearing effect or result in unacceptable overlooking or loss of privacy to neighbours, subject to being completed in accordance with the submitted plans. Conditions removing permitted development rights, allowing for some internal alterations to take pace if necessary to accord with Building Regulation requirements are however considered essential. Conditional approval is therefore recommended.

RECOMMENDATION

APPROVE, subject to the following conditions: AREA 1 DEVELOPMENT CONTROL COMMITTEE – 18TH AUGUST 2009

ITEM 12 (CONT’D) APPLICATION NO. 2008/2265

1 The dwelling shall be completed in accordance with the plans hereby approved, subject to any minor internal alterations as may be required in order to comply with Building Regulations (those amendments to be agreed with the Local Planning Authority), prior to the occupation of the dwelling. The dwelling shall not be occupied until completion of the building works to the dwelling. Reason: To ensure the development is completed in accordance with the approved plans and is not brought into beneficial use before then.

2 Notwithstanding the provisions of the Town and Country Planning (General Permitted Development) Order 1995 (or any Order revoking or amending that Order, Classes A, B, C and E of Part 1 to Schedule 2 shall not apply. No additional window openings shall be formed in any external wall at any time. Reason: To protect the amenities of neighbouring residents.

3 Within 6 months of the beneficial occupation of the dwelling the application site shall be enclosed, cleared of all building materials, other than that required to complete the approved development, and the driveway and garden area as set out in the approved site layout plan surfaced and landscaped, all in accordance with a detailed scheme to be submitted to and approved by the Local Planning Authority. The dwelling shall be vacated if these works are not completed. Reason: To ensure the development provides for adequate access, parking and amenity space in the interests of the residential amenity of occupants, and the visual amenity of the occupants of the neighbouring properties.

4 The dwelling shall be occupied at all times as a single dwelling house and not subdivided into more than 1 residential property at any time. Reason: To avoid an overintensification of use, in the interests of the residential amenity of the occupants of the property and of neighbouring properties.

INFORMATIVES

PLANS

Site location plan, supporting statement received 14th October 2008. Amended site layout, block plan and cross section received 3rd February 2009, Amended existing and proposed elevations received 08 April 2009.

AREA 1 DEVELOPMENT CONTROL COMMITTEE

Councillors:

V N Abbott (Vice Chairman) R J Lloyd (Non-Voting) P M Black (Non-Voting) P M Matthews (Non-Voting) N S Bradley P N May J E Burtonshaw J T Miles A R A Clement (Chairman) J Newbury W J F Davies H M Morris C R Doyle B G Owen J Evans D Phillips R Francis-Davies (Non-Voting) S J Rice M E Gibbs I M Richard J B Hague D A Robinson M J Hedges G Phillips C A Holley P B Smith (Non-Voting) D T Howells R Speht D H Hopkins R J Stanton B J Hynes R C Stewart D H James D G Sullivan W E A Jones (Non-Voting) C Thomas Mervyn R Jones J M Thomas Mary H Jones L G Thomas E T Kirchner (Non-Voting) S M Waller Thomas R D Lewis J Woodman(Non-Voting) A Lloyd