4th January 2012
20871513
To: Members of the Council
Dear Councillor
Planning Committee Wednesday 11th January 2012 at Ferrier Hall, City Hall, Cardiff (meeting starts at 2.30.p.m.)
I attach a copy of the schedule of Development Control Applications which will be considered at this meeting of the Planning Committee.
The plans relating to the applications will be available for inspection at the City Hall, during the whole of Tuesday and Wednesday morning preceding the Committee.
Unless otherwise stated in the report, Planning Committee has delegated powers to determine the applications in the schedule. Planning Committee (but not an individual member) can also refer a matter to another committee or to the Council for a resolution. However, Council cannot move an amendment to a recommendation relating to a planning application or make a recommendation relating to a planning application and can only refer a matter back to Planning Committee on one occasion, after which Planning Committee shall decide the matter.
Please now note that if any requests for site visits are acceded to by the meeting, such site visits will take place during the afternoon of Monday 30th January 2012. If you submit a request for a site visit, you must include in your submission -
(a) a choice of at least two starting times for the site visit that you are requesting, each of which must be at least 45 minutes apart; and (b) the reasons why you believe that such a site visit is necessary.
If you fail to provide any choices of starting times for the site visit that you've requested, it will be assumed that you will be available to attend such a site visit at any time of the day, regardless of what time it starts.
The Clerk to the Council will circulate the Agenda for the meeting to the Members of the Planning Committee separately.
Yours sincerely
Strategic Planning and Development Manager
CARDIFF COUNTY COUNCIL PLANNING COMMITTEE
THE REPORTS OF THE CHIEF STRATEGIC PLANNING AND ENVIRONMENT OFFICER
LIST OF DEVELOPMENT APPLICATIONS FOR CONSIDERATION BY THE PLANNING COMMITTEE ON 11TH JANUARY 2012 AT 2.30PM
AREA PAGES
HOUSEHOLDER 1 - 29
OUTER 30 - 191
INNER 192 - 315
CARDIFF LOCAL DEVELOPMENT PLAN
When regard is to be had to the Development Plan the Council’s decision must be made in accordance with the Plan unless material considerations indicate otherwise.
The Development Plan for the administrative area of Cardiff remains the City of Cardiff Local Plan (1996), the South Glamorgan (Cardiff Area) Replacement Structure Plan (1997) and the South Glamorgan (Cardiff Area) Minerals Local Plan together with the approved Mid Glamorgan County structure Plan incorporating Proposed Alterations No.1 (September 1989).
In accordance with statutory procedures, the Council prepared and placed on deposit a Unitary Development Plan (to 2016) in October 2003. It has never been formally abandoned but agreement was reached with the Welsh Assembly Government in May 2005 to cease work on the UDP and commence work on a new Local Development Plan prepared under the provisions of the Planning and Compulsory Purchase Act 2004.
On the 28 April 2009 Cardiff Council placed the Cardiff Local Development Plan 2006- 2021 on deposit for public consultation. From that date, and in accordance with the Council’s resolution, it was taken into account in development control decisions. On the 30th November 2009, following consideration of the responses to consultation, the submission draft was submitted to the Welsh Assembly Government for examination.
However, in the light of the significant reservations expressed at an Exploratory Meeting by the Inspectors appointed to carry out the examination and their recommendation that the Local Development Plan be with drawn from the examination, the Council duly withdrew the LDP on the 12 April 2010.
Unless a draft policy or proposal is a material consideration it should not be taken into account when making decisions: it is strictly irrelevant and if it is given weight in reaching a decision, that decision may be successfully quashed in the High Court.
In the general run of cases the withdrawn Local Development Plan will not be a material consideration. If there is an issue in relation to which the withdrawn LDP is relevant, officers will advise the Committee specifically. Otherwise it should not be taken into account.
Since the deposited UDP has not been abandoned, its policies and proposals may be a material consideration in a given case, but the weight which can be attached to the UDP, and any statement of policy including the statutory Development Plan should be determined in the light of the following principal considerations:-
• The degree to which later statements of national policy and the Wales Spatial Plan make the policy out of date and suggest a decision should be taken otherwise than in accordance with it; • The degree to which the policy is out of date for any other reason; • The level and nature of any objection to a UDP or other draft policy.
Table 1.1: Existing Development Plans covering the Cardiff County Area
Cardiff County Area Cardiff Deposit Unitary Development The Plan was placed on deposit in Plan (to 2016) October 2003 and agreement was reached with Welsh Assembly Government in May 2005 to cease work on the plan and commence work on a new Local Development Plan.
City of Cardiff Area (part of the County of South Glamorgan until April 1996) South Glamorgan (Cardiff Area) Adopted April 1997 Replacement Structure plan 1991- 2011
City of Cardiff Local Plan (including Adopted January 1996 Waste Policies)
South Glamorgan (Cardiff Area) Adopted June 1997 Minerals Local Plan Pentyrch Community Area (part of the County of Mid Glamorgan and Borough of Taff Ely until April 1996) Mid Glamorgan County Structure Plan Approved September 1989 incorporating Proposed Alterations No. 1 Mid Glamorgan Replacement Structure Modifications to the Plan including Plan recommendations of the EIP Panel approved by Mid Glamorgan County Council in January 1996 but not adopted in respect of the Pentyrch Community Area.
Glamorgan County Development Plan Approved March 1963 (Area No. 2)
Mid Glamorgan Minerals Local Plan for In June 1996 Cardiff County Council Limestone Quarrying resolved to approve the Plan as modified by the Inspector’s Report, for development control and other planning purposes, but the Plan was not adopted in respect of the Pentyrch Community Area.
PLANNING COMMITTEE 11TH JANUARY 2012 Page No. App No. Location Description Decision Officer 11/01458/DCH ROCKY BANK, CONSTRUCTION OF TWO STOREY GRANNY PER CJE 1 GARTH HILL, ANNEXE EXTENSION TO SIDE AND TWO STOREY GWAELOD-Y-GARTH, EXTENSION TO REAR OF EXISTING DWELLING, CARDIFF, CF15 9HS LINK TO EXISTING DWELLING AND ASSOCIATED ENGINEERING AND RETAINING WORKS 11/01933/DCH 38 HEOL DON, RETENTION AS BUILT OF SINGLE STOREY REF ODJ 21 WHITCHURCH, EXTENSION CARDIFF, CF14 2AS
PLANNING COMMITTEE - 11 JANUARY, 2012
Page App No. Location Description Decision Officer No 30 10/2301/DCO WHITCHURCH HOSPITAL, MODIFICATION OF CONDITIONS 1C AND 1D OF 106 MR PARK ROAD, PLANNING PERMISSION 95/1195N FOR MIXED USE WHITCHURCH, CARDIFF, DEVELOPMENT AT WHITCHURCH HOSPITAL CF14 7XB COMPRISING HOSPITAL, RESIDENTIAL, LEISURE, EMPLOYMENT, COMMUNITY AND RETAIL USES WITH PLAYING FIELDS(AS MODIFIED BY PLANNING PERMISSION 05/2689W) TO ALLOW EXTENSION OF TIME PERIOD FOR SUBMISSION OF RESERVED MATTERS APPLICATIONS AND FOR COMMENCEMENT OF DEVELOPMENT,FOR AN ADDITIONAL FIVE YEARS.
47 11/425/DCO 4 GERNANT & PART OF DEVELOPMENT OF LARGE REAR AND SIDE PER MR LAND AT 15 CLOS BRYN GARDEN OF BUNGALOW PLOT FOR RESIDENTIAL DERI, RHIWBINA, USE WITH ACCESS FROM 14 CLOS BRYN DERI CARDIFF, CF14 6NA AND 15 CLOS BRYN DERI 69 11/428/DCO 4 GERNANT & PART OF DEVELOPMENT OF LARGE REAR AND SIDE PER MR LAND AT 14 & 15 CLOS GARDEN OF BUNGALOW PLOT FOR RESIDENTIAL BRYN DERI, RHIWBINA, USE WITH ACCESS FROM 14 & 15 CLOS BRYN CARDIFF, CF14 6NA DERI 90 11/429/DCO 4 GERNANT & PART OF DEVELOPMENT OF LARGE REAR AND SIDE PER MR LAND AT 14 CLOS BRYN GARDEN OF BUNGALOW PLOT FOR RESIDENTIAL DERI, RHIWBINA, USE WITH ACCESS FROM 14 CLOS BRYN DERI CARDIFF, CF14 6NA 111 11/1205/DCO LLANISHEN FACH PROPOSED RELOCATION OF EXISTING PRE- PER HMW PRIMARY SCHOOL, HEOL FABRICATED BUILDING TO SITE, ALTERATIONS UCHAF, RHIWBINA, TO EXISTING CAR PARKING AND VEHICULAR CARDIFF, CF14 6SS ACCESS ARRANGEMENTS 125 11/1359/DCO TYLA MORRIS FARM, RETENTION OF USE OF LAND FOR PER APB CHURCH ROAD, RECREATIONAL PAINTBALL GAMES, TOGETHER PENTYRCH, CARDIFF, WITH ERECTION OF ANCILLARY STRUCTURES. CF15 9QN 142 11/1894/DCO EGLWYS WEN/MELIN PROPOSED EXTENSION AND REFURBISHMENT PER MR GRUFFYDD SCHOOLS, OF THE EXISTING SCHOOLS PLUS ASSOCIATED ERW LAS, WHITCHURCH, EXTERNAL WORKS CARDIFF, CF14 1NL 162 11/1895/DCO EGLWYS NEWYDD DEMOLITIONS EXTENSIONS INTERNAL ADAPTION PER MR PRIMARY SCHOOL, AND REFURBISHMENT OF EXISTING BUILDINGS GLAN-Y-NANT ROAD, NEW MULTI USE GAMES AREA HARD COURT WHITCHURCH, CARDIFF, AREA AND EXTENDED CAR PARK CF14 1AP
PLANNING COMMITTEE - 11 January 2012
Page No. App No. Location Description Decision Officer 192 11/00833/DCI LAND ADJACENT TO 20 CONSTRUCTION OF A NEW SEMI-DETACHED/END WINDSOR ESPLANADE, TERRACE HOUSE ON AN EXISTING VACANT PLOT IN S106 LAD CARDIFF BAY CARDIFF BAY
209 11/01168/DCI STERLING WORKS, DEMOLITION OF WAREHOUSE BUILDING AND FORMER CLARENCE ROAD, CHURCH AND ERECTION OF 19 ONE AND TWO BED S106 LAD BUTETOWN, CARDIFF, APARTMENTS ON THE SITE CF10 5FA
231 11/01414/DCI LAND AT TALYBONT PROPOSED CONSTRUCTION OF NEW 179 BED, SEVEN GATE, BEVAN PLACE, STOREY STUDENT ACCOMMODATION. S106 RJC CARDIFF
264 11/01692/DCI 22-23 ST MARY STREET, Change of use and conversion of 1st, 2nd & 3rd floors at Nos. 22 CITY CENTRE, CARDIFF, & 23 St Mary Street from commercial offices to 10 No. self S106 RJC CF10 1AA contained flats for students. Commercial retail uses to be retained to ground floor units.
274 11/01893/DCI 22-23 ST MARY STREET, PROPOSED INTERNAL AND EXTERNAL ALTERATIONS TO CITY CENTRE, CARDIFF, FACILITATE CONVERSION OF 1ST 2ND AND 3RD FLOORS PERU RJC CF10 1AA TO SELF CONTAINED FLATS
278 11/01850/DCI 32 CITY ROAD, ROATH, CHANGE OF USE TO A3 CARDIFF, CF24 3DL REF OGR
286 11/01897/DCI 29 ALBANY ROAD, CHANGE OF USE OF GROUND FLOOR TO A REAL ALE BAR ROATH, CARDIFF, CF24 AND FIRST FLOOR TO ANCILLARY MEETING ROOM PER OAG 3LH
298 11/01946/DCI WORKING STREET EXTENSION AND EXTERNAL ALTERATIONS TO WORKING ENTRANCE QUEENS STREET FACADE OF QUEENS ARCADE S106 OAS ARCADE, CITY CENTRE
LOCAL MEMBER OBJECTION
COMMITTEE DATE: 11/01/2012
APPLICATION No. 11/01458/DCH APPLICATION DATE: 01/09/2011
ED: PENTYRCH
APP: TYPE: Householder
APPLICANT: Mr N King LOCATION: ROCKY BANK, GARTH HILL, GWAELOD-Y-GARTH, CARDIFF, CF15 9HS PROPOSAL: CONSTRUCTION OF TWO STOREY GRANNY ANNEXE EXTENSION TO SIDE AND TWO STOREY EXTENSION TO REAR OF EXISTING DWELLING, LINK TO EXISTING DWELLING AND ASSOCIATED ENGINEERING AND RETAINING WORKS
______
RECOMMENDATION 1: That planning permission be GRANTED subject to the following conditions:
1. The consent relates to the application as amended by the revised plans received on 18 October, 2011 and 24th November, 2011 attached to and forming part of this planning application. Reason: The plans amend and form part of the application.
2. This consent relates to the application as supplemented by the information contained in the letter from the applicant dated 16th October, 26th October and 24th November, 2011. Reason: The information provided forms part of the application.
3. C2I Ancillary Occupation
4. Notwithstanding the provisions of the Town and Country Planning (General Permitted Development) Order 1995 (or any Order amending, revoking or re-enacting that Order) no windows shall be inserted in the north elevation, other than the window shown on the approved plans. Reason : To ensure that the privacy of adjoining occupiers is protected.
5. Within three months of the date of this consent detailed drawings showing the construction of the proposed windows, doors and Juliet balconies shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The scheme shall be implemented in accordance with the approved details. Reason: To ensure that the character and appearance of the Conservation Area is preserved.
1 6. D7Z Contaminated materials
7. E7Z Imported Aggregates
8. The development hereby approved shall be undertaken in accordance with the tree protection requirements and recommendations detailed in the submitted Tree Assessment Survey dated January 2011 from James Pinder. Reason: To ensure that trees shown for retention are not harmed during construction works.
9. Prior to any felling, details of tree planting to replace the Ash (identified as T1 in the Tree Assessment) shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The replacement tree shall be planted in accordance with the approved details during the first planting season following the completion of the construction works and shall thereafter be retained and maintained. Reason: In the interests of visual amenity.
10. Notwithstanding the details illustrated on the approved plans, within three months of the date of this consent a planting scheme shall be submitted for the written approval of the Local Planning Authority. The submitted scheme shall include (but not be limited to) details of a climbing species that shall be allowed to cover the faces of the gabion retaining walls hereby approved. Reason: In the interests of visual amenity.
11. All planting, seeding, turf-laying and paving shown on the plans approved in respect of condition 10 above shall be carried out in the first planting and seeding season following the completion of development. Any retained or planted trees or plants which within a period of 5 years from the completion of development die, become seriously damaged or diseased, or (in the opinion of the Local Planning Authority) otherwise defective, shall be replaced in the planting season following their death with other of a similar size and species, unless the Local Planning Authority give written consent to any variation. Reason: To maintain and improve the appearance of the area in the interests of visual amenity.
12. Prior to the commencement of construction of the extensions hereby approved samples of the external finishing materials shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The extensions shall be constructed in accordance with the approved details. Reason: To ensure that the finished appearance of the development is in keeping with the area.
13. Within three months of the date of this consent details of the means of enclosure to the northern boundary of the site with no. 2 Sunny Bank
2 shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The means of enclosure shall be installed prior to the beneficial use of the development hereby approved and shall thereafter be retained and maintained. Reason: In the interests of privacy.
14. Within three months of the date of this consent details of a sight screen to the northern end of the gabion terraces shall be submitted for the written approval of the Local Planning Authority. The approved details shall be implemented prior to the beneficial use of the land forming the gabion terraces. Reason: In the interests of privacy.
15. The rooflight to the front roofslope shall be of a ‘Conservation’ design that shall be fitted so as to be flush with the roofslope. Reason: In the interests of visual amenity of the Gwaelod Y Garth Conservation Area.
RECOMMENDATION 2: This development falls within an area which has a geological predisposition to radon and will require basic radon protective measures, as recommended for the purposes of the Building Regulations 2000. Should you have any queries in this matter I would suggest you consult with my Building Control Division.
RECOMMENDATION 3: The contamination assessments and the affects of unstable land are considered on the basis of the best information available to the Planning Authority and are not necessarily exhaustive. The Authority takes due diligence when assessing these impacts, however you are minded that the responsibility for
(i) determining the extent and effects of such constraints and; (ii) ensuring that any imported materials (including, topsoils, subsoils, aggregates and recycled or manufactured aggregates / soils) are chemically suitable for the proposed end use. Under no circumstances should controlled waste be imported. It is an offence under section 33 of the environmental Protection Act 1990 to deposit controlled waste on a site which does not benefit from an appropriate waste management license. The following must not be imported to a development site: • Unprocessed / unsorted demolition wastes. • Any materials originating from a site confirmed as being contaminated or potentially contaminated by chemical or radioactive substances. • Japanese Knotweed stems, leaves and rhizome infested soils. In addition to section 33 above, it is also an offence under the Wildlife and Countryside Act 1981 to spread this invasive weed; and
(iii) the safe development and secure occupancy of the site rests with the developer.
Proposals for areas of possible land instability should take due account of the physical and chemical constraints and may include action on land reclamation
3 or other remedial action to enable beneficial use of unstable land.
The Local Planning Authority has determined the application on the basis of the information available to it, but this does not mean that the land can be considered free from contamination.
RECOMMENDATION 4: Bats often roost in houses and other buildings, and work on these buildings may disturb a bat roost. All bats and their roosts are protected against disturbance under UK and European legislation. If works are planned on a building in which bats are roosting, the Countryside Council for Wales (CCW) must be contacted. They must be given reasonable time to advise as to whether the works should be carried out and, if so, the method to be used. This legislation does not apply to bats in the living area of a dwelling-house.
If work has already commenced and bats are found, or if any evidence that bats are using the site as a roost is found, work should cease and CCW should be contacted immediately.
For buildings other than a dwelling-house, no works of site clearance, demolition or construction should take place unless a licence to disturb these species has been granted in accordance with the relevant legislation.
The Cardiff office of CCW can be contacted at :
Unit 7, Castleton Court Fortran Road St Mellons Cardiff CF3 0LT Tel : 02920 772400 Fax : 02920 772412
For further advice on bats please contact :
The Bat Conservation Trust Unit 2, 15 Cloisters House 8 Battersea Park Road London, SW8 4BG Tel : 02920 7627 2629 Fax : 020 7627 2628
1. DESCRIPTION OF PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT
1.1 An amended application in two parts, for the construction of 2no. two storey extensions to the rear and side of an existing cottage dwelling with the construction of a retaining wall to the side/rear, and for the undertaking of ground works to create a terraced garden including the placement of stone retaining walls contained within steel wire gabion baskets and the placement of shallow timber retaining ‘steps’ to a re-modelled area of sloping garden to
4 the front/side of the dwelling.
It should be noted that considerable unauthorised groundworks have already taken place which do not reflect the original ground levels.
1.2 The proposed two storey rear extension measures approx. 3.0m deep (max.) x 9.9m wide x 5.3m high with a flat roof and has been amended to remove reference to two bridges at first floor level to a ‘raised garden’. These bridges have been replaced by Juliet balconies with glazed balustrades. The extension is to be finished in rendered stone and hardwood windows and doors.
The proposed ‘L’ shaped side extension is intended to create additional ‘granny annexe’ living accommodation. This extension measures approx. 8.8m across the proposed rear elevation and is a maximum of approx. 7.7m deep to the front gable end. The front gable end is approx. 5.0m wide and has a return to the ‘front elevation’ of the remainder of the extension of approx, 2.9m. The proposed extension has a maximum height of approx. 6.1m, reducing to approx. 4.1m at eaves. There is a small, pitched roof dormer window set directly off the wall plate to the small inner return elevation. The extension is to be finished in rendered stone, with hardwood windows and doors and a Spanish slate roof.
A retaining wall of approx. 1.5-1.7m height is required to the rear and partial side of the new structure as the development requires the removal of part of the steep ground to the rear of the original dwelling.
1.3 The proposed terracing to the front garden is to be undertaken predominantly utilising stone filled gabion baskets (already partially in place), creating three flat levels of ground, with the remainder of the ground to the northern side of the terraces (up to the boundary) and to the front of the first terrace (to the boundary with the lane) being sloping.
The ground within the curtilage of the dwelling is raised from the access lane. The sloping ground to the front of the first terrace will slope up for approx. 5.5m depth from a ground level of approx. 44.4m Above Ordnance Datum (AOD) up to approx. 46.0m AOD at the base of the first terrace gabion.
The first terrace gabion increases the ground height to approx. 47.5m AOD for a depth of approx. 3.3-3.7m to the base of the second terrace gabion.
The second terrace gabion increases the ground height to approx. 48.8m AOD for a depth of approx. 2.6m to the base of the third terrace gabion.
The third terrace is the ground level at the dwelling and at a height of approx. 49.4m AOD.
The gabion terraces measure approx. 9.0m in width across the garden, with a further gabion wall at the base of the garden (adjacent to the lane) extending the full width of the garden. The gabion walls finish approx. 8.0-8.5m away
5 from the boundary to the adjacent dwelling at no. 2 ‘Sunny Bank’, with this ground gradually sloping to meet the existing boundary fence at generally the same level (as indicated on the submitted plans).
The area of land to the north of the gabion terraces has a step of approx. 1.4m at the level of the second terrace. This step is to be formed by a timber stake and bar retaining ‘wall’, with a set of steps set close to the northern boundary. The submitted plans indicate a new line of hedge planting set approx. 1.5m off the northern boundary, extending from the front boundary enclosure to the top of the existing garden area.
1.4 The groundworks details have been amended to reduce the width of the gabion terraces (increasing the space between them and the northern boundary to no. 2 ‘Sunny Bank’), and to better define the layout of the remaining land to the north and east of the terraces.
2. DESCRIPTION OF SITE
2.1 Rocky Bank is a house situated within a large (c 0.1 ha) plot on steeply sloping ground which falls from the rear to the front (east to west). It is located near the end of a private cul de sac and has two parking spaces and a garage adjacent to the road below the house. To the rear of the existing house and site of the proposed annex is a copse of mature trees which screen the site from the rear (uphill) side. A shelter is situated on the site boundary to the north of the proposed annex adjacent with the boundary to 2 Sunny Bank. A mature tree is located immediately to the north east of the proposed side extension.
2.2 Two storey houses of similar architectural style are located to the north and south of Rocky Bank built at similar level and sharing the same access (Sunny Bank and Llwyn Onn). On the other side of the access at a lower level are dwellings of a different visual character.
2.3 The application site is within the Gwaelod Y Garth Conservation Area.
3. PLANNING HISTORY
3.1 09/551W – 2 storey extension to rear and single storey extension – Approved. 10/1299DCH – 2 Storey granny annexe extension – Refused. 10/2169DCH – 2 storey granny annexe extension – Approved.
4. POLICY FRAMEWORK
4.1 Mid Glamorgan County Structure Plan (Incorporating Proposed Alterations No. 1) Policy LC13 (Presumption against development likely to affect adversely the character of conservation areas)
4.2 Deposit Cardiff Unitary Development Plan (Deposit Written Statement)
6 Policy 2.20 (Good Design) Policy 2.24 (Residential Amenity) Policy 2.53 (Conservation Areas)
4.3 Supplementary Planning Guidance, Householder Design Guide.
4.4 Gwaelod Y Garth Conservation Area Appraisal.
5. INTERNAL CONSULTEE RESPONSES
5.1 The Operational Manager Transportation has no objection, subject to conditions requiring the provision of three off street parking spaces and a construction management plan.
5.2 The Council’s Ecologist has no objection, but requests that advice regarding Bats be included in any consent.
5.3 The Council’s Tree Protection Officer has no objection in light of the additional information received on the 16th October 2011 and the Tree Assessment, subject to a condition relating to replacement tree planting as per planning permission 10/2169DCH.
5.4 The Waste Manager has no observations or objections
5.5 The Pollution Control Manager has no objection subject to imported soils and aggregates conditions and advice regarding Radon gas and contaminated land.
5.6 The Council’s Structural Manager has provided informal advice in respect of the groundworks from an engineering perspective insofar as the submitted analysis has been carried out in accordance with the correct codes. He recommends that the developer confirms that reasonable professional skill and care has been taken in the preparation of the details.
6. EXTERNAL CONSULTEE RESPONSES
6.1 Glamorgan Gwent Architectural Trust have no objection.
6.2 The North West Cardiff Conservation Group object to the proposals for the following reasons:
• Re-affirm previous concerns; • Out of keeping with the area; • Negative impact on neighbours; • Detrimental to the street scene; • May set a dangerous precedent; • Disappointed that it appears that part of this is retrospective planning; • Due regard needs to be given to existing trees if planning permission is granted; • Unsympathetic development;
7 • Concern about additional developments not on approved plan – dormer window(s), roof light.
7. REPRESENTATIONS
7.1 Councillor C Williams makes the following comment:
“Can I formally object to this application and echo the objections below (a reference to the objections raised by Pentyrch Community Council).
I have previously requested a site visit, which has been registered.”
7.2 Pentyrch Community Council objects to the proposals on the following grounds:
• The scale of the extension does not achieve harmony with the form and scale of the area and therefore represents an overdevelopment of the site; • Concerns are raised in respect of the degree of disruption that will be caused within the village by traffic during works to implement any development; • There are concerns in respect of the impact of the proposals on trees which are not dispelled by the Tree Assessment; • The gabion baskets will detract from the conservation area;
Further to the above, the following comments are also made in respect of amended details received:
• The combination of the terraces will result the gabions presenting a 7.5m high wall when viewed from the lane, adjoining properties and from the other side of the valley. This is overbearing, out of keeping with neighbouring properties and will be detrimental to the integrity of the village conservation area; • The previous concerns raised by the Council remain valid. • The Council is concerned that unauthorised development appears to be taking place that flies in the face of the ethos of the conservation area and in ignorance of planning regulations.
The Community Council request that the application be considered by Planning Committee and that Planning Committee undertakes a site visit prior to making their determination.
7.3 Adjacent occupiers were consulted and the application was advertised on site and in the press in accordance with procedures. The occupiers of 2 Sunny Bank (via Carolyn Jones Planning Services), The Anchorage and another resident of Gwaelod Y Garth (no address given) object to the proposals on the following grounds:
8 • The submitted cross-sections are insufficiently detailed and insufficient engineering detail is submitted in respect of the retaining structures; • The scale of the ‘granny annexe’ is such that it is not an annexe, but a new dwelling that the applicant and his wife will occupy, whilst his daughter’s family will occupy the original house separately, for which additional parking is not provided; • The resulting building is out of character with the conservation area in terms of its scale, design and represents an overdevelopment of the site; • The groundworks will result in an unacceptable degree of overlooking into their garden, kitchen and private amenity space; • The gabions destroy the integrity of the hillside and introduce alien features which are out of character with the conservation area; • There are concerns over the engineering and construction of the retaining wall at the rear of the dwelling; • The proposals will cause unacceptable disruption to the village during construction by reason of excessive vehicle movements; • The land to the rear of the application dwelling was sold to the applicant with an attached covenant which precludes the removal of trees and construction works; • The loss of trees to the rear of the dwelling results in a loss of privacy to the occupiers of ‘The Anchorage’ to the rear of the application site.
In addition, the following comments are made by the occupier of no. 2 Sunny Bank in respect of amended plans and additional information received:
• The amended cross-sections do not overcome concerns; • The utilisation of the existing post and rail fence to the northern boundary of the application site to support any new fence will not be allowed; • The new fence, at approx. 2.0m to 2.5m high will cause overshadowing to the existing vegetable garden to no. 2 Sunny Bank and will result in their plans to expand their vegetable garden being abandoned; • The proposed hedge serves no purpose as it will take time to mature and the gaps will do little to protect privacy.
The occupier of 2 Sunny Bank requests that the application be considered by Planning Committee.
8. ANALYSIS
8.1 The main issues to consider are the acceptability of the design and appearance of the proposed extension works, the acceptability of the appearance of the proposed groundworks and their impact on the privacy and amenity of adjacent occupiers.
In considering the application, due weight is afforded to the extant planning permissions that exist for the construction of substantial rear and side two storey extensions. (See Planning History - para. 3 above).
9
Design & Appearance - Extensions
8.2 The Council’s Conservation and Design Officer’s comments on the rear extension proposals are:
“With regard to the rear elevation, the proposed extension is now of reduced design quality. Potential may exist for views of the extension to the rear/from the Garth due to the steep rise of the land. Regard should be had to the Householder Design Guide SPG. Generally extensions should be subservient to the main dwelling, in this case already significantly extended, and regard had to mass, form and roof design among other details. Consideration should be given to consulting the Design team on this extension.
It is not understood what ‘to the garden’ means on the plans. Are there to be bridges into the embankment are? If so what are the details? Is it intended that the trees currently on the embankment are to be cleared to create a garden? Tree loss would not be desirable. Trees in gardens are an important feature of the conservation area. The adopted conservation area appraisal for Gwaelod-y-Garth states ‘The main landscape character in the Conservation Area derives from woodlands and tree planting, rather than other lower level planting’. It is queried if a tree officer has been consulted with regard to this as they deal with trees in conservation areas.
With regard to the proposed rear retaining wall there is no objection.”
The main issue in respect of the rear extension is the effect on the character and appearance of the conservation area. There will be little, if any, impact on the amenities of neighbours.
It is considered that there will be no significant effect on the conservation area as the extension will be largely screened from public view to the rear of the dwelling, where it backs onto relatively steep sloping land then has significant tree coverage. Whilst it is noted that the current design is different to that previously approved (09/551W) it is considered that the current proposals would have less of a visual impact by reason of the reduced height.
With regard to the issue of the ‘bridges’ etc. these have been removed from the application. The application has been supplemented by a Tree Assessment, which has been considered by the Council’s Tree Protection Officer who has no objection. Whilst there is some regrettable loss of tree coverage on the site, it is unlikely the Council could sustain refusal of consent on these grounds.
8.3 The Council’s Conservation and Design Officer’s comments on the side annexe extension proposals are:
“As commented in previous applications the gable of the extension is inappropriate as it is not characteristic of traditional properties in the conservation area and the window style should match that of the majority of
10 windows on the original dwelling (a vertical rather than horizontal emphasis). However, it is acknowledged that despite these issues being raised previously a planning application was approved with similar details.
With regard to this application it is noted that the ground level is to be raised significantly where the extension is proposed. This alters the roof line of the proposed extension from the front elevation but is considered beneficial with regard to the skyline relative to that previously approved. Roof lights on front/prominent elevations are not good practice/normally acceptable in conservation areas. However, in this instance one small conservation grade roof light is acceptable subject to acceptable details being submitted. The dormer is considered inappropriate, unnecessary and should be removed.”
The site is located on a hillside within the Gwaelod Y Garth conservation area. It is considered therefore, that the primary design issue to assess is whether the development would preserve and enhance the character and appearance of the conservation area. The visual character of the part of the area in which the site is located comprises detached buildings set at different levels on the hillside. Rocky Bank is one of three building groups located at a similar level above their shared access road all of which have a linear terraced type appearance with traditional wall and roof materials. It is considered that the proposed annexe extension retains this linear emphasis. It is acknowledged that the extension would introduce a contrasting element as a result of the gable end. However, as this would be set forward of the existing front elevation, yet remaining a considerable distance (15m) from and several metres above the public viewpoint on the access lane, the gable form is considered to provide a visual stop to the front elevation and to not result in a form of building with an alien appearance in this setting. The lower level of the extension roof compared to the existing will also help ensure that the new structure does not appear incongruous.
The proposed dormer window is set into the roofslope that forms the internal return from the gable to the main front elevation. The dormer is of a modest size, with a dual pitched roof and would only be seen in its entirety when viewing the site from the south, along the access lane. Whilst it is acknowledged that the majority of the older dwellings in the area may not benefit from such features, there are a significant number of dwellings that do have dormers of a similar (and some larger) design. Given the setting and scale of the dormer window, it is considered that there would be no significant harm caused to the character of the conservation area by its presence.
Design & Appearance – Groundworks
8.4 The Council’s Conservation and Design Officer’s comments on the garden terracing proposals are:
“With regard to the terracing proposals, works had started at the time of site visit though on hold. Before views of the area prior to this work have not been submitted to help assess the impact. Retaining stone walls are traditionally found throughout the conservation area and are a feature of it. The gabion
11 walls proposed are different in appearance and construction to the traditional walls. Information has been provided as to the height and location of various gabion walls but cross sections would have been beneficial to illustrate the fall of the land as existing and proposed and the height of the gabions above ground level. Generally I would expect terraces to have retaining walls that reflect the appearance of traditional walling as has been done nearby. However, given the location of the property, the use of stone, proposals for landscaping and screening detailed in the application and the limited visibility of this property from public views on balance there is no objection subject to a condition being attached to any consent requiring implementation of landscaping and screening. A tree officer should be consulted with regard to type of species for screening and landscaping to the proposed gabions.”
The proposed gabion terraces and non-terraced land to the north have been amended in order to reduce the degree of wall and to reflect the previous character of the front of this dwelling. The gabion walls now extend approximately from the central access steps from the lane across the garden area to a point where a historic retaining wall to the top of the garden finished. (Historic aerial photography shows the retaining wall in its position generally where shown on the submitted plans). The proposed ground level to the front of the first gabion wall has been increased to reduce the extent of (the largest single area) exposed wall from approx 2.0m high (max.) to approx. 1.5m high (max.).
There is evidence to suggest that the application site and surrounding properties already benefit from terracing to the front garden areas. Whilst it is recognised that much of the terrace walling in the area is un-retained dry stone construction, it is considered that the use of gabion baskets to retain dry stone which will be the subject of landscaping and weathering, in a setting which has considerable visual screening from direct public views, will not cause significant harm to the character of the conservation area.
Impact on residential Amenity and Privacy - Extensions
8.5 It is considered that the proposed rear and side extensions are of a design and siting that they have little or no impact on the privacy or the amenity of adjoining occupiers.
With regard to the side extension, the windows to the front elevation would afford similar views to those that currently exist in the main dwelling. A single window is proposed to the side (north) elevation facing no. 2 Sunny Bank. A condition is recommended which seeks to ensure that no additional windows are inserted into the north elevation in the interests of privacy.
Impact on Privacy and Residential Amenity – Groundworks
8.6 The proposed groundworks have been amended in order to overcome concerns that were raised in the consideration of the planning application.
The gabion terraces have been reduced in width so as to be set approx. 8.0m
12 from the northern boundary of the site, adjoining 2 Sunny Bank. The remaining land between the terraces and the existing boundary fence is to be graded so that the land level at the boundary fence is generally the same. Further amendments to the proposed groundworks and site layout include the installation of a 2.0-2.5m high fence to the existing boundary and the intention to plant a Beech hedge approx. 1.5m off the boundary line. In addition, a further condition is recommended that will require the submission, approval and installation of sight screens to the northern end of the gabion terraces.
Having regard for the degree of overlooking that would have existed prior to the unauthorised groundworks that have taken place (and the degree of overlooking from property to property across the wider general area by nature of the lay of the land), the proposals for sight screening along the northern boundary, the sight screen condition and the amended distance from the levelled terraces to the northern boundary, it is considered that there would be no harm caused to the privacy of the occupiers of the adjacent property at no. 2 Sunny Bank that would reasonably warrant or sustain refusal of planning permission.
Whilst it is recognised that the placement of a 2.0m high fence to the established boundary line may result in some loss of direct light in the immediate vicinity of the boundary (on the northern side of any fence) it should be noted that the garden area to no. 2 Sunny Bank is considerable, with the main sitting out amenity space for the occupiers of that property being directly to the side of their dwelling, approx. 20m from the boundary. It is recognised that the occupiers of no. 2 Sunny Bank have a chicken shed and vegetable garden area close to the boundary with the application site, that may be impacted by the placement of any fence. However, the presence of the chicken shed and vegetable garden cannot reasonably be held as grounds for refusing the siting of a fence along this boundary (this is further compounded by the fact that the installation of a 2.0m high fence would be permitted development and could be undertaken without recourse to this application).
In light of the above, and having regard for the degree of separation from the boundary to the established main amenity area to no. 2 Sunny Bank, it is considered that there would be no sustainable grounds to refuse consent in terms of impact on residential amenity.
8.7 With regard to the objections raised in respect of the proposals the following comments are made:
North West Cardiff Conservation Group
• It is unclear what ‘previous concerns’ are referred to. The Group were consulted in respect of the three previous applications and the Council did not receive any comments in respect of application 10/1299DCH (granny annexe – refused) or application 10/2169DCH (granny annexe – approved). With regard to application 09/551W (2 storey rear
13 extension – approved) the Group found the proposals acceptable, subject to materials being in keeping with the existing building; • The proposals have been considered having regard for adopted planning policy, and in light of extant consents. The proposals are considered acceptable in terms of visual impact on the conservation area and neighbours, subject to conditions.
Pentyrch Community Council (echoed by Councillor C Williams)
• The proposed extensions have been considered in terms of their design, scale and setting. The annexe extension is subservient to the original dwelling, which maintains the historical linear pattern of the built form in the immediate area; • It is recognised that should planning permission be granted, there is likely to be some disruption during works to implement any consent. However, this is part & parcel of development and cannot reasonably be held as sustainable grounds for refusal of consent; • The development proposals, and the impact on trees on the site have been afforded due consideration by the Council’s Tree Protection Officer. No objections are raised. In this case, there would be no sustainable grounds to refuse consent in terms of impact on trees • The use of gabion baskets to retain stone has been considered above and having regard for the effect of weather in this exposed setting, the requirement for screen planting and the presence of existing screen planting, it is considered that the use of gabion baskets is acceptable; • The amended details reduce the degree of exposed wall created by the gabions. Notwithstanding this, views of the gabions from the lane would be significantly obscured by the existing tree and mature hedge enclosure to the front. The suggestion that the proposed gabions would prejudice the integrity of the conservation area in offering unacceptable aspects from the other side of the Taff river valley is unreasonable and would not sustain refusal of consent. • The request for Planning Committee to undertake a site inspection prior to determination of the application is noted. It is for members of Committee to determine whether this course of action is required.
Adjacent Occupiers
• The submitted plans are considered sufficient to allow the Local Planning Authority to make a reasonable assessment of the proposals in terms of their aesthetic impact. In addition, whilst the Council’s Structural Manager advises that the wider area has a history of land slips, he further advises that the submitted engineering analysis appears to have been carried out to the correct codes, but based on estimated soil properties. He recommends that the developer confirms that reasonable professional skill and care has been taken. The applicant’s Consulting Engineers have provided a letter which indicates that they are satisfied that, from an engineering perspective, the gabion walls and rear garden retaining wall proposals are adequate. As indicated above, the proposed groundworks are considered acceptable
14 aesthetically, and the LPA is satisfied that a qualified Engineer has indicated the proposals are acceptable; • The proposed annexe extension is clearly shown on the submitted plans as being linked internally to the existing dwelling. A condition is recommended that requires the annexe to be occupied as ancillary accommodation to the main dwelling. Which family members actually occupy the main dwelling or the annexe is immaterial to the consideration of the application; • The design scale and massing of the extensions are considered acceptable in context of the existing dwelling and surrounding land. The application site is a substantial plot and the proposals do not represent an overdevelopment of the site; • The issue of overlooking has been addressed above. A condition is recommended to secure a sight screen which will result in the proposed terraced areas not having any significant views into the kitchen of 2 Sunny Bank (which is approx. 20m from the shared boundary), or the sitting out area which is tucked behind their outbuildings. In addition, the proposals include the installation of a new fence to the northern boundary, with a beech hedge set inside the same boundary. Any change in the degree of overlooking that would result from the proposals, compared to the historical degree of overlooking that has existed, is therefore considered insufficient to sustain refusal of consent; • It is acknowledged that there is likely to be some localised disruption caused during development. However, this is an accepted consequence of any construction development and it is not a reasonable ground for refusal of consent; • The issue of any restrictive covenant on land sold between private parties is not material to the consideration of this application. The grant of planning permission would not supersede any other private legal requirements; • The difference in ground level to the rear of the application site, along with the degree of retained tree coverage is such that to refuse consent on grounds of loss of privacy to the occupiers of the property to the rear of the application site would be unreasonable and unsustainable; • The utilisation of the existing boundary fence to support any new fence is a private matter between the parties concerned. Notwithstanding this, a condition requiring the submission and approval of details of the means of enclosure is recommended; • The issue of overshadowing caused by any new fence along the shared boundary, and its impact on light has been addressed above. The presence of the vegetable garden area in proximity to the shared boundary cannot reasonably be held as grounds for refusal of consent; • It is recognised that hedge planting takes time to mature. However, it is understood that hedge plant can be acquired at later stages of growth which would reduce this timing. A landscaping condition is recommended which requires the submission and approval of planting details which can be considered in due course, should consent be granted;
15 • The request for Planning Committee to undertake a site inspection prior to determination of the application is noted. It is for members of Committee to determine whether this course of action is required.
8.8 In light of the above, having regard for adopted planning policy and having regard for the previously approved proposals, it is recommended that planning permission be granted, subject to conditions.
16 17 18 19 20 PETITION
COMMITTEE DATE: 11/01/2012
APPLICATION No. 11/01933/DCH APPLICATION DATE: 08/11/2011
ED: WHITCHURCH/TONGWYNLAIS
APP: TYPE: Householder
APPLICANT: Dr Catherine Davies LOCATION: 38 HEOL DON, WHITCHURCH, CARDIFF, CF14 2AS PROPOSAL: RETENTION AS BUILT OF SINGLE STOREY EXTENSION
______
RECOMMENDATION 1: That planning permission be REFUSED for the following reasons:
1. The extension, by virtue of its excessive length and height along with its siting adjacent to the boundary with 40 Heol Don, results in an unneighbourly and overbearing form of development which prejudices the amenities of No 40 Heol Don contrary to Policy 2.24 (Residential Amenity) of the Deposit Cardiff Unitary Development Plan (October 2003 and the advice contained within Chapter 6 of the Council approved Householder Design Guide: Supplementary Planning Guidance.
2. The extension by reason of its excessive bulk and mass results in an incongruous feature which is prejudicial to the visual amenities of neighbouring occupiers contrary to Policy 11 (Design and Aesthetic Quality) of the Cardiff Local Plan, policy 2.20 (Good Design) of the deposited Cardiff Unitary Development Plan and the advice contained within Chapter 5 of the Council approved Householder Design Guide: Supplementary Planning Guidance.
RECOMMENDATION 2: That the Chief Legal and Democratic Services Officer be authorised to issue an Enforcement Notice under Section 172 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 to secure the removal of the unauthorised extension.
1. DESCRIPTION OF PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT
1.1 Planning permission is sought to retain a single storey extension as built at 38 Heol Don, Whitchurch.
1.2 Planning permission 11/825/DCH approved a single storey side and rear extension. The extension was to be sited along the side of the dwelling and extending past the rear elevation of the dwelling replacing an existing garage
21 and garden room. This extension was to measure a total of 20.3m long, extending 13.4m past the rear elevation of the dwelling, 2.4m to eaves with a maximum height of 2.7m where adjacent to the dwelling and 3.85m where extending past the rear elevation of the dwelling. The extension had a mono- pitch roof with its maximum height adjacent to the northern boundary of the site.
1.3 The scheme approved by planning permission 11/825/DCH would have resulted in a development approximately 550mm higher than the adjoining garage at 40 Heol Don.
1.4 The development as built measures approximately 4.65m at its maximum height (4.25m from damp proof course (DPC)), 2.8m to eaves and projects 14.45m from the rear elevation of the dwelling. It should be noted that although the development is 800m higher than approved, the plans submitted with planning application 11/825/DCH did not take into account the difference in ground level at the application site compared to neighbouring properties. As the ground level at the application site is lower than that at No. 40 the extension as built is approximately 850 – 900mm higher than the existing garage at No. 40 rather than 550mm as approved by planning permission 11/825/DCH (a difference of approximately 300 – 350mm). It should also be noted that the extension is approximately 1.05m longer than that approved by planning permission 11/825/DCH.
1.5 The applicant has confirmed that the development is to be finished in render on all elevations including the northern elevation facing No. 40 Heol Don. The roof is finished in slates. The applicant has also confirmed her willingness to install trellis along the elevation of the extension facing No. 40 and provide soft landscaping to be grown up the trellis in an attempt to soften this elevation.
2. DESCRIPTION OF SITE
2.1 The application site is a semi detached dwelling within a residential location. The property is sited opposite to the Church Road Conservation Area. The rear garden is land locked with the neighbouring property to the north benefiting from a detached garage which is abutting the development.
3. SITE HISTORY
3.1 Planning Permission 11/825/DCH – Proposed Single Storey Side and Rear Extension – Approved 6th July 2011
3.2 Planning Permission 10/1714/DCH – Hip to gable roof extension with rear apex dormer and Juliet Balcony – Approved
3.3 Planning Permission 05/2370/W – First Floor Extension - Approved
4. POLICY FRAMEWORK
22 4.1 The site lies within an existing area of housing, as defined in the adopted City of Cardiff Local Plan (January 1996). The following Local Plan policy is relevant:
11 (Design and Aesthetic Quality)
4.2 The following policies from the deposit Unitary Development Plan (October 2003) are of relevance:
2.20 (Good Design) 2.24 (Residential Amenity)
4.3 The following Supplementary Planning Guidance is of relevance:
Householder Design Guide (March 2007)
5. INTERNAL CONSULTEES RESPONSES
5.1 None
6. EXTERNAL CONSULTEES RESPONSES
6.1 None.
7. REPRESENTATIONS
7.1 Local Council Members Linda Morgan and Mike Jones-Pritchard has requested that the application be determined by Planning Committee.
7.2 The occupiers of 34 and 39 Heol Don has no objection to the proposal. The occupiers of No 34 suggest that they have something similar constructed 25 years ago.
7.3 The occupier of 42 Heol Don object to the proposal for the following reasons: • The garden at No. 40 Heol Don is overshadowed by the development. • They were not notified of the original application • The occupiers of 42 Heol Don have lost 2-3 hours of morning sunlight within their garden. • The proposal sets a precedent for others in the area.
7.4 A petition signed by 7 people from Heol Don and Kelston Place has been submitted which objects to the development as it is out of character with the surrounding buildings, which are low pitched hip style roofs. They request the application is refused and the building lowered to the height of the existing neighbours garage as proposed.
7.5 A resident from Kelston Place is concerned that they were not notified of the application and that the development is out of character with the area. This neighbour has not provided her exact address within Kelston Place.
23
8. ANALYSIS
8.1 The main issues are how the proposal affect the character and appearance of the area and living conditions of neighbours.
8.2 It is considered that the extension approved by planning permission 11/825/DCH was on balance marginally acceptable as this was illustrated to replace an existing garage and outbuilding. What has been constructed on site is approximately 300 – 350mm higher and 1 metre longer. This additional length and height is considered to result in an unacceptable development in regards to both its design and relationship with neighbours.
8.3 The extension extends approximately 14.4m from the rear elevation of the dwelling and at its maximum, directly adjacent to the northern boundary of the site the extension measures approximately 4.65m. This results in a development approximately 4.2 – 4.3m high when viewed from the neighbouring property of 40 Heol Don. Due to this excessive height and length along with its siting adjacent to the southern boundary of 40 Heol Don, the proposal is considered to be overbearing and would cast an unacceptable shadow over the rear garden of No. 40. This results in the enjoyment of the rear garden of No. 40 being prejudiced, contrary to the advice contained within policy 2.24 of the deposited Unitary Development Plan and Chapter 6 of the Householder Design Guide.
8.4 Although the extension as built is of a similar design to that approved by planning permission 11/825/DCH its additional height and length results in a structure of additional mass when viewed from neighbouring properties. This additional mass and bulk is considered prejudicial to the visual amenities of the surrounding neighbours and accordingly contrary to policy 11 (Design and Aesthetic Control) of the Cardiff Local Plan
8.5 In regards to the comments made by the occupiers of 42 Heol Don and the petition signed by neighbours from Heol Don and Kelston Place the following should be noted: • No representation has been made by the occupier of 40 Heol Don on this application • The Town and Country Planning (General Development Procedure) Order 1995 require the Local Planning Authority to either notify all adjoining land owners in writing of a planning application being received or place a notice on or near to the site notifying the public. In regards to the consultation process carried out by both the current application and planning permission 11/825/DCH all adjoining land owners were written to consulting them on the applications. The occupier of 42 Heol Don although not adjoining the site was aware of the current proposal and has written to the Local Planning Authority. In addition the planning case officer has inspected the development from the rear garden of No. 42. • Although the development is approximately 10 – 11 metres from the garden at No 42 it could be argued that the proposal does adversely prejudice their visual amenities. Where the proposal might not restrict as much sun light as it does to the rear garden of No. 40, due to its excessive size it is
24 recognised that there is an issue that the extension has an overbearing appearance which could be considered to prejudice the enjoyment of the rear garden of No. 42. • Any further planning applications received for similar developments within this location will be determined based on its own merits. • It should be noted that the difference in ground level at the application site was not illustrated on the submitted plans approved by planning permission 11/825/DCH. It does not appear that this permission can be implemented. However, regard has to be had for the fact that a similar extension some 1.05m shorter in length and 350mm lower in height was approved at the application site. On balance the approved scheme was considered to be the maximum which could be considered acceptable by officers. What has been constructed is considered to be over and above this and has resulted in an inappropriate development for the context of the application site.
8.6 Accordingly, planning permission is recommended for refusal.
25 26 27 28 29 LOCAL MEMBER OBJECTION
COMMITTEE DATE: 11/01/2012
APPLICATION No. 10/2301/DCO APPLICATION DATE: 15/12/2010
ED: WHITCHURCH/TONGWYNLAIS
APP: TYPE: Renewal of previous permission
APPLICANT: DPDS Consulting LOCATION: WHITCHURCH HOSPITAL, PARK ROAD, WHITCHURCH, CARDIFF, CF14 7XB PROPOSAL: MODIFICATION OF CONDITIONS 1C AND 1D OF PLANNING PERMISSION 95/1195N FOR MIXED USE DEVELOPMENT AT WHITCHURCH HOSPITAL COMPRISING HOSPITAL, RESIDENTIAL, LEISURE, EMPLOYMENT, COMMUNITY AND RETAIL USES WITH PLAYING FIELDS (AS MODIFIED BY PLANNING PERMISSION 05/2689W) TO ALLOW EXTENSION OF TIME PERIOD FOR SUBMISSION OF RESERVED MATTERS APPLICATIONS AND FOR COMMENCEMENT OF DEVELOPMENT, FOR AN ADDITIONAL FIVE YEARS. ______
RECOMMENDATION: That, subject to persons having relevant interest in the application site entering into a binding planning obligation under SECTION 106 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 encompassing the matters referred to in paragraphs 5.7 and 8.14 of the Chief Strategic Planning and Environment Officer's report, planning permission be GRANTED for mixed use development at Whitchurch Hospital comprising, hospital, residential, leisure, employment, community and retail uses with playing fields without complying with conditions 1, 14 and 15 of planning permission 95/1195N dated 3rd July, 2001 (as modified by planning permission 05/2689W dated 27th May, 2010) but subject to conditions 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 16, 17, 18 and 19 of planning permission 95/1195N (as modified by planning permission 95/2689W) remaining in full force and effect and subject to the following replacement and additional conditions:
1. 1 A. Subject to condition 2 of planning permission ref. 95/1195/N granted by the Secretary of State on 30th July 2001, approval of the details of the layout, scale and appearance of the building(s), the means of access thereto and the landscaping of the site (hereinafter called the "reserved matters") shall be obtained from the Local Planning Authority in writing before any development is commenced.
1B. Plans and particulars of the reserved matters referred to in condition 1A above, relating to the siting, design and external appearance of any buildings to be erected, the means of access thereto and the landscaping of the site shall be submitted in writing to the Local Planning Authority and
30 shall be carried out as approved.
1C. Application for the approval of the reserved matters shall be made to the Local Planning Authority before the expiration of three years from the date of this permission.
1D The development hereby permitted shall be begun either before the expiration of 5 years from the date of this permission before the expiration of two years from the date of the last of the reserved matters to be approved, whichever is the later.
1E. The details to be submitted for approval in accordance with A above and the plans and particulars to be submitted under B above shall include details of the proposed means by which the listed buildings, including the chapel, are to be retained and converted and shall identify the use or uses to which these buildings are intended to be put. The requirement for approval of such details shall be in addition to any requirement of listed building consent which may need to be obtained before any proposed works to the listed buildings is carried out.
Reasons: A. In accordance with the provisions of Article (3)1 of the Town and Country Planning (General Development Procedure) Order 1995. C and D. In accordance with the provisions of Section 92 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990.
2. The dwellings hereby approved shall meet the BRE Code for Sustainable Homes (Version 3) Level 3, and shall obtain a minimum of 1 credit under Ene 1 (Dwelling Emissions Rate). Reason: To ensure that the development is constructed
3. Construction for any dwelling hereby permitted shall not begin until an ‘Interim Certificate’ has been submitted to the Local Planning Authority, certifying that a minimum Code for Sustainable Homes (Version 3) Level 3 and a minimum of 1 credit under Ene 1 (Dwelling Emission Rate) shall be achieved. Reason: To ensure that the development is constructed in accordance with national planning sustainable building standards.
4. Prior to occupation of the individual dwellings hereby permitted a Code for Sustainable Homes (Version 3) Level 3 ‘Final Certificate’ shall be submitted to the Local Planning Authority, certifying that a minimum Code for Sustainable Homes (Version 3) Level 3 and a minimum of 1 credit under Ene 1 (Dwelling Emissions Rate) has been achieved for the dwelling(s). Reason: To ensure that the development is constructed in accordance with national planning sustainable building standards.
5. No development shall take place until a site assessment, including ground permeability testing as appropriate, has been undertaken to determine the
31 practicality of utilising SUDS techniques such as soakaway drainage and permeable paving as a first option for the disposal of surface water run off, as well as other forms of sustainable drainage techniques and a drainage scheme for the disposal of both surface water and foul sewage has been submitted to and approved by the local planning authority. No part of the development shall be occupied until the scheme is carried out and completed as approved. Reason: To ensure an orderly form of development.
6. The details submitted in pursuance of condition 1 shall have regard to the designation within the application site of the historic park and garden known as ‘Whitchurch Hospital PGW (GM)66(CDF)’ which is included in the Register of Historic Parks and Gardens in Wales. Reason: In the interest of protecting the historic environment.
7. Prior to the commencement of development, a detailed survey of the grassland within the Whitchurch Green Field Site of Nature Conservation Importance (SINC) shall be undertaken, and a report detailing findings of the survey together with a management plan for the undeveloped part of the SINC shall be submitted to and approved by the local planning authority. The Management Plan shall be implemented in accordance with the approved details such that the non-residual area of the SINC shall be returned to favourable management and shall ensure ongoing monitoring of this area in the future to ensure improvement in the condition of the SINC. Reason: To protect the remaining grassland within the Whitchurch Green Field Site of Improvement for Nature Conservation.
RECOMMENDATION 2: To protect the amenities of occupiers of other premises in the vicinity attention is drawn to the provisions of Section 60 of the Control of Pollution Act 1974 in relation to the control of noise from demolition and construction activities. Further to this the applicant is advised that no noise audible outside the site boundary adjacent to the curtilage of residential property shall be created by construction activities in respect of the implementation of this consent outside the hours of 0800-1800 hours Mondays to Fridays and 0800 - 1300 hours on Saturdays or at any time on Sunday or public holidays. The applicant is also advised to seek approval for any proposed piling operations.
1. DESCRIPTION OF PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT
1.1 Outline planning permission for a mixed use development at Whitchurch Hospital was granted on 30th July, 2001 by the National Assembly for Wales (planning application 95/1195N). In November 2005, Cardiff and Vale NHS Trust submitted an application to modify conditions 1C and 1D of this planning permission to allow an extension of the time period for submitting reserved matters and the commencement of development for an additional 5 years. The application was granted by Planning Committee in March, 2006, subject to consequential amendments to the planning agreement. Revisions to the agreement were concluded in 2010 and the permission to modify the
32 conditions was issued in May 2010, and permitted the submission of reserved matters until 30th July, 2011.
1.2 The agents for the current application advise that the expectation of the Cardiff and Vale University Health Board (formerly the Cardiff and Vale NHS Trust) had been that the health use of the existing buildings would have been relinquished prior to the expiration of the latest permission and that the site would have been disposed of to a development company, the proceeds being devoted to other health projects. However, they advise changes to the Board’s service delivery strategy have meant that progress in respect of the site has not been as originally envisaged, and, that as a consequence the Board wish to extend the lifetime of the planning permission for a further five years.
1.3 The principle of the development has been established and there are no proposed changes to the substance of the application from that approved in July, 2001 and modified by the 2005 application, where the parameters of the development were limited by conditions. In particular, condition 2 sought to develop the site in accordance with ‘plan D07/A and to levels no higher than indicated in the table headed Development Densities on plan D/07A.
1.4 The table reads as follows:
SITE AREA(ha) USE DENSITY# SIZE A 2.51 Grazing - - B 2.74 Landscape - - Buffer D1 1.67+ Residential 12 units/ha 20 houses D2 2.72+ Residential 24 units/ha 65 houses E1 1.66+ Residential 24 units/ha 40 houses E2/3 0.74+ Residential 34 units/ha 25 houses F 5.45 Playing Fields - Cricket Hockey Rugby Football x 2 Bowls G1 0.26+ Leisure - 800sq.m. H 1.41 Landscape - - J 8.00+ Mixed Use * - 26,000sq.m. K 3.22 New Hospital - 200 beds
# Indicates a maximum density + Areas measured to include road. * Mixed use formed from :
Residential 14,400 sq.m. 180 flats Offices 2,600 sq.m. Community 3,000 sq.m. Pub/Restaurant 1,000 sq.m. Retail 1,500 sq.m. (max sized retail unit 500 sq.m.)
33 Community Health 3,500 sq.m.
1.5 A copy of plan D/07/A is attached as an appendix to this report.
1.6 Vehicular access will be from Park Road by way of a proposed new roundabout. The highway works are subject to an Agreement with the Council dated September, 2000, pursuant to Sections 28 and 278 of the Highways Act 1980. A condition of the outline planning permission requires that no part of the site should be brought into beneficial use until the highway improvements provided for in the Agreement have been completed.
1.7 The current application is supported by a Design and Access Statement which sets out the general principles guiding the overall layout of the proposed development and providing framework for detailed design at a later stage. In summary, the Statement advises that the development will be designed to:
• reflect local character and context • be legible, permeable, and relate well to adjoining areas • respect the adjoining Site of Special Scientific Interest and Local Nature Reserve • provide a safe and accessible environment for residents and visitors • make efficient use of a previously developed site and preserve the character of the listed buildings of Whitchurch Hospital • adopt the good principles of urban design relating to land uses, layout, density, movement, height, massing, scale and landscaping
1.8 It is intended that new housing will be located in the north western part of the site, as previously approved (areas D1, D2 and E1 on the submitted plans). The area to the north-west, located beyond the proposed new build housing (Area A) is to be retained as grazing land thereby preventing development from encroaching into relatively undeveloped areas to the north-west of the City. A landscaped buffer zones (Area B) is shown to be located along the western and northern boundary.
1.9 Open space contributions agreed as part of the outline planning permission granted in 2001 and, the subsequent application to modify conditions 1C and 1D (Ref. 05/2689N) are addressed by condition 9 of the outline planning permission and by a Section 106 Agreement. Under the terms of the Agreement, The Trust (now Board) has granted options to the Council to acquire at no cost:
(i) the agricultural open space (i.e. the open land north of the Northern Meadows housing site); (ii) the recreational open space (i.e. the space within the hospital complex currently used for recreational purposes);
34 (iii) the Wildlife corridor (i.e. the strip of land along the south west edge of the site).
To cover the maintenance costs associated with (ii) and (iii), the agreement makes provision for a ‘recreational’ payment of £100,000 and ‘wildlife’ payment of £52,500 with the figures to be updated by reference to the change in the RPI at the date of the transfer of the land, compared with February, 1999 when the figures were initially set.
2. DESCRIPTION OF SITE
2.1 The site comprises approximately 29 hectares of land and includes a group of listed hospital buildings, together with their landscaped grounds.
2.2 Beyond the north frontage of the hospital buildings there is a large open area laid out with football/rugby/cricket pitches, a bowling green, car parks, lawns and mature landscaping. Changing facilities for the bowls club are provided in (prefabricated) building situated behind a listed chapel.
2.3 Beyond the playing fields, to the north west, lies a narrowing area of pasture. This area lays between a steep embankment on the south west side which drops down to the Glamorgan Canal (part of a Site of Special Scientific Interest) and a former railway cutting along the northern boundary which also forms part of the local nature reserve.
2.4 The boundary of these fields is thickly wooded and the area has a rural character. There are public footpaths along the boundaries of the fields through wooded areas, which are linked by a right of way running across the site to the north of the sports pitches.
2.5 The buildings and grounds of Velindre Hospital adjoin the south eastern site boundary with residential areas beyond. Further residential areas lie to the north east and south west of the site.
3. SITE HISTORY
3.1 Numerous planning applications have been submitted in respect of the Whitchurch Hospital site over the years. Significant planning applications included the following:
(i) 95/1195N : Outline planning application for mixed use development comprising hospital, residential leisure, employment, community and retail uses with playing fields. The application was refused in 1996 for reasons relating to the loss of open space having amenity and nature conservation importance. However, following an appeal, the National Assembly for Wales granted outline planning permission on 30th July, 2001.
35 (ii) 97/771N : Outline planning permission for a mixed use development comprising new hospital, residential, leisure, retail and community facilities with playing fields. The application was refused (contrary to Officer recommendation) for reasons relating to loss of open space and traffic congestion. No appeal was made against that decision. (iii) A further outline planning permission was submitted in May, 1998 for a mixed use development comprising a new hospital, residential, leisure, related community facilities, open space and playing fields. The application was refused in April, 1999, for reasons relating to loss of open space and effect on local educational facilities. No appeal was made against that decision. (iv) 03/2439W : Day Centre of hospice granted November 2003 (on site E2/3 of plan D07A). (v) 05/2689W : Modification of conditions 1C and 1D of planning permission 95/1195N to allow extension of time period for submitting reserved matters applications and commencement of development for an additional five years. This application was approved in March 2006, subject to the legal agreement relating to planning application 95/1195N being amended. The consent was subsequently issued in May, 2010. (vi) 05/2192W : Mixed use development comprising new hospital, residential, leisure and community health uses with playing fields. The application remains in abeyance and has not been determined. (vii) 05/2191W : Listed building consent application for selected demolition of buildings within the hospital complex to facilitate the conversion and reuse of the site. The application remains in abeyance and has not been determined. (viii)08/70W : New two storey mental health unit comprising inpatient, day and community services with ancillary administrative accommodation, roof plant rooms and associated external units and planting. Application granted April 2008, subject to Section 106 Agreement. (ix) 08/79W : Demolition of Velindre Grange (associated with development subject of planning application 08/70W).
(Note: The Agent has advised with respect to the development subject of planning application 08/70W (Mental Health Unit) Velindre Road, that it is now the Heath Board’s intention to locate it on a site adjacent to Llandough Hospital).
4. POLICY FRAMEWORK
4.1 Relevant policies of the City of Cardiff Local Plan (1996) include:
Policy 3 (Listed Buildings) Policy 4 (Historic Gardens) Policy 8 (Site of Nature Conservation) Policy 11 (Design and Aesthetic Quality)
36 Policy 13 (Energy Use) Policy 14 (Facilitate for public transport) Policy 17 (Parking and Servicing Facilities) Policy 18 (Provision for Cyclists Policy 19 (Provision for Pedestrians) Policy 30 (Insensitive Infilling)
4.2 Relevant Deposit Cardiff Unitary Development Plan (October 2003) include:
Policy 1A (General Principles for the Location of Development) Policy 2.20 (Good Design) Policy 2.24 (Residential Amenity) Policy 2.45 (Trees Woodlands and Hedgerows) Policy 2.47 (Sites of Local Importance for Nature Conservation) Policy 2.48 (Biodiversity) Policy 2.51 (Listed Buildings) Policy 2.54 (Historic Gardens) Policy 2.57 (Access, Circulation and Parking Requirements) Policy 2.58 (Impact on Transport Networks)
4.3 Supplementary Planning Guidance : Access, Circulation and Parking Supplementary Planning Guidance : Cardiff Residential Design Supplementary Planning Guidance : Trees and Development. Supplementary Planning Guidance : Waste and Collection and Storage Facilities Supplementary Planning Guidance : Biodiversity Supplementary Planning Guidance : Schools and Development Supplementary Planning Guidance : Development and Community Contributions
4.4 Planning Policy Wales, 2011 (Edition 4)
4.5 TAN 5 : Nature Conservation and Planning (September 2009).
4.6 TAN 12 : Design (June 2009).
4.7 TAN 22 : Planning for Sustainable Buildings
4.8 Register of Parks and Gardens of Special Historic Interest in Wales.
4.9 Welsh Officer Circular 61/96 : Planning and the Historic Environment : Historic Buildings and Conservation Areas.
4.10 Welsh Office Circular 33/95 : The Use of Conditions in Planning Permissions : Paragraph 60 (Renewal of Planning Permissions).
5. INTERNAL CONSULTEE RESPONSES
5.1 The Operational Manager, Transportation advises that he has no objection to
37 the modification of conditions 1C and 1D of outline planning permission 95/1195N (as modified by planning permission 05/2689W) to allow the extension of time for the submission of reserved matters applications and for the commencement of development for an additional five years. His representations have been incorporated into the analysis section of this report.
5.2 The Operational Manager, Parks Services advises that he has no objections or comments on the application.
5.3 The Operational Manager, Environment (Pollution Control) advises that he has no comments on the application.
5.4 The Operational Manager, Drainage Operations raised no objection to the proposed modification of the conditions on the assumption that the design of the site referred to in condition 1A includes the drainage design for the proposed development.
5.5 The Operational Manager Waste Management has no observations or objections to the application.
5.6 The Chief Officer, Schools and Lifelong Learning (Education Service) advises that he has no comments to make on the application at this time.
5.7 The Chief Officer Housing, Neighbourhood Renewal and Community Safety (Housing Strategy Enabling Officer) advises as follows in relation to affordable house provision:
Robust negotiations have taken place with the applicant, as they informed the Council that in their opinion, the site was unable to provide the full policy target of a 40% affordable housing contribution on the basis of the economic viability of the overall proposed scheme.
Cardiff and Vale University Health Board commissioned the District Valuer to undertaken an independent economic viability assessment to determine the level of the affordable housing contribution that could be provided. The District Valuer assessment concluded that a renewal of the existing 25% affordable housing contribution was appropriate in the current market. He advised that it is reasonable that the consent be renewed on this basis and that a review of affordable housing contribution is made when the further applications are submitted. For clarification, the independent economic viability assessment was undertaken on a NIL Social Housing Grant (SHG) basis.
Housing Strategy recognise the findings of the District Valuer assessment and taking this into consideration, accept that a 25% affordable housing contribution will be renewed on the site at this current time. We would also seek to include in the renewal of the planning permission reference to a deferred payment arrangement and/or review mechanism, as the viability could be subject to change given the timescales for the development.
38 6. EXTERNAL CONSULTEES RESPONSES
6.1 The Countryside Council for Wales advises that it has no comments to make on the request to allow an extension of the time period for the submission of reserved matters or the commencement of development.
6.2 Cadw states that its advice, set out below, relates only to those aspects of the proposal, which fall within its remit as a consultee on planning applications, namely, the impact of developments on scheduled monuments or Registered Historic Landscapes, Parks and Gardens and does not address the potential impact on the setting of any listed building, which is a matter for the local planning authority. Its advice is as follows:
This proposal lies within the historic park and garden known as ‘Whitchurch Hospital PGW (GM) 66 (CDF)’, which is included in the Register of Historic Parks and Gardens in Wales.
The Welsh Assembly Government’s policies towards the protection of the historic environment are set out at chapter 8 of Planning Policy Wales Edition 4, February 2011.
Paragraph 6.5.25 advises that ‘local planning authorities should protect parks and gardens and their settings in the first part (parks and gardens) of the Register of Landscapes, Parks and Gardens of Special Historic Interest in Wales’.
Cadw has no concerns with the proposed modifications.
6.3 Welsh Water has been notified of the application. No representations have been received.
7. REPRESENTATIONS
7.1 Councillor Jones Pritchard queries, in response to a request from local resident, whether the notification of the application has been advertised appropriately.
(Note. The principle of the development has been established and there is no change to its substance. Some 230 addresses immediately surrounding the site were consulted and site notices were placed in Velindre Road, Park Road (2) and Forest Farm Road).
7.2 Councillor Linda Morgan writes on behalf of a number of residents in Whitchurch stating that there are concerns about the impact of the development on the environment with adverse effects on the good work of Forest Farm and the Nature Reserve. She states that in the years since the planning application was initially considered, many things have changed with far more clogged up roads surrounding the area, issues with parking, less facilities than ever in the Whitchurch area and schools about to close.
39 The Councillor requests that the application be subject to a Committee site visit prior to its determination.
7.3 A petition of objection has been submitted via offices of Jonathan Morgan AM. The petition is signed by 68 residents and object to the application on the following grounds:
(i) increase in housing density and subsequent traffic congestion; (ii) potential damage to Forest Farm Nature Reserve.
7.4 The Friends of Forest Farm and Glamorganshire Canal Nature Reserve, object to the proposed development. They question whether there has been appropriate level of communication with the local community in respect of the application.
In summary, their objections are as follows:
(i) they state that since planning permission was granted, there is evidence to show that a development of the type proposed will destroy much of the biodiversity of the nature reserved in the form of:
• predation to bird species and mammals by domestic cats • human encroachment into presently protect areas • effect of street and domestic lighting on breeding birds • evidence of Dormice within Longwood which are a protected species and would be destroyed by domestic cats • damage to the protected SSSI beech wood
(ii) they consider that the total amount of land provided to the Reserve to be totally inadequate for its protection, they consider that the whole of the Hospital Meadows should be given over and the development surrounded by physical barriers to stop damage to the Reserve; (iii) they consider that the provision of any housing on the Hospital Meadows would cause damage to the Reserve; (iv) they consider that the proposed buffer zones are inadequate; (v) the provision of roads adjacent to the Reserve will lead to increase street lighting into the Reserve causing disturbance. They state that reference to the Taff Trail is invalid as there is no provision of lighting and therefore it cannot be used for commuting for much of the year; (vi) they believe that the existing planning permission is flawed and that there is evidence to show that the proposed development would destroy much of the reserve. They conclude that the application should be refused and that a new planning application be made and appropriate Local and Assembly departments are involved together with appropriate consultation with the local community.
7.5 Thirteen further letters/email communications have been received. In summary, the grounds of objection relate to the following issues:
(i) the proposed application to extend the time period of the existing planning
40 permission by a further five years should be viewed against revised planning policy guidance which require more rigorous environmental, ecological, access and design considerations. If the current application is approved, a resident considers this to be anti-democratic and without justification; (ii) loss of greenfield/open space; (iii) adverse effect on ecology/wildlife/Forest Farm Nature Reserved Proposed Buffer Zones are insufficient to prevent damage to the wildlife in the Nature Reserve, SSSI; (iv) reference is made to the increase in traffic and congestion though the Park Road and Predwyallt Road area and to the housing developments which have take place since the Whitchurch Hospital plans were first considered (e.g. BT site and Whitchurch Rugby Club); (v) possible loss of privacy from the proposed development; (vi) noise/dust etc during construction; (viii) pressure on local services such as sewers, and roads at peak periods; (ix) a resident queries whether the Trust (Health Board) has authority to develop the land believing that it was originally granted by the Marquis of Bute for use for health purposes; (x) a letter makes reference to the delays in the developing medical facilities at Whitchurch Hospital causing uncertainty within the local community as well as amongst patients being caused for at the Hospital and their families; (xi) it is considered that a large number of trees would be lost if the development were to proceed.
8. ANALYSIS
8.1 Outline planning permission for the mixed use development of Whitchurch Hospital was granted by the National Assembly for Wales in July, 2001. The Council subsequently granted permission under application 05/2689W to modify conditions 1C and 1D of the outline planning permission to extend the time period for the submission of reserved matters and commencement of development for a further 5 years (the relevant time period expiring on 30th July, 2011). The current application seeks to modify conditions 1C and 1D of the outline planning permission again, to effectively extend the lifetime of the permission for a further five years.
8.2 The principle developing of a mixed use development of Whitchurch Hospital site has therefore been established for many years and the current application proposes no changes to the substance of the application from that originally granted in 2001.
8.3 By seeking to extend the time conditions in respect of the submission of reserved matters and the commencement of development, the applicant is, in effect, seeking to renew the planning permission. Guidance on the renewal of planning permissions is contained in Welsh Office Circular 35/95. The key issue for consideration is whether there has been some material change in planning circumstances since the original permission was granted.
41 8.4 Whilst there have been changes to planning policy in recent years, most notably in the publication of Planning Policy Wales and its subsequent revisions, TAN Guidance and the publication of new Supplementary Planning Guidance at the local level, the adopted development plan, against which the original application was considered, remains the City of Cardiff Local Plan (January, 1996).
8.5 Issues of particular significance that have been raised in relation to the consideration of this application relate to highway/transportation, the effect on the Forest Farm Nature Reserve/ecology and appropriate level of affordable housing contribution from the development.
8.6 To address relevant highway considerations, at the request of the Operational Manager, Transportation, the applicant has updated the Transport Assessment prepared by Ove Arup and Partners in April 1997 to establish whether the proposed development remains appropriate and acceptable in traffic and transport terms
8.7 In respect of this further information, the Officer advises as follows:
(i) The original planning application for this site was accompanied by a Transport Assessment (TA) prepared by Ove Arup & Partners in April 1997. The Transportation Service advised that the information contained within this report should be updated in order to ensure that the base / development traffic flows were representative of the current situation, compared to those which were projected when the original report was prepared, and also to ensure that the impacts associated with the proposed development could be mitigated through the implementation of the previously accepted highway improvement works. (ii) A TA Update (October 2011) has since been submitted in support of this application, the results of which are based on traffic surveys that were undertaken by the Council on 5th July 2011 and 18th October 2010 at the junctions surveyed in 1991 and 1995. A comparison of the base flow data in 1995 with 2011 shows that the A4054 Park Road corridor has generally seen a decline in traffic flows rather than an increase, as was predicted in the Arup TA. This has been attributed to the opening of the Butetown Tunnel, which provides an alternative route to traffic travelling from the north of Cardiff, who are accessing the town centre and/or Cardiff Bay, thereby avoiding Northern Avenue and Park Road as was previously the case; (iii) The TA also puts forward evidence to conclude that two-way traffic flows along the A470 during the peak hours are similar to those that occurred almost 20 years ago; (iv) The analysis undertaken within the assessment update considers the same uses as per the Arup TA, namely:
239 Residential Units (assumed to be privately owned); 180 Residential Apartments (assumed privately owned); 36 Residential Units for the Elderly; 2600 sqm Office;
42 100 bed hospital; 1000 sqm Pub/Restaurant; 2000 sqm Retail; 3500 sqm Community Facilities; 3000 sqm Community Health; and 3380 sq.m Leisure Centre;
(v) Using the latest TRICS (Trip Rate Information Computer System) data base to compare against those previously included, the 'average' trip rates result in a decrease in the total number of trips and the'85th percentile' which should be considered as a 'worse case' scenario indicates that the proposed development would be likely generate an additional 20 vehicle movements and 28 vehicle movements in the AM and PM peak periods respectively, which it is concluded would be distributed across the surrounding highway network, being accommodated with no discernable impact. It is therefore considered that the TA Update represents a robust analysis in respect to existing traffic flows and likely impact and demonstrates that those junction capacity tests previously undertaken can still be considered valid. (vi) The TA Update has also been independently audited by Acstro Ltd who reach similar conclusions. In addition the report has been checked by officers and is accepted as representing a robust analysis for the purpose of this application;
8.8 On the basis of the above, the Officer advises that he has no objection to the modification of conditions 1C and 1D of Planning Permission 95/01195/N (as modified by pp 05/02689/W) to allow the extension of time for the submission of reserved matters applications and for commencement of development, subject to the highway conditions previously attached by the Inspector being retained.
8.9 The Ecologist (City Development) advises that following survey work in 2008, the site of the Hospital Meadows was designated as the Whitchurch Green Fields Site of Importance (SNIC) for its Neutral Grassland Habitat. The area extends to approximately 7.8 hectares of which approximately 4.4 hectares is identified for low density residential development within the extant planning permission and the residual element of approximately 3.4 open space and a wildlife corridor. Under the terms of the planning agreement, the Council has the option to acquire to the area of pasture and wildlife corridor at no cost.
8.10 As the outline planning permission was granted prior to the designation of the SINC, the Ecologist acknowledges that it would be unreasonable to expect mitigation and compensation measure associated with the development to ensure no reduction in the overall conservation value of the site, as set out in TAN 5. Nevertheless, the Officer has recommended that a detailed grassland survey be secured by condition together with details of measures to mitigate the effects of development on the SINC where possible. The Agent considers this to be a reasonable requirement and envisages the additional information to be submitted at the reserved matters stage, comprising a report detailing the findings of the grassland survey accompanied by a management plan for
43 the undeveloped part of the SINC.
8.11 With respect to the concerns raised by the Friends of Forest Farm, the Ecologist has seen no evidence that development of this type would destroy much of the biodiversity of the Glamorganshire Canal LNR. With regard to some of the specific points raised he comments as follows:
(i) He states that whilst it may well be the case that if some householders have cats, some of them may predate wild animals. However, it is not considered that predation would be at a level which would damage animal populations. He also states that there are plenty of other examples of woodlands in close proximity to housing in Cardiff where populations of wild animals have not been destroyed. (ii) With regard to the effect of additional lighting, he states that this issue can be dealt at the detailed application stage when consideration can be given to imposing a condition on any permission granted control to light spillage outside of the development footprint. (iii) He says that there is no evidence of Dormice within Longwood. As the planning application relates to land which has no potential as a Dormice Habitat, a survey would not be expected. He says that he has no evidence that domestic cats have a detrimental affect on Dormice populations and that both Natural England and the People’s Trust for Endangered Species state that Dormice have few predators with their biggest threats are habitat loss and starvation in winter. (iv) The application site lies outside the SSSI and it is noted that the Countryside Council for Wales has raised no objections to the renewal of planning permission. (v) The buffer zones referred to have been seen by CCW and no objections have been raised to the renewal of the planning application.
8.12 Whilst there have been material changes to the planning circumstances since the original application was granted, it is not considered that they warrant a different recommendation in respect of the current application to extend the lifetime of the permission for an additional 5 years.
8.13 It is recommended, therefore, that conditions 1C and 1D be modified accordingly and that additional conditions be attached to the consent to ensure that the development is undertaken in accordance with national policy sustainable building standards where appropriate. Additional conditions relating to the drainage of the site, the Whitchurch Greenfields SINC designation and the Whitchurch Hospital Historic Park and Garden are also recommended.
8.14 It is also recommended that conditions 14 and 15 of the outline planning permission, relating to the provision of affordable housing be removed, and that the affordable housing contribution sought by the Housing Strategy Officer (outlined in paragraph 5.7) be secured via a planning agreement.
44 45 46 LOCAL MEMBER OBJECTION
COMMITTEE DATE: 11/01/2012
APPLICATION No. 11/425/DCO APPLICATION DATE: 05/04/2011
ED: RHIWBINA
APP: TYPE: Outline Planning Permission
APPLICANT: Mrs Elizabeth Harding LOCATION: 4 GERNANT & PART OF LAND AT 15 CLOS BRYN DERI, RHIWBINA, CARDIFF, CF14 6NA PROPOSAL: DEVELOPMENT OF LARGE REAR AND SIDE GARDEN OF BUNGALOW PLOT FOR RESIDENTIAL USE WITH ACCESS FROM 14 CLOS BRYN DERI AND 15 CLOS BRYN DERI
______
RECOMMENDATION 1: That outline planning permission be GRANTED subject to the following conditions:
1. A. Approval of the details of the layout, scale, appearance of the buildings, and the landscaping of the site (hereinafter called "the reserved matters") shall be obtained from the Local Planning Authority in writing before any development is commenced.
B. Plans and particulars of the reserved matters referred to in condition 1A above, relating to the siting, design and external appearance of any buildings to be erected, and the landscaping of site, shall be submitted in writing to the local planning authority and shall be carried out as approved.
C. Application for approval of the reserved matters shall be made to the Local Planning Authority before the expiration of three years from the date of this permission.
D. The development hereby permitted shall be begun either before the expiration of five years from the date of this permission or before the expiration of two years from the date of the last of the reserved matters to be approved, whichever is the later.
Reasons: A. In accordance with the provisions of Article (3)1 of the Town and Country Planning (General Development Procedure) Order 1995. B. and C. In accordance with the provisions of Section 92 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990.
2. The building hereby approved shall meet the BRE Code for Sustainable Homes (Version 3) Level 3, and shall obtain a minimum of 1 credit under
47 Ene 1 (Dwelling Emissions Rate). Reason: To ensure that the development is constructed in accordance with national planning sustainable building standards.
[The relevant requirement is determined by the date the proposed development was registered with the BRE by a licensed CSH assessor.]
3. Construction for any dwelling hereby permitted shall not begin until an ‘Interim Certificate’ has been submitted to the Local Planning Authority, certifying that a minimum Code for Sustainable Homes (Version 3) Level 3 and a minimum of 1 credit under Ene 1 (Dwelling Emission Rate) shall be achieved. Reason: To ensure that the development is constructed in accordance with national planning sustainable building standards.
4. Prior to occupation of the individual dwelling(s) hereby permitted a Code for Sustainable Homes (Version 3) Level 3 ‘Final Certificate’ shall be submitted to the Local Planning Authority, certifying that a minimum Code for Sustainable Homes (Version 3) Level 3 and a minimum of 1 credit under Ene 1 (Dwelling Emissions Rate) has been achieved for the dwelling(s). Reason: To ensure that the development is constructed in accordance with national planning sustainable building standards.
5. No development shall take place until a scheme for the drainage of the site and any connection to the existing drainage system has been submitted to and approved in writing by the local planning authority. Prior to the submission of the drainage details, ground permeability tests shall be undertaken to ascertain whether sustainable drainage techniques can be utilised and the results of the tests shall be incorporated in the submitted scheme. No part of the development shall be occupied until the scheme is carried out and completed as approved. Reason: To ensure an orderly form of development.
6. The consent relates to the application as amended by the revised plans numbered C483/16C and C483 Rev A (location plan) attached to and forming part of this planning application. Reason: The plans amend and form part of the application.
7. This consent relates to the application as supplemented by the information contained in the letter from the agent dated 31st August, 2011 and 30th September, 2011. Reason: The information provided forms part of the application.
8. The details submitted in pursuance of condition 1 hereof shall have particular regard to the preservation of the amenities and privacy of the occupiers of the adjoining properties. Reason : To ensure that the privacy and amenities of the occupiers of the adjoining properties are protected.
48 9. No development shall take place until details showing provision within the layout for garage or car parking spaces for each of the proposed dwellings, together with replacement parking for 15 Clos Brynderi, have been submitted to and approved in writing by the local planning authority, including sufficient manoeuvring space. The development shall not be brought into beneficial use until the garages or spaces are laid out in accordance with the approved details and thereafter the garages and/or spaces shall not be used for any purpose other than the parking or vehicles incidental to the enjoyment of the dwelling houses as such. Reason: To make provision for the parking of vehicles clear of the roads so as not to prejudice the safety, convenience and free flow of traffic.
10. Notwithstanding the approved plans, no development shall take place until further construction details of the junctions between the proposed access roads and the adopted highway, (carriageway markings, signage and street lighting) have been submitted to and approved in writing by the local planning authority. The approved access shall be implemented in accordance with the approved details prior to the beneficial occupation of the dwellings hereby approved and thereafter be so retained. Reason: To ensure that the use of the proposed development does not interfere with the safety and free flow of traffic passing along the highway abutting the site.
11. Prior to commencement of development, a scheme of construction management shall be submitted to and approved by the local planning authority to include details of construction traffic routes, site hoardings, site access, wheel washing facilities and parking of contractors vehicles. The development construction shall be managed strictly in accordance with the scheme so approved. Reason: In the interests of highway safety and public amenity.
12. The proposed development shall be limited to a maximum of two dormer bungalows, as indicated on the revised illustrative layout plan ref. C483/16C, and, that the height of the dwellings shall be comparable at eaves and ridge level to the existing bungalow at 4 Gernant. Reason: To ensure that the proposed development sympathetically reflects the urban form of the area, has due regard to amenities of neighbouring occupiers and permits the retention of trees of amenity value.
13. Unless it is otherwise agreed in writing with the local planning authority, the access within the Root Protection Area of the retained ash tree shall be constructed in accordance with the specification noted on drawing C483/16C. In particular, construction shall be of a ‘no-dig’ type utilising a cellular confinement system and non-fines aggregate to provide a load bearing, water permeable and gas pervious surfacing. No excavation or compaction of existing soils shall be undertaken to construct the access and the final wearing course shall be fully water permeable and gas pervious. Reason: In the interests of visual amenity.
49
14. The details to be submitted in discharge of condition 1 (landscaping) shall include new tree and hedge planting. Part of the tree planting scheme shall include species capable of long life and large size together with some fruiting trees to maintain the ‘Orchard’ character prevailing currently over much of the site. Reason: In the interests of visual amenity.
15. D7Z Contaminated materials
16. E7Z Imported Aggregates
17. C2F Details of Floor and Ground Levels
RECOMMENDATION 2: That the developer be advised to liaise with the Operational Manager, Highway Operations in order to obtain the necessary licence required to implement the proposed access works subject of condition 10. The applicant is advised that at the detailed planning stage when the full extent of the works associated with this condition are established, it may be necessary to implement these via a S278 Agreement between the Highway Authority and Developer.
RECOMMENDATION 3: The contamination assessments and the affects of unstable land are considered on the basis of the best information available to the Planning Authority and are not necessarily exhaustive. The Authority takes due diligence when assessing these impacts, however you are minded that the responsibility for
(i) determining the extent and effects of such constraints and; (ii) ensuring that any imported materials (including, topsoils, subsoils, aggregates and recycled or manufactured aggregates/soils) are chemically suitable for the proposed end use. Under no circumstances should controlled waste be imported. It is an offence under section 33 of the environmental Protection Act 1990 to deposit controlled waste on a site which does not benefit from an appropriate waste management license. The following must not be imported to a development site: • Unprocessed / unsorted demolition wastes. • Any materials originating from a site confirmed as being contaminated or potentially contaminated by chemical or radioactive substances. • Japanese Knotweed stems, leaves and rhizome infested soils. In addition to section 33 above, it is also an offence under the Wildlife and Countryside Act 1981 to spread this invasive weed; and
(iii) the safe development and secure occupancy of the site rests with the developer.
Proposals for areas of possible land instability should take due account of the physical and chemical constraints and may include action on land reclamation or other remedial action to enable beneficial use of unstable land.
50
The Local Planning Authority has determined the application on the basis of the information available to it, but this does not mean that the land can be considered free from contamination.
RECOMMENDATION 5: To protect the amenities of occupiers of other premises in the vicinity attention is drawn to the provisions of Section 60 of the Control of Pollution Act 1974 in relation to the control of noise from demolition and construction activities. Further to this the applicant is advised that no noise audible outside the site boundary adjacent to the curtilage of residential property shall be created by construction activities in respect of the implementation of this consent outside the hours of 0800-1800 hours Mondays to Fridays and 0800 - 1300 hours on Saturdays or at any time on Sunday or public holidays. The applicant is also advised to seek approval for any proposed piling operations.
1. DESCRIPTION OF PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT
1.1 This planning application relates to 4 Gernant; a single storey dwelling occupying a large (0.17 hectare) plot where planning permission is sought for residential development in the rear and side garden.
1.2 The application is made in outline with all matters except access reserved for determination at a later stage.
1.3 The application is one of three that have been submitted for the same plot. The Agent advises that as the proposed site is land locked, the applicant is seeking to establish options for gaining access onto the public highway, hence the submission of three separate applications.
1.4 Although the applications are submitted in outline, all are supported by illustrative plans showing how the site might be developed whilst retaining a rear garden approximately 10.5 metres in length with 4 Gernant. The proposals, as initially submitted, were accompanied by drawings showing the sub-division of the site into three plots, depicting two storey dwellings with garages of a similar footprint and scale (7.5 metres suggested maximum height) to those in Clos Brynderi. However, following concerns expressed by officers regarding the potential of the site to accommodate a development of this scale, the illustrative layouts have been amended and now depict a development comprising two dormer bungalows.
1.5 A copy of the layout plan subject of this application is attached to the report. It was initially proposed that access to the site for all three dwellings would be via the private shared cul-de-sac serving nos. 15, 16 and 17 Clos Brynderi, with the garage of no. 15 to be demolished to facilitate the access. The amended layout plan for two dormer bungalows, however, proposed that one of the plots would be accessed in this manner and the other plot would be accessed across a section of the front garden belonging to 14 Clos Brynderi.
1.6 The site contains a variety of trees of varying maturity, including several fruit
51 trees and is also bounded, in part, by hedges. The application proposes the removal of trees to facilitate the development (as shown on the attached tree drawing). The Agent advises that the plan depicts:
(i) the retention of hedging along the north east boundary with 16 Clos Brynderi; (ii) the original field hedge along the rear (north west) boundary with 14 Clos Brynderi retained (other than the area to be opened up for access; (iii) the existing hedging along the south west boundary with 5 Gernant is to be retained; (iv) a group of fruit trees/saplings on the south east boundary with 3 Gernant to be retained.
1.7 The application is supported by a Code for Sustainable Homes Pre- Assessment statement which suggests that the site can achieve CSH level 3 as a minimum and obtain 1 credit under the energy design category Ene1 dwelling emission rate.
2. DESCRIPTION OF SITE
2.1 The application site comprises the large side and rear garden of 4 Gernant; one of nine single storey dwellings arranged in a crescent and sited to the rear of nos. 21 to 29 Beulah Road. Access to the dwellings is via a narrow private road located between 27 and 29 Beulah Road (refer to the attached location plan).
2.2 To the north lies Close Brynderi; a cul-de-sac of seventeen detached two storey dwellings. The application site adjoins the side boundary of no. 16 Clos Brynderi. It incorporates part of the rear garden of no. 15 Clos Brynderi including its garage, together with a small part of the front garden of 14 Clos Brynderi, located to the north west. The garage at no. 15 is attached to the garage of 16 Clos Brynderi.
2.3 The site also adjoins the rear garden of the neighbouring single storey dwelling at 5 Gernant and the side (northern) boundary of the bungalow at 3 Gernant.
2.4 The garden is currently neglected and incorporates several mature and sapling fruit trees together with other tree species and is enclosed, in part, with hedges.
3. SITE HISTORY
3.1 None directly applicable.
4. POLICY FRAMEWORK
4.1 The application site is shown as an existing housing area on the Proposals Map of the City of Cardiff Local Plan. Relevant policies of the Local Plan include:
52
Policy 11 (Design and Aesthetic Quality) Policy 17 (Parking and Servicing Facilities) Policy 30 (Insensitive or Inappropriate Infilling)
4.2 Deposit Cardiff Unitary Development Plan (October 2003) relevant policies include:
Policy 2.20 (Good Design) Policy 2.24 (Residential Amenity) Policy 2.57 (Access, Circulation and Parking Requirements)
4.3 Supplementary Planning Guidance : Access, Circulation and Parking Supplementary Planning Guidance : Trees and Development. Supplementary Planning Guidance : Design Guidance for Infill Sites Supplementary Planning Guidance : Biodiversity
4.4 Relevant national planning guidance is contained in Planning Policy Wales Edition 4, February 2011, TAN 12 Design and TAN 22 Planning for Sustainable Buildings.
5. INTERNAL CONSULTEE RESPONSES
5.1 The Operational Manager, Transportation notes that the amended proposal is for a residential development accessed off Clos Brynderi which will now include two separate points of access being created off a private highway, each serving one of the new dwellings together with the relocation of the garage that serves no. 15 Clos Brynderi. The Officer advises that such an access, in principle, would be considered acceptable at this location.
He notes that two off road car parking spaces for each of the new dwellings are indicatively shown, which complies with the Councils SPG - Access, Circulation and Parking Standards – January 2010.
The Officer advises that there are currently no carriageway markings or associated signage at the existing roundabout to indicate the direction of flow and that there is an existing lighting column at the western access which may require relocating due to the proposed works and which may also require upgrading in order to accommodate the new access proposals at this location.
Mindful of the objection/concerns raised by residents and local members, he advises that a Road Safety Audit was undertaken by the Council’s Transport Projects Team in respect of the original scheme, which proposed three dwellings served off a single point of access, in order to ascertain whether the access proposals would be acceptable on safety grounds. He states that a number of recommendations were put forward which, where appropriate, have been incorporated into the revised scheme or can be addressed by condition. The Officer has concluded that no objections be raised on highway grounds to the application, as amended, subject to the following conditions.
53 (i) Parking Provision (Dwellings) - No development shall take place until details showing provision within the layout for garage or car parking spaces for each dwelling, have been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority (LPA), including sufficient manoeuvring space. The development shall not be brought into beneficial use until the garages or spaces are laid out in accordance with the approved details and thereafter the garages and/or spaces shall not be used for any purpose other than the parking of vehicles incidental to the enjoyment of the dwelling houses as such. Reason: To make provision for the parking of vehicles clear of the roads so as not to prejudice the safety, convenience and free flow of traffic.
(ii) Details of Access Road Junction - No development shall take place until construction details of the junctions between the proposed access roads and adopted highway, including carriageway markings, signage and street lighting have been submitted to and approved in writing by the LPA. Those details shall be implemented prior to beneficial occupation of the development. Reason: To ensure that the use of the proposed development does not interfere with the safety and free flow of traffic passing along the highway abutting the site.
(iii) Construction Management Plan - Prior to commencement of development a scheme of construction management shall be submitted to and approved by the LPA to include details of construction traffic routes, site hoardings, site access, wheel washing facilities and parking of contractors vehicles. The development construction shall be managed strictly in accordance with the scheme so approved. Reason: In the interests of highway safety and public amenity.
Informative
(iv) That the developer be advised to liaise with Operational Manager, Highway Operations in order to obtain the necessary licence required to implement the access works conditioned above.
5.2 The Operational Manager, Environment (Pollution Control) advises that he has no objections to the application recommending conditions/informatives D7Z (Imported Materials), E7Z (Imported Aggregates) and R4 Contamination and Unstable Land Advisory Notice.
5.3 The Operational Manager, Drainage Management advises that if the access arrangement serving the proposed development is to remain ‘private’ as opposed to an adopted public highway, the applicant should note that no surface water run off from such an access would be permitted to drain to the public highway at Clos Brynderi or its associated highway drainage system.
He notes that it is currently proposed to drain surface water from the access road(s) and presumably the wider development to a 'main' (Public Sewer). He states that this is likely to be resisted by DCWW and therefore the use of SUDS techniques, including permeable paving or soakaway drainage, should
54 be investigated as a first option.
The Officer advises that any subsequent proposal to discharge surface water directly to the nearby Rhydwaedlyd Brook would require specific consent from the Principal Engineer (Drainage) and, if approved, may be subject to a requirement for discharge flows to be attenuated to a rate determined by the Authority .
The Officer recommends in the light of the above and in order to ensure an orderly development, that the following condition be added to any planning consent that may be granted.
No development shall take place until ground permeability tests have been undertaken to ascertain whether sustainable drainage techniques can be utilised and comprehensive details of a drainage scheme for the disposal of both surface water and foul sewage have been submitted to and approved by the Planning Authority.
The Officer requests that details of this application be forwarded to Dwr Cymru Network Welsh Water Development Consultants for comment.
5.4 The Operational Manager Waste Management advises that waste would have to be collected from Clos Brynderi on specific collection days. The application is referred to the Supplementary Planning Guidance : Waste and Collection and Storage Facilities for further relevant guidance.
6. EXTERNAL CONSULTEES RESPONSES
6.1 Welsh Water/Dwr Cymru recommends drainage conditions to ensure no detriment to the environment, neighbouring occupiers or the Company’s assets. Reference is also drawn to a public sewer crossing the application site (Note: A copy of the Company’s representations have been forwarded to the Agents for their information).
7. REPRESENTATIONS
7.1 In respect of the planning application as initially submitted for consideration, Councillors J Cowan and B Jones objected for the following reasons:
(i) the impact on Clos Brynderi would be detrimental to the residents of this small close and any additional traffic would be problematic; (ii) there is concern that the proposal is in outline without specific detail on exact proportions, number of bedrooms etc. (iii) they are advised that bats live on the application site and request that an appropriate survey to be carried out; (iv) if the application was granted it would set a dangerous precedent.
7.2 A 35 signature petition of objection from residents of Clos Brynderi has been submitted in relation to the planning application. No specific grounds of objection have been stated in the petition.
55
7.3 Neighbouring occupiers were consulted on the application as initially submitted for consideration. Some 20 letters/emails of objection were received, primarily from residents of Close Brynderi and Gernant.
In summary, the following objections/concerns have been raised:
(i) highway safety/increased traffic nuisance/increased parking pressure in Clos Brynderi. Reference is made to issues with large vehicles such as refuse lorries/emergency vehicles accessing the Close due to the number of parked vehicles in the way. The increased traffic resulting from the development could impact on the ability of children in the Close being able to play safely outside; (ii) loss of trees/hedges/greenery/loss of wildlife habitat; (iii) possible disturbance to bat habitat; (iv) adverse effect on character/appearance of the area; (v) adverse impact on outlook/views from existing dwellings; (vi) concern that as all matters except access are reserved, residents are not able to comment on the appearance, landscaping, scale or layout of the proposals which could have a significant affect on the character of the area; (vii) noise/disturbance/disruption during building works; (viii)it is noted that the applications intend to make use of land which is not adopted by the Council and is owned by neighbouring residents. It is queried why the applicant does not have agreement from the residents concerned; (ix) unacceptable garden grabbing; (x) The current bungalow at no. 4 is considered to be in keeping with the largely homogenous group of bungalows that together with the communal green areas, make up Gernant. There is concern that the visual impact of three 2 storey houses would be out of character with Gernant; (xi) there is concern that if access is denied via Clos Brynderi, it may be sought through Gernant; (xi) devaluation of existing properties; (xii) loss of natural soakaway; (xiii)the proposal is considered to be out of accord with planning policy guidance, e.g. policies 2.20 and 2.24 of the Deposit Cardiff Unitary Development Plan (October 2003), SPG Design Guidance for Infill Sites, SPG on Biodiversity Part 1; (xiv)the development will compromise a low crime, safe play area in Clos Brynderi.
7.4 The owner of 14 Clos Brynderi, whose front garden is in part, included in the application to facilitate access to the site, advises that she strongly objects to the proposal and states that access to her land would be denied.
7.5 The owner/occupier of 15 Clos Brynderi states with regard to planning application 11/425DCO and 11/428DCO that the applicant has no right of access across his property and that he has no intention of providing such access. In summary, he considers that the proposals would significantly
56 destroy and harm the local landscape and ecology and would create access and parking issues. He states that the applications would leave his property as a virtual island between roads and that application 11/425/DCO would necessitate the demolition of his garage and that of his neighbour at no. 16. He states that the current ecology of the site allows for a large area of soakaway and water uptake from the trees on the site.
7.6 Comments have been received on behalf of the Rhiwbina Civic Society. In summary, the representation considers the main concern of those living close to the site to be loss of privacy and the threat of being overlooked. It states that any detailed planning application would need to incorporate sufficient screening so as to reduce as far as possible, the loss of privacy that might ensue from the development. The Society considers that the appearance of new housing often leaves a great deal to be desired and it would like an assurance that the character of any potential houses would be in keeping with the other properties in the area.
7.7 Local Members and neighbouring occupiers have been consulted on amended plans proposing two dormer bungalows on the site.
7.8 Some 20 further letters of objection have been received in response to this re- consultation The objections generally replicate the concerns expressed in relation to the scheme as initially submitted, and, in summary, relate to the following matters:
(i) access/traffic and parking concerns. The access proposals are considered to be impractical, both during construction and thereafter. Access relies on land in the ownership of nos. 14 and 15 Clos Brynderi, the occupiers of which are opposed to the proposals. No traffic impact assessment has been submitted. Clos Brynderi, is already congested at times with many cars parked in the road and problems causes for refuse and emergency vehicles. It is considered that the proposed development would add to existing problems. A shingle road surface is considered to be impractical; (ii) adverse effect on landscape/trees and fauna including birds, bats, and amphibians. The current ecology of the site allows for a large area of the soakaway and water uptake from trees; (iii) adverse effect on Gernant, considered to be a unique group of bungalows which have been kept in their traditional form over the years. The proposal would dramatically change the character of Gernant for the worse. The view on entering the Close would be changed with the dwellings being visible and out of context, creating a cramped development; (iv) adverse effects on neighbouring/nearby occupiers (overshadowing. overlooking); (v) adverse effect on views from Clos Brynderi; (vi) noise/disturbance during construction and from the activities of future occupiers; (vii) drainage/flooding concerns. Impact on surface water drainage in the vicinity by hard surfacing a large garden. A resident queries whether the
57 Council would be liable if flooding were to occur at some time in the future. It is suggested investigative land and soil testing should be undertaken before any major decision is made; (viii)as the proposal is in outline, it is not possible to properly assess the true impact on the existing dwelling Clos Brynderi/Gernant; (ix) loss of property value; (x) the owner/occupier of 15 Clos Brynderi reiterates his previous objections pointing out with regard to applications 11/425 and 11/428 that the applicant has no right of access and that he does not intend to provide such access. He is concerned that all three applications would leave his property as an island, between roads. With respect to applications 11/425 and 11/429, he states that the proposed access is via an unadopted road which has been maintained by residents since the construction of Clos Brynderi. He states that the access to the unadopted roads is already restricted; (xii)where large gardens exist, they should be cherished for their increased biodiversity; (xiii)A resident states that this is a Gernant application and that access should be from Gernant where traffic flows are considerably lighter than at Clos Brynderi.
7.9 Further to consultation on the amended plans, Councillors J Cowan and B Jones have requested a site visit so that Members of Planning Committee can view the site prior to the determination of the application. They consider the proposed development to be unneighbourly and an over development of the site which would be out of keeping and detrimental to the street scene. They also express concerns about additional traffic and believe that the proposal, if approved, could set a precedent for future applications.
7.10 Councillor J Cowan has also submitted a drawing from a local resident providing his impression of one of the proposed dwellings viewed from the access road in front of 4 Gernant which he states is ‘in the absence of equivalent architectural elevation drawings’. It is evident that the drawings has been forwarded to all Members of Planning Committee. The sketch appears to depict a two storey pitched roof dwelling (rather than a dormer bungalow) visible in the ‘gap’ between nos. 3 and 4 Gernant viewed from the access road and public ‘realm’ of Gernant.
8. ANALYSIS
8.1 This planning application was deferred on 16th November, 2011, for a Committee Site Visit which took place on 5th December, 2011.
8.2 Outline planning permission is sought for the residential development of the large rear and side garden at 4 Gernant, Rhiwbina. The application one of three applications for the same plot. The agent advises that the reason for the three applications is that the site is land locked and the applicant is seeking to establish options for gaining permissible access into the site from the public highway.
58 8.3 It is evident that the owners of nos. 14 and 15 Clos Brynderi have both objected to the proposed developments which rely on land owned by them. This, however, does not preclude the positive determination of the planning applications provided the schemes are considered to be acceptable on planning grounds. Whether or not the applicant owns the land is not a material consideration in determining planning application. Were the application to be favourably determined, it would be for the applicant to resolve any access issues with the owners.
8.4 The main planning issues are considered to relate to:
(i) the likely effect of the proposed development on the character and appearance of the area; (ii) the likely effect on the amenities/living conditions of neighbouring occupiers and future residents of the development; (iii) the affect on trees and ecology; (iv) the acceptability of the development in terms of highway safety/parking.
8.5 All matters of detail are reserved for subsequent approval save for access which is to be considered at this stage.
8.6 The proposal as initially submitted was accompanied by drawings showing the sub-division of the site into three plots, depicting two storey dwellings and garages, with a view to illustrating the feasibility of such a development. Access serving all three dwellings was to be via the cul-de-sac serving nos. 15, 16 and 17 Clos Brynderi and involved the removal of the garage at no. 15, which is also attached to the garage of 16 Clos Brynderi.
8.7 In support of the proposal, the DAS indicated that the plots (varying from 0.022 ha to 0.33 ha) would be compatible or generally larger than the plots in Clos Brynderi. It was also indicated that the scale and massing of the proposed dwellings would be comparable to the dwellings at Clos Brynderi, which are typically 3 or 4 bedroom detached two storey family houses. Whilst the application proposed the removal of several trees within the site (none of which are protected) the scheme sought to retain many of the existing trees and boundary hedges.
8.8 With regard to the effect of the proposal on the character and visual impact of the street scene, it is important that any development is appropriate for the site and its wider setting. Whilst the proposal is to be accessed from Clos Brynderi, the impact of the development is considered to be equally important in relation to its effect on Gernant, which is characterised by single storey dwellings set within more generous plots.
8.9 Concern was subsequently expressed to the Applicant’s agent regarding to the potential of the site to accommodate the scale of development shown on the illustrative plan, having regard to proximity of neighbouring dwellings and the requirement to protect residential amenity, the need to respect the low rise scale and character of Gernant, and the desire to retain existing landscaping were appropriate, and provide some opportunity for replacement planting.
59
8.10 Consequently, the illustrative layout subject of the current application has been amended and now depicts a development comprising two dormer bungalows compatible in terms of eaves and ridge height to the existing Gernant dwelling at 4 Gernant. The access arrangements have also been revised with the north western plot shown to access Clos Brynderi across a small section of the front garden belonging to 14 Clos Brynderi and the south eastern, plot, accessed via the cul de sac serving nos. 15, 16 and 17 Clos Brynderi, as described in paragraph 8.5 above. The layout provides for replacement parking for the lost garage space at no.15.
8.11 The reduction in the number of dwellings from three to two and in their scale from two storeys to single storey with dormers is considered to be more appropriate from a design perspective having regard to the site context.
8.12 The proposed plots compare favourably in size with most of those in Clos Brynderi and are similar in area to nos. 2 and 3 Gernant. The bungalows at Gernant occupy plots of varying size and it is evident that No. 4 is by far the largest. The application proposes to retain a plot at no. 4 which would not be dissimilar in size to its neighbours at nos. 2 and 3 Gernant and which is considered to provide adequate amenity space for its occupants.
8.13 The application will necessitate the removal of the garage at the rear of 15 Clos Brynderi, which forms half of a pitched roof, double garage block, shared with 16 Clos Brynderi. Although its demolition would leave the retained garage and a mono pitched structure, it is not considered that this would be unacceptable on design grounds as the building is not prominent in the street scene.
8.14 With respect to the visual impact of the proposed development from the ‘public’ realm of Gernant, views would primarily comprise glimpses of single storey dwellings comparable in scale to the existing bungalows. The illustrative proposal indicate that there would be no dormer windows in the roof planes facing towards the rear of no. 4. Having regard to the screening effect of adjacent houses and proposed retained landscaping, it is not considered that the proposed dormer bungalows would impact prominently in the street scene, viewed from Clos Brynderi.
8.15 With regard to the concern that the proposed access road would to some degree have an isolating effect on 15 Clos Brynderi, this would not be dissimilar to any detached dwelling in a corner plot flanked by detached dwellings with their own private drives. In this case, it is proposed that the access, in terms of its construction should not appear over-engineered, with a gravel filled cellular system proposed to provide a low visual impact.
8.16 With respect to the effect of the proposed development on the amenities of neighbouring occupiers, it is considered that two dormer bungalow of a scale comparable to the existing dwellings in Gernant, could be sited on the land without having an unduly overbearing or dominating impact. The detailed design and siting of the dwellings would be for a future reserved matters
60 application, the assessment of which would need to carefully consider such matters as the location of any windows within the roof space, to ensure that the privacy of neighbouring occupiers was appropriately safeguarded. At ground floor level it is considered that adequate privacy could be maintained by the provision/retention of solid fencing and landscaping.
8.17 The Operational Manager, Transportation, who is mindful of the objections/concerns raised by residents and local members, has advised that he considers the proposed development (as amended to 2 no. dwellings with two separate points of access) acceptable on highway safety/parking grounds, subject to conditions/informatives outlined in at paragraph 5.1 of this report.
8.18 The proposed development site comprises a neglected garden containing several mature and sapling fruit trees and other tree species. A number of the trees are proposed to be removed to facilitate the proposed development, however, none are protected by Preservation Order.
8.19 The application has been examined by the Tree Officer who has identified certain trees considered worthy of retention on amenity grounds and others that are not desirable for retention in a development context. In this regard, the Officer has identified the desirability of retaining a large Ash tree (T7) located towards Clos Brynderi, adjacent to the proposed access, an apple tree (T5) in the north west corner of the site and Hawthorn (T2) within a group also comprising a willow (T1) and Lawson’s Cypress (T3), next to be boundary with 5 Gernant.
8.20 The amended illustrative layout plan shows the intention to retain these and several others. Specifically, with regard to the large Ash tree (T7), the retention of which is considered important on visual amenity grounds, the Officer has sought further technical information from the Agent to demonstrate that the proposed vehicular access can be constructed without significant detriment to the tree, with the intention to use a no-dig construction method and a cellular confinement system utilising a ‘no fines’ aggregate sub base.
8.21 The illustrative plan is annotated to indicate the general retention/ reinforcement of existing native species hedges. Notwithstanding this intention, in the event that outline planning permission is granted, a detailed landscape scheme will need to be prepared for the site in pursuance of the approval of reserved matters.
8.22 The Ecologist has advised that there is a very low likelihood of any protected species being present on the site, stating that the habitat itself would not qualify as a Site of Importance for Nature Conservation under published Wildlife Sites Guidance Wales.
8.23 The Officer advises that all species of bats and their roosts (whether occupied or vacant), are protected through European legislation and that in order to fully implement protection it is necessary to consider both the likelihood of their presence and the affect the development would have on the
61 sustainability of the population. Guidelines for assessing the likelihood of bats being present in a structure/tree is set out in paragraph 1.5.17 of the Council’s Biodiversity Supplementary Planning Guidance. The Officer considers that the trees on the site have low potential for bat roosts and that the presence of bats feeding in the area would not unexpected. The Officer concludes that the loss of feeding area resulting from the development would not have a detrimental affect on the population. Having regard to the low likelihood that bats are roosting in the trees and the minimal loss of feeding area, the Officer considers that it would be inappropriate to request a bat survey from the applicant.
8.24 Residents concerns regarding site drainage are noted, however, no objections have been raised to the proposed development by the Council’s Operational Manager, Drainage Management or Welsh Water/Dwr Cymru on drainage grounds subject to the attachment of an appropriate drainage condition (refer to paragraphs 5.2 and 6.1).
8.25 On balance, it is considered that the proposed development, as amended, is acceptable on planning grounds and that outline planning permission for the development of two dormer bungalows on the site should be granted, subject to the attached conditions.
8.26 At Planning Committee on 14th December, 2011, Members deferred a decision on the application to enable officers to draft reasons for refusal based upon concerns relating to neighbour impact and the visual effect on the character of Gernant.
8.27 As instructed, the following reasons are offered:
(i) The proposed development would be likely to harm the character and appearance of Gernant by virtue of the ‘incongruous’ appearance of the proposed dwelling at plot 2, in views from the ‘public’ area of Close. As such, it is considered Supplementary Planning Guidance ‘Infill Design Guide (April 2011). (ii) The proposal, by reason of the siting and scale of the proposed dwellings would be likely to result in an unneighbourly and overbearing form of development to the detriment of the amenities of the adjoining occupiers, contrary to Policy 2.24 (Residential Amenity) of the Deposit Cardiff Unitary Development Plan (October 2003) and paragraph 4.11 of Supplementary Planning Guidance : Infill Design Guide (April 2011).
8.28 Before debating these reasons, Members of Committee are respectfully reminded that the application is submitted in outline with the illustrative layout depicting a development of two dormer bungalows, that would be compatible in terms of their eaves and ridge height to the existing dwelling at 4 Gernant. A planning condition is recommended which would restrict the development to a maximum of two dormer bungalows, as proposed on the illustrative layout, and also limit the height of the dwellings so that they would be comparable with 4 Gernant.
62 8.29 As indicated in paragraph 8.16, the detailed appearance and layout of the dwellings would be for a future reserved matters application, when consideration would need to be given to such matters as the location of any windows within the roof space, to ensure that the privacy of neighbouring occupiers was appropriately safeguarded.
63 64 65 66 67 68 LOCAL MEMBER OBJECTION
COMMITTEE DATE: 11/01/2012
APPLICATION No. 11/428/DCO APPLICATION DATE: 05/04/2011
ED: RHIWBINA
APP: TYPE: Outline Planning Permission
APPLICANT: Mrs Elizabeth Harding LOCATION: 4 GERNANT & PART OF LAND AT 14 & 15 CLOS BRYN DERI, RHIWBINA, CARDIFF, CF14 6NA PROPOSAL: DEVELOPMENT OF LARGE REAR AND SIDE GARDEN OF BUNGALOW PLOT FOR RESIDENTIAL USE WITH ACCESS FROM 14 & 15 CLOS BRYN DERI ______
RECOMMENDATION 1: That outline planning permission be GRANTED subject to the following conditions:
1. A. Approval of the details of the layout, scale, appearance of the buildings, and the landscaping of the site (hereinafter called "the reserved matters") shall be obtained from the Local Planning Authority in writing before any development is commenced.
B. Plans and particulars of the reserved matters referred to in condition 1A above, relating to the siting, design and external appearance of any buildings to be erected, and the landscaping of site, shall be submitted in writing to the local planning authority and shall be carried out as approved.
C. Application for approval of the reserved matters shall be made to the Local Planning Authority before the expiration of three years from the date of this permission.
D. The development hereby permitted shall be begun either before the expiration of five years from the date of this permission or before the expiration of two years from the date of the last of the reserved matters to be approved, whichever is the later.
Reasons: A. In accordance with the provisions of Article (3)1 of the Town and Country Planning (General Development Procedure) Order 1995. B. and C. In accordance with the provisions of Section 92 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990.
2. The building hereby approved shall meet the BRE Code for Sustainable Homes (Version 3) Level 3, and shall obtain a minimum of 1 credit under Ene 1 (Dwelling Emissions Rate).
69 Reason: To ensure that the development is constructed in accordance with national planning sustainable building standards.
[The relevant requirement is determined by the date the proposed development was registered with the BRE by a licensed CSH assessor.]
3. Construction for any dwelling hereby permitted shall not begin until an ‘Interim Certificate’ has been submitted to the Local Planning Authority, certifying that a minimum Code for Sustainable Homes (Version 3) Level 3 and a minimum of 1 credit under Ene 1 (Dwelling Emission Rate) shall be achieved. Reason: To ensure that the development is constructed in accordance with national planning sustainable building standards.
4. Prior to occupation of the individual dwelling(s) hereby permitted a Code for Sustainable Homes (Version 3) Level 3 ‘Final Certificate’ shall be submitted to the Local Planning Authority, certifying that a minimum Code for Sustainable Homes (Version 3) Level 3 and a minimum of 1 credit under Ene 1 (Dwelling Emissions Rate) has been achieved for the dwelling(s). Reason: To ensure that the development is constructed in accordance with national planning sustainable building standards.
5. No development shall take place until a scheme for the drainage of the site and any connection to the existing drainage system has been submitted to and approved in writing by the local planning authority. Prior to the submission of the drainage details, ground permeability tests shall be undertaken to ascertain whether sustainable drainage techniques can be utilised and the results of the tests shall be incorporated in the submitted scheme. No part of the development shall be occupied until the scheme is carried out and completed as approved. Reason: To ensure an orderly form of development.
6. The consent relates to the application as amended by the revised plans numbered C483/12C attached to and forming part of this planning application. Reason: The plans amend and form part of the application
7. This consent relates to the application as supplemented by the information contained in the letter from the agent dated 31st August, 2011 and 30th September, 2011. Reason: The information provided forms part of the application.
8. The details submitted in pursuance of condition 1 hereof shall have particular regard to the preservation of the amenities and privacy of the occupiers of the adjoining properties. Reason : To ensure that the privacy and amenities of the occupiers of the adjoining properties are protected.
9. No development shall take place until details showing provision within the
70 layout for garage or car parking spaces for each dwelling have been submitted to and approved in writing by the local planning authority, including sufficient manoeuvring space. The development shall not be brought into beneficial use until the garages or spaces are laid out in accordance with the approved details and thereafter the garages and/or spaces shall not be used for any purpose other than the parking or vehicles incidental to the enjoyment of the dwelling houses as such. Reason: To make provision for the parking of vehicles clear of the roads so as not to prejudice the safety, convenience and free flow of traffic.
10. Notwithstanding the approved plans, no development shall take place until further construction details of the junction between the proposed access road and the adopted highway, (including carriageway markings, signage and street lighting) have been submitted to and approved in writing by the local planning authority. The approved access shall be implemented in accordance with the approved details prior to the beneficial occupation of the dwellings hereby approved and thereafter be so retained. Reason: To ensure that the use of the proposed development does not interfere with the safety and free flow of traffic passing along the highway abutting the site.
11. Prior to commencement of development, a scheme of construction management shall be submitted to and approved by the local planning authority to include details of construction traffic routes, site hoardings, site access, wheel washing facilities and parking of contractors vehicles. The development construction shall be managed strictly in accordance with the scheme so approved. Reason: In the interests of highway safety and public amenity.
12. The proposed development shall be limited to a maximum of two dormer bungalows, as indicated on the revised illustrative layout plan ref. C483/12C and that the height of the dwellings shall be comparable at eaves and ridge level to the existing bungalow at 4 Gernant. Reason: To ensure that the proposed development sympathetically reflects the urban form of the area, has due regard to amenities of neighbouring occupiers and permits the retention of trees of amenity value.
13. Unless it is otherwise agreed in writing with the local planning authority, the access within the Root Protection Area of the retained ash tree shall be constructed in accordance with the specification noted on drawing C483/16C. in particular, construction shall be of a ‘no-dig’ type utilising a cellular confinement system and non-fines aggregate to provide a load bearing, water permeable and gas pervious surfacing. No excavation or compaction of existing soils shall be undertaken to construct the access and the final wearing course shall be fully water permeable and gas pervious. Reason: To ensure for the retention of the tree in the interests of visual amenity.
71
14. D7Z Contaminated materials
15. E7Z Imported Aggregates
16. C2F Details of Floor and Ground Levels
RECOMMENDATION 2: That the developer be advised to liaise with the Operational Manager, Highway Operations in order to obtain the necessary licence required to implement the proposed access works subject of condition 10. The applicant is advised that at the detailed planning stage when the full extent of the works associated with this condition are established, it may be necessary to implement these via a S278 Agreement between the Highway Authority and Developer.
RECOMMENDATION 3: The contamination assessments and the affects of unstable land are considered on the basis of the best information available to the Planning Authority and are not necessarily exhaustive. The Authority takes due diligence when assessing these impacts, however you are minded that the responsibility for
(i) determining the extent and effects of such constraints and; (ii) ensuring that any imported materials (including, topsoils, subsoils, aggregates and recycled or manufactured aggregates / soils) are chemically suitable for the proposed end use. Under no circumstances should controlled waste be imported. It is an offence under section 33 of the environmental Protection Act 1990 to deposit controlled waste on a site which does not benefit from an appropriate waste management license. The following must not be imported to a development site: • Unprocessed / unsorted demolition wastes. • Any materials originating from a site confirmed as being contaminated or potentially contaminated by chemical or radioactive substances. • Japanese Knotweed stems, leaves and rhizome infested soils. In addition to section 33 above, it is also an offence under the Wildlife and Countryside Act 1981 to spread this invasive weed; and
(iii) the safe development and secure occupancy of the site rests with the developer.
Proposals for areas of possible land instability should take due account of the physical and chemical constraints and may include action on land reclamation or other remedial action to enable beneficial use of unstable land.
The Local Planning Authority has determined the application on the basis of the information available to it, but this does not mean that the land can be considered free from contamination.
RECOMMENDATION 4: To protect the amenities of occupiers of other premises in the vicinity attention is drawn to the provisions of Section 60 of
72 the Control of Pollution Act 1974 in relation to the control of noise from demolition and construction activities. Further to this the applicant is advised that no noise audible outside the site boundary adjacent to the curtilage of residential property shall be created by construction activities in respect of the implementation of this consent outside the hours of 0800-1800 hours Mondays to Fridays and 0800 - 1300 hours on Saturdays or at any time on Sunday or public holidays. The applicant is also advised to seek approval for any proposed piling operations.
1. DESCRIPTION OF PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT
1.1 This planning application relates to 4 Gernant; a single storey dwelling occupying a large (0.17 hectare) plot where planning permission is sought for residential development in the rear and side garden.
1.2 The application is made in outline with all matters except access reserved for determination at a later stage.
1.3 The application is one of three that have been submitted, for the same plot. The Agent advises that as the proposed site is land locked, the applicant is seeking to establish options for gaining access onto the public highway, hence the submission of three separate applications.
1.4 All three applications propose access via Clos Brynderi with the current application proposing access to the site across a small section of the front garden belonging to 14 Clos Brynderi and part of the side/front garden of 15 Clos Brynderi (refer to the attached indicative layout plan).
1.5 Although the applications are submitted in outline, all are supported by illustrative plans showing how the site might be developed whilst retaining a rear garden approximately 10.5 metres in length with 4 Gernant. The proposals, as initially submitted, were accompanied by drawings showing the sub-division of the site into three plots, depicting two storey dwellings with garages of a similar footprint and scale (7.5 metres suggested maximum height) to those in Clos Brynderi. However, following concerns expressed by officers regarding the potential of the site to accommodate a development of this scale, the illustrative layouts have been amended and now depict a development comprising two dormer bungalows. A copy of the layout plan subject of this application is attached to the report.
1.6 The site contains a variety of trees of varying maturity, including several fruit trees and is also bounded, in part, by hedges. The application proposes the removal of trees to facilitate the development (as shown on the attached tree drawing). The Agent advises that the plan depicts:
(i) the retention of hedging along the north east boundary with 16 Clos Brynderi; (ii) the original field hedge along the rear (north west) boundary with 14 Clos Brynderi retained (other than the area to be opened up for access; (iii) the existing hedging along the south west boundary with 5 Gernant is to
73 be retained; (iv) a group of fruit trees/saplings on the south east boundary with 3 Gernant to be retained.
1.7 The application is supported by a Code for Sustainable Homes Pre- Assessment statement which suggests that the site can achieve CSH level 3 as a minimum and obtain 1 credit under the energy design category Ene1 dwelling emission rate.
2. DESCRIPTION OF SITE
2.1 The application site comprises the large side and rear garden of 4 Gernant; one of nine single storey dwellings arranged in a crescent and sited to the rear of nos. 21 to 29 Beulah Road. Access to the dwellings is via a narrow private road located between 27 and 29 Beulah Road (refer to the attached location plan).
2.2 To the north, lies Close Brynderi; a cul-de-sac of seventeen detached two storey dwellings. The application site adjoins the side boundary of no. 16 Clos Brynderi. It incorporates part of the side/rear garden of no. 15 Clos Brynderi together with a small part of the front garden of 14 Clos Brynderi, located to the north west.
2.3 The site also adjoins the rear garden of the neighbouring single storey dwelling at 5 Gernant and the side (northern) boundary of the bungalow at 3 Gernant.
2.4 The garden is currently neglected and incorporates several mature and sapling fruit trees together with other tree species and is enclosed, in part, with hedges.
3. SITE HISTORY
3.1 None directly applicable.
4. POLICY FRAMEWORK
4.1 The application site is shown as an existing housing area on the Proposals Map of the City of Cardiff Local Plan. Relevant policies of the Local Plan include:
Policy 11 (Design and Aesthetic Quality) Policy 17 (Parking and Servicing Facilities) Policy 30 (Insensitive or Inappropriate Infilling)
4.2 Deposit Cardiff Unitary Development Plan (October 2003) relevant policies include:
Policy 2.20 (Good Design) Policy 2.24 (Residential Amenity)
74 Policy 2.57 (Access, Circulation and Parking Requirements)
4.3 Supplementary Planning Guidance : Access, Circulation and Parking Supplementary Planning Guidance : Trees and Development. Supplementary Planning Guidance : Design Guidance for Infill Sites Supplementary Planning Guidance : Biodiversity
4.4 Relevant national planning guidance is contained in Planning Policy Wales Edition 4, February 2011, TAN 12 Design and TAN 22 Planning for Sustainable Buildings.
5. INTERNAL CONSULTEE RESPONSES
5.1 The Operational Manager, Transportation notes that the amended proposal is for a residential development accessed off Clos Brynderi adjacent to the adopted highway which will now serve two dwellings off a 4.5 metre wide access, reducing to 3.0 metres in width after the first 5.0 metres. The Officer advises that such an access, in principle, would be considered acceptable at this location.
He notes that two off road car parking spaces for each of the new dwellings are indicatively shown, which complies with the Councils SPG - Access, Circulation and Parking Standards – January 2010.
The Officer advises that there are currently no carriageway markings or associated signage at the existing roundabout to indicate the direction of flow and that there is an existing lighting column which may require relocating due to the proposed access works and which may also require upgrading in order to accommodate the new access proposals at this location;
Mindful of the objection/concerns raised by residents and local members, he advises that a Road Safety Audit was undertaken by the Council’s Transport Projects Team in respect of the original scheme, which proposed three dwellings served off a single point of access, in order to ascertain whether the access proposals would be acceptable on safety grounds. He states that a number of recommendations were put forward which where appropriate have been incorporated into the revised scheme or can be addressed by condition. The Officer has concluded that no objections be raised on highway grounds to the application, as amended, subject to the following conditions.
(i) Parking Provision (Dwellings) - No development shall take place until details showing provision within the layout for garage or car parking spaces for each dwelling, have been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority (LPA), including sufficient manoeuvring space. The development shall not be brought into beneficial use until the garages or spaces are laid out in accordance with the approved details and thereafter the garages and/or spaces shall not be used for any purpose other than the parking of vehicles incidental to the enjoyment of the dwelling houses as such. Reason: To make provision for the parking
75 of vehicles clear of the roads so as not to prejudice the safety, convenience and free flow of traffic;
(ii) Details of Access Road Junction - No development shall take place until construction details of the junction between the proposed access road and the adopted highway, including carriageway markings, signage and street lighting have been submitted to and approved in writing by the LPA. Those details shall be implemented prior to beneficial occupation of the development. Reason: To ensure that the use of the proposed development does not interfere with the safety and free flow of traffic passing along the highway abutting the site;
(iii) Construction Management Plan - Prior to commencement of development a scheme of construction management shall be submitted to and approved by the LPA to include details of construction traffic routes, site hoardings, site access, wheel washing facilities and parking of contractors vehicles. The development construction shall be managed strictly in accordance with the scheme so approved. Reason: In the interests of highway safety and public amenity;
Informative
(iv) That the developer be advised to liaise with Operational Manager, Highway Operations in order to obtain the necessary licence required to implement the access works conditioned above. At the detailed stage, when the full extent of the works associated with the above condition are established, it may be necessary to implement these via a S278 Agreement between the Highway Authority and Developer;
5.2 The Operational Manager, Environment (Pollution Control) advises that he has no objections to the application recommending conditions/informatives D7Z (Imported Materials), E7Z (Imported Aggregates) and R4 Contamination and Unstable Land Advisory Notice.
5.3 The Operational Manager, Drainage Management advises that if the access arrangement serving the proposed development is to remain ‘private’ as opposed to an adopted public highway, the applicant should note that no surface water run off from such an access would be permitted to drain to the public highway at Clos Bryn Deri or its associated highway drainage system.
He notes that it is currently proposed to drain surface water from the access road(s) and presumably the wider development to a 'main' (Public Sewer). He states that this is likely to be resisted by DCWW and therefore the use of SUDS techniques, including permeable paving or soakaway drainage, should be investigated as a first option.
The Officer advises that any subsequent proposal to discharge surface water directly to the nearby Rhydwaedlyd Brook would require specific consent from the Principal Engineer (Drainage) and, if approved, may be subject to a requirement for discharge flows to be attenuated to a rate determined by the
76 Authority .
The Officer recommends in the light of the above and in order to ensure an orderly development, that the following condition be added to any planning consent that may be granted.
No development shall take place until ground permeability tests have been undertaken to ascertain whether sustainable drainage techniques can be utilised and comprehensive details of a drainage scheme for the disposal of both surface water and foul sewage have been submitted to and approved by the Planning Authority.
The Officer requests that details of this application be forwarded to Dwr Cymru Network Welsh Water Development Consultants for comment.
5.4 The Operational Manager Waste Management advises that waste would have to be collected from Clos Brynderi on specific collection days. The application is referred to the Supplementary Planning Guidance : Waste and Collection and Storage Facilities for further relevant guidance.
6. EXTERNAL CONSULTEES RESPONSES
6.1 Welsh Water/Dwr Cymru recommends drainage conditions to ensure no detriment to the environment, neighbouring occupiers or the Company’s assets. Reference is also drawn to a public sewer crossing the application site (Note: A copy of the Company’s representations have been forwarded to the Agents for their information).
7. REPRESENTATIONS
7.1 In respect of the planning application as initially submitted for consideration, Councillors J Cowan and B Jones objected for the following reasons:
(i) the impact on Clos Brynderi would be detrimental to the residents of this small close and any additional traffic would be problematic; (ii) there is concern that the proposal is in outline without specific detail on exact proportions, number of bedrooms etc. (iii) they are advised that bats live on the application site and request that an appropriate survey to be carried out; (iv) if the application was granted it would set a dangerous precedent.
7.2 A 35 signature petition of objection from residents of Clos Brynderi has been submitted in relation to the planning application. No specific grounds of objection have been stated in the petition.
7.3 Neighbouring occupiers were consulted on the application as initially submitted for consideration. Some 20 letters/emails of objection were received, primarily from residents of Close Brynderi and Gernant.
In summary, the following objections/concerns have been raised:
77
(i) highway safety/increased traffic nuisance/increased parking pressure in Clos Brynderi. Reference is made to issues with large vehicles such as refuse lorries/emergency vehicles accessing the Close due to the number of parked vehicles in the way. The increased traffic resulting from the development could impact on the ability of children in the Close being able to play safely outside; (ii) loss of trees/hedges/greenery/loss of wildlife habitat; (iii) possible disturbance to bat habitat; (iv) adverse effect on character/appearance of the area; (v) adverse impact on outlook/views from existing dwellings; (vi) concern that as all matters except access are reserved, residents are not able to comment on the appearance, landscaping, scale or layout of the proposals which could have a significant affect on the character of the area; (vii) noise/disturbance/disruption during building works; (viii)it is noted that the applications intend to make use of land which is not adopted by the Council and is owned by neighbouring residents. It is queried why the applicant does not have agreement from the residents concerned; (ix) unacceptable garden grabbing; (x) The current bungalow at no. 4 is considered to be in keeping with the largely homogenous group of bungalows that together with the communal green areas, make up Gernant. There is concern that the visual impact of three 2 storey houses would be out of character with Gernant; (xi) there is concern that if access is denied via Clos Brynderi, it may be sought through Gernant; (xi) devaluation of existing properties; (xii) loss of natural soakaway; (xiii)the proposal is considered to be out of accord with planning policy guidance, e.g. policies 2.20 and 2.24 of the Deposit Cardiff Unitary Development Plan (October 2003), SPG Design Guidance for Infill Sites, SPG on Biodiversity Part 1; (xiv)the development will compromise a low crime, safe play area in Clos Brynderi.
7.4 The owner of 14 Clos Bryn Deri, whose front garden, in part, is included in applications 11/428DCO and 11/429DCO (to facilitate access to the site), advises that she strongly objects to the proposal and states that access to her land would be denied.
7.5 The owner/occupier of 15 Clos Brynderi states with regard to planning application 11/425DCO and 11/428DCO that the applicant has no right of access across his property and that he has no intention of providing such access. In summary, he considers that the proposals would significantly destroy and harm the local landscape and ecology and would create access and parking issues. He states that the applications would leave his property as a virtual island between roads. He states that the current ecology of the site allows for a large area of soakaway and water uptake from the trees on the site.
78
7.6 Comments have been received on behalf of the Rhiwbina Civic Society. In summary, the representation considers the main concern of those living close to the site to be loss of privacy and the threat of being overlooked. It states that any detailed planning application would need to incorporate sufficient screening so as to reduce as far as possible, the loss of privacy that might ensue from the development. The Society considers that the appearance of new housing often leaves a great deal to be desired and it would like an assurance that the character of any potential houses would be in keeping with the other properties in the area.
7.7 Local Members and neighbouring occupiers have been consulted on amended plans proposing two dormer bungalows on the site.
7.8 Some 19 further letters of objection have been received in response to this re- consultation The objections generally replicate the concerns expressed in relation to the scheme as initially submitted, and, in summary, relate to the following matters:
(i) access/traffic and parking concerns. The access proposals are considered to be impractical, both during construction and thereafter. Access relies on land in the ownership of nos. 14 and 15 Clos Brynderi, the occupiers of which are opposed to the proposals. No traffic impact assessment has been submitted. Clos Brynderi, is already congested at times with many cars parked in the road and problems causes for refuse and emergency vehicles. It is considered that the proposed development would add to existing problems. A shingle road surface would be impractical; (ii) adverse effect on landscape/trees and fauna including birds, bats, and amphibians. The current ecology of the site allows for a large area of the soakaway and water uptake from trees. (iii) adverse effect on Gernant, considered to be a unique group of bungalows which have been kept in their traditional form over the years. The proposal would dramatically change the character of Gernant for the worse. The view on entering the Close would be changed with the dwellings being visible and out of context, creating a cramped development. (iv) adverse effects on neighbouring/nearby occupiers (overshadowing. overlooking). (v) adverse effect on views from Clos Brynderi. (vi) noise/disturbance during construction and from the activities of future occupiers. (vii) drainage/flooding concerns. Impact on surface water drainage in the vicinity by hard surfacing a large garden. A resident queries whether the Council would be liable if flooding were to occur at some time in the future. It is suggested investigative land and soil testing should be undertaken before any major decision is made. (viii)as the proposal is in outline, it is not possible to properly assess the true impact on the existing dwelling Clos Brynderi/Gernant. (ix) loss of property value;
79 (x) the owner/occupier of 15 Clos Brynderi reiterates his previous objections pointing out with regard to applications 11/425 and 11/428 that the applicant has no right of access and that he does not intend to provide such access. He is concerned that all three applications would leave his property as an island, between roads. (xii)Where large gardens exist, they should be cherished for their increased biodiversity. (xiii)A resident states that this is a Gernant application and that access should be from Gernant where traffic flows are considerably lighter than at Clos Brynderi.
7.9 Further to consultation on the amended plans, Councillors J Cowan and B Jones have requested a site visit so that Members of Planning Committee can view the site prior to the determination of the application. They consider the proposed development to be unneighbourly and an over development of the site which would be out of keeping and detrimental to the street scene. They also express concerns about additional traffic and believe that the proposal, if approved, could set a precedent for future applications.
7.10 Councillor J Cowan has also submitted a drawing from a local resident providing his impression of one of the proposed dwellings viewed from the access road in front of 4 Gernant which he states is ‘in the absence of equivalent architectural elevation drawings’. It is evident that the drawings has been forwarded to all Members of Planning Committee. The sketch appears to depict a two storey pitched roof dwelling (rather than a dormer bungalow) visible in the ‘gap’ between nos. 3 and 4 Gernant viewed from the access road and public ‘realm’ of Gernant.
8. ANALYSIS
8.1 This planning application was deferred on 16th November, 2011, for a Committee site visit which took place on 5th December, 2011.
8.2 Outline planning permission is sought for the residential development of the large rear and side garden at Gernant, Rhiwbina. The application is one of three applications for the same plot. The agent advises that the reason for the three applications is that the site is land locked and the applicant is seeking to establish options for gaining permissible access into the site from the public highway.
8.3 It is evident that the owners of nos. 14 and 15 Clos Brynderi have both objected to the proposed developments which rely on land owned by them. This, however, does not preclude the positive determination of the planning applications provided the schemes are considered to be acceptable on planning grounds. Whether or not the applicant owns the land is not a material consideration in determining planning application. Were the application to be favourably determined, it would be for the applicant to resolve any access issues with the owners.
8.4 The main planning issues are considered to relate to:
80
(i) the likely effect of the proposed development on the character and appearance of the area; (ii) the likely effect on the amenities/living conditions of neighbouring occupiers and future residents of the development; (iii) the affect on trees and ecology; (iv) the acceptability of the development in terms of highway safety/parking.
8.5 The current application proposes vehicular access onto Clos Brynderi across land in the ownership of nos. 14 and 15 Clos Brynderi. All matters of detail are reserved for subsequent approval save for access which is to be considered at this stage.
8.6 The proposal as initially submitted was accompanied by drawings showing the sub-division of the site into three plots, depicting two storey dwellings and garages, with a view to illustrating the feasibility of such a development.
8.7 In support of the proposal, the DAS indicated that the plots (varying from 0.022 ha to 0.33 ha) would be compatible or generally larger than the plots in Clos Brynderi. It was also indicated that the scale and massing of the proposed dwellings would be comparable to the dwellings at Clos Brynderi, which are typically 3 or 4 bedroom detached two storey family houses. Whilst the application proposed the removal of several trees within the site (none of which are protected) the scheme sought to retain many of the existing trees and boundary hedges.
8.8 With regard to the effect of the proposal on the character and visual impact of the street scene, it is important that any development is appropriate for the site and its wider setting. Whilst the proposal is to be accessed from Clos Brynderi, the impact of the development is considered to be equally important in relation to its effect on Gernant, which is characterised by single storey dwellings set within more generous plots.
8.9 Concern was subsequently expressed to the Applicant’s agent regarding to the potential of the site to accommodate the scale of development shown on the illustrative plan, having regard to proximity of neighbouring dwellings and the requirement to protect residential amenity, the need to respect the low rise scale and character of Gernant, and the desire to retain existing landscaping were appropriate, and provide some opportunity for replacement planting.
8.10 Consequently, the illustrative layout has been amended and now depicts a development comprising two dormer bungalows compatible in terms of eaves and ridge height to the existing Gernant dwelling at 4 Gernant..
8.11 The reduction in the number of dwellings from three to two and in their scale from two storeys to single storey with dormers is considered to be more appropriate from a design perspective having regard to the site context.
8.12 The proposed plots compare favourably in size with most of those in Clos Brynderi and are similar in area to nos. 2 and 3 Gernant. The bungalows at
81 Gernant occupy plots of varying size and it is evident that No. 4 is by far the largest. The application proposes to retain a plot at no. 4 which would not be dissimilar in size to its neighbours at nos. 2 and 3 Gernant and which is considered to provide adequate amenity space for its occupants.
8.13 With respect to the visual impact of the proposed development from the ‘public’ realm of Gernant, views would primarily comprise glimpses of single storey dwellings comparable in scale to the existing bungalows. The illustrative proposal indicate that there would be no dormer windows in the roof planes facing towards the rear of no. 4. Having regard to the screening effect of adjacent houses and proposed retained landscaping, it is not considered that the proposed dormer bungalows would impact prominently in the street scene, viewed from Clos Brynderi.
8.14 With regard to the concern that the proposed access road would to some degree have an isolating effect on 15 Clos Brynderi, this would not be dissimilar to any detached dwelling in a corner plot flanked by detached dwellings with their own private drives. In this case, it is proposed that the access, in terms of its construction should not appear over-engineered, with a gravel filled cellular system proposed to provide a low visual impact. It is also noteworthy that the Agent advises the amount of private amenity space remaining with no. 15, following construction of the road would be comparable to the area enjoyed by the property from its construction up to recently, when the owner of no. 15 purchased an additional parcel from the applicant. The amended layout plan depicts an enhanced hatched area which would be available to add to no. 15, subject to the landowner’s agreement.
8.15 With respect to the effect of the proposed development on the amenities of neighbouring occupiers, it is considered that two dormer bungalows of a scale comparable to the existing dwellings in Gernant, could be sited on the land without having an unduly overbearing or dominating impact. The detailed design and siting of the dwellings would be for a future reserved matters application, the assessment of which would need to carefully consider such matters as the location of any windows within the roof space, to ensure that the privacy of neighbouring occupiers was appropriately safeguarded. At ground floor level it is considered that adequate privacy could be maintained by the provision/retention of solid fencing and landscaping.
8.16 The Operational Manager, Transportation, who is mindful of the objections/concerns raised by residents and local members, has advised that he considers the proposed development (as amended to 2 no. dwellings) to be acceptable on highway safety/parking grounds, subject to conditions/informatives outlined in at paragraph 5.1 of this report.
8.17 The proposed development site comprises a neglected garden containing several mature and sapling fruit trees and other tree species. A number of the trees are proposed to be removed to facilitate the proposed development, however, none are protected by Preservation Order.
8.18 The application has been examined by the Tree Officer who has identified
82 certain trees considered worthy of retention on amenity grounds and others that are not desirable for retention in a development context. In this regard, the Officer has identified the desirability of retaining a large Ash tree (T7) located towards Clos Brynderi, adjacent to the proposed access, an apple tree (T5) in the north west corner of the site and Hawthorn (T2) within a group also comprising a willow (T1) and Lawson’s Cypress (T3), next to be boundary with 5 Gernant.
8.19 The amended illustrative layout plan shows the intention to retain these and several others. Specifically, with regard to the large Ash tree (T7), the retention of which is considered important on visual amenity grounds, the Officer has sought further technical information from the Agent to demonstrate that the proposed vehicular access can be constructed without significant detriment to the tree, with the intention to use a no-dig construction method and a cellular confinement system utilising a no fines aggregate sub base.
8.20 The illustrative plan is annotated to indicate the general retention/ reinforcement of existing native species hedges. Notwithstanding this intention, in the event that outline planning permission is granted, a detailed landscape scheme will need to be prepared for the site in pursuance of the approval of reserved matters.
8.21 The Ecologist has advised that there is a very low likelihood of any protected species being present on the site, stating that the habitat itself would not qualify as a Site of Importance for Nature Conservation under published Wildlife Sites Guidance Wales.
8.22 The Officer advises that all species of bats and their roosts (whether occupied or vacant), are protected through European legislation and that in order to fully implement protection it is necessary to consider both the likelihood of their presence and the affect the development would have on the sustainability of the population. Guidelines for assessing the likelihood of bats being present in a structure/tree is set out in paragraph 1.5.17 of the Council’s Biodiversity Supplementary Planning Guidance. The Officer considers that the trees on the site have low potential for bat roosts and that the presence of bats feeding in the area would not unexpected. The Officer concludes that the loss of feeding area resulting from the development would not have a detrimental affect on the population. Having regard to the low likelihood that bats are roosting in the trees and the minimal loss of feeding area, the Officer considers that it would be inappropriate to request a bat survey from the applicant.
8.23 Residents concerns regarding site drainage are noted, however, no objections have been raised to the proposed development by the Council’s Operational Manager, Drainage Management or Welsh Water/Dwr Cymru on drainage grounds subject to the attachment of an appropriate drainage condition (refer to paragraphs 5.2 and 6.1).
8.24 On balance, it is considered that the proposed development, as amended, is acceptable on planning grounds and that outline planning permission for the
83 development of two dormer bungalows on the site should be granted, subject to the attached conditions.
8.25 On balance, it is considered that the proposed development, as amended, is acceptable on planning grounds and that outline planning permission for the development of two dormer bungalows on the site should be granted, subject to the attached conditions.
8.26 At Planning Committee on 14th December, 2011, Members deferred a decision on the application to enable officers to draft reasons for refusal based upon concerns relating to neighbour impact and the visual effect on the character of Gernant.
8.27 As instructed, the following reasons are offered:
(i) The proposed development would be likely to harm the character and appearance of Gernant by virtue of the ‘incongruous’ appearance of the proposed dwelling at plot 2, in views from the ‘public’ area of Close. As such, it is considered that the proposal would conflict with Policy 11 (Design and Aesthetic Quality) of the adopted Local Plan, Policy 2.20 (Good Design) of the Deposit Cardiff Unitary Development Plan (October 2003) and the Council’s Supplementary Planning Guidance ‘Infill Design Guide (April 2011). (ii) The proposal, by reason of the siting and scale of the proposed dwellings would be likely to result in an unneighbourly and overbearing form of development to the detriment of the amenities of the adjoining occupiers, contrary to Policy 2.24 (Residential Amenity) of the Deposit Cardiff Unitary Development Plan (October 2003) and paragraph 4.11 of Supplementary Planning Guidance : Infill Design Guide (April 2011).
8.28 Before debating these reasons, Members of Committee are respectfully reminded that the application is submitted in outline with the illustrative layout depicting a development of two dormer bungalows, that would be compatible in terms of their eaves and ridge height to the existing dwelling at 4 Gernant. A planning condition is recommended which would restrict the development to a maximum of two dormer bungalows, as proposed on the illustrative layout, and also limit the height of the dwellings so that they would be comparable with 4 Gernant.
8.29 As indicated in paragraph 8.16, the detailed appearance and layout of the dwellings would be for a future reserved matters application, when consideration would need to be given to such matters as the location of any windows within the roof space, to ensure that the privacy of neighbouring occupiers was appropriately safeguarded.
84 85 86 87 88 89 LOCAL MEMBER OBJECTION
COMMITTEE DATE: 11/01/2012
APPLICATION No. 11/429/DCO APPLICATION DATE: 05/04/2011
ED: RHIWBINA
APP: TYPE: Outline Planning Permission
APPLICANT: Mrs Elizabeth Harding LOCATION: 4 GERNANT & PART OF LAND AT 14 CLOS BRYN DERI, RHIWBINA, CARDIFF, CF14 6NA PROPOSAL: DEVELOPMENT OF LARGE REAR AND SIDE GARDEN OF BUNGALOW PLOT FOR RESIDENTIAL USE WITH ACCESS FROM 14 CLOS BRYN DERI ______
RECOMMENDATION 1: That outline planning permission be GRANTED subject to the following conditions:
1. A. Approval of the details of the layout, scale, appearance of the buildings, and the landscaping of the site (hereinafter called "the reserved matters") shall be obtained from the Local Planning Authority in writing before any development is commenced.
B. Plans and particulars of the reserved matters referred to in condition 1A above, relating to the siting, design and external appearance of any buildings to be erected, and the landscaping of site, shall be submitted in writing to the local planning authority and shall be carried out as approved.
C. Application for approval of the reserved matters shall be made to the Local Planning Authority before the expiration of three years from the date of this permission.
D. The development hereby permitted shall be begun either before the expiration of five years from the date of this permission or before the expiration of two years from the date of the last of the reserved matters to be approved, whichever is the later.
Reasons: A. In accordance with the provisions of Article (3)1 of the Town and Country Planning (General Development Procedure) Order 1995. B. and C. In accordance with the provisions of Section 92 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990.
2. The building hereby approved shall meet the BRE Code for Sustainable Homes (Version 3) Level 3, and shall obtain a minimum of 1 credit under Ene 1 (Dwelling Emissions Rate).
90 Reason: To ensure that the development is constructed in accordance with national planning sustainable building standards.
[The relevant requirement is determined by the date the proposed development was registered with the BRE by a licensed CSH assessor.]
3. Construction for any dwelling hereby permitted shall not begin until an ‘Interim Certificate’ has been submitted to the Local Planning Authority, certifying that a minimum Code for Sustainable Homes (Version 3) Level 3 and a minimum of 1 credit under Ene 1 (Dwelling Emission Rate) shall be achieved. Reason: To ensure that the development is constructed in accordance with national planning sustainable building standards.
4. Prior to occupation of the individual dwelling(s) hereby permitted a Code for Sustainable Homes (Version 3) Level 3 ‘Final Certificate’ shall be submitted to the Local Planning Authority, certifying that a minimum Code for Sustainable Homes (Version 3) Level 3 and a minimum of 1 credit under Ene 1 (Dwelling Emissions Rate) has been achieved for the dwelling(s). Reason: To ensure that the development is constructed in accordance with national planning sustainable building standards.
5. No development shall take place until a scheme for the drainage of the site and any connection to the existing drainage system has been submitted to and approved in writing by the local planning authority. Prior to the submission of the drainage details, ground permeability tests shall be undertaken to ascertain whether sustainable drainage techniques can be utilised and the results of the tests shall be incorporated in the submitted scheme. No part of the development shall be occupied until the scheme is carried out and completed as approved. Reason: To ensure an orderly form of development.
6. The consent relates to the application as amended by the revised plans numbered C483/14C attached to and forming part of this planning application. Reason: The plans amend and form part of the application.
7. This consent relates to the application as supplemented by the information contained in the letter from the agent dated 31st August, 2011 and 30th September, 2011. Reason: The information provided forms part of the application.
8. The details submitted in pursuance of condition 1 hereof shall have particular regard to the preservation of the amenities and privacy of the occupiers of the adjoining properties. Reason : To ensure that the privacy and amenities of the occupiers of the adjoining properties are protected.
9. No development shall take place until details showing provision within the
91 layout for garage or car parking spaces for each dwelling have been submitted to and approved in writing by the local planning authority, including sufficient manoeuvring space. The development shall not be brought into beneficial use until the garages or spaces are laid out in accordance with the approved details and thereafter the garages and/or spaces shall not be used for any purpose other than the parking or vehicles incidental to the enjoyment of the dwelling houses as such. Reason: To make provision for the parking of vehicles clear of the roads so as not to prejudice the safety, convenience and free flow of traffic.
10. Notwithstanding the approved plans, no development shall take place until further construction details of the junction between the proposed access road and the adopted highway, (carriageway markings, signage and street lighting) have been submitted to and approved in writing by the local planning authority. The approved access shall be implemented in accordance with the approved details prior to the beneficial occupation of the dwellings hereby approved and thereafter be so retained. Reason: To ensure that the use of the proposed development does not interfere with the safety and free flow of traffic passing along the highway abutting the site.
11. Prior to commencement of development, a scheme of construction management shall be submitted to and approved by the local planning authority to include details of construction traffic routes, site hoardings, site access, wheel washing facilities and parking of contractors vehicles. The development construction shall be managed strictly in accordance with the scheme so approved. Reason: In the interests of highway safety and public amenity.
12. The proposed development shall be limited to a maximum of two dormer bungalows, as indicated on the revised illustrative layout plan ref. C483/14C, and, that the height of the dwellings shall be comparable at eaves and ridge level to the existing bungalow at 4 Gernant. Reason: To ensure that the proposed development sympathetically reflects the urban form of the area, has due regard to amenities of neighbouring occupiers and permits the retention of trees of amenity value.
13. Unless it is otherwise agreed in writing with the local planning authority, the access within the Root Protection Area of the retained ash tree shall be constructed in accordance with the specification noted on drawing C483/14C. In particular, construction shall be of a ‘no-dig’ type utilising a cellular confinement system and non-fines aggregate to provide a load bearing, water permeable and gas pervious surfacing. No excavation or compaction of existing soils shall be undertaken to construct the access and the final wearing course shall be fully water permeable and gas pervious. Reason: In the interests of visual amenity.
14. The details to be submitted in discharge of condition 1 (landscaping) shall
92 include new tree and hedge planting. Part of the tree planting scheme shall include species capable of long life and large size together with some fruiting trees to maintain the ‘Orchard’ character prevailing currently over much of the site. Reason: In the interests of visual amenity.
15. D7Z Contaminated materials
16. E7Z Imported Aggregates
17. C2F Details of Floor and Ground Levels
RECOMMENDATION 2: That the developer be advised to liaise with the Operational Manager, Highway Operations in order to obtain the necessary licence required to implement the proposed access works subject of condition 10. The applicant is advised that at the detailed planning stage when the full extent of the works associated with this condition are established, it may be necessary to implement these via a S278 Agreement between the Highway Authority and Developer.
RECOMMENDATION 3: Applicants be advised that Air Quality in the immediate area exceeds levels specified by the Air Quality Regulations (Wales) 2000 and that occupants of the development who have pre-existing medical conditions that are exacerbated by elevated levels of nitrogen dioxide may suffer adverse health effects as a result.
RECOMMENDATION 4: To protect the amenities of occupiers of other premises in the vicinity attention is drawn to the provisions of Section 60 of the Control of Pollution Act 1974 in relation to the control of noise from demolition and construction activities. Further to this the applicant is advised that no noise audible outside the site boundary adjacent to the curtilage of residential property shall be created by construction activities in respect of the implementation of this consent outside the hours of 0800-1800 hours Mondays to Fridays and 0800 - 1300 hours on Saturdays or at any time on Sunday or public holidays. The applicant is also advised to seek approval for any proposed piling operations.
. DESCRIPTION OF PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT
1.1 This planning application relates to 4 Gernant; a single storey dwelling occupying a large (0.17 hectare) plot where planning permission is sought for residential development in the rear and side garden.
1.2 The application is made in outline with all matters except access reserved for determination at a later stage.
1.3 The application is one of three that have been submitted, for the same plot. The Agent advises that as the proposed site is land locked, the applicant is seeking to establish options for gaining access onto the public highway, hence the submission of three separate applications.
93
1.4 All three applications propose access via Clos Brynderi with the current application proposing access to the site across a small section of the front garden belonging to 14 Clos Brynderi (refer to the attached indicative layout plan).
1.5 Although the applications are submitted in outline, all are supported by illustrative plans showing how the site might be developed whilst retaining a rear garden approximately 10.5 metres in length with 4 Gernant. The proposals, as initially submitted, were accompanied by drawings showing the sub-division of the site into three plots, depicting two storey dwellings with garages of a similar footprint and scale (7.5 metres suggested maximum height) to those in Clos Brynderi. However, following concerns expressed by officers regarding the potential of the site to accommodate a development of this scale, the illustrative layouts have been amended and now depict a development comprising two dormer bungalows. A copy of the layout plan subject of this application is attached to the report.
1.6 The site contains a variety of trees of varying maturity, including several fruit trees and is also bounded, in part, by hedges. The application proposes the removal of trees to facilitate the development (as shown on the attached tree drawing). The Agent advises that the plan depicts:
(i) the retention of hedging along the north east boundary with 16 Clos Brynderi; (ii) the original field hedge along the rear (north west) boundary with 14 Clos Brynderi retained (other than the area to be opened up for access; (iii) the existing hedging along the south west boundary with 5 Gernant is to be retained; (iv) a group of fruit trees/saplings on the south east boundary with 3 Gernant to be retained.
1.7 The application is supported by a Code for Sustainable Homes Pre- Assessment statement which suggests that the site can achieve CSH level 3 as a minimum and obtain 1 credit under the energy design category Ene1 dwelling emission rate.
2. DESCRIPTION OF SITE
2.1 The application site comprises the large side and rear garden of 4 Gernant; one of nine single storey dwellings arranged in a crescent and sited to the rear of nos. 21 to 29 Beulah Road. Access to the dwellings is via a narrow private road located between 27 and 29 Beulah Road (refer to the attached location plan).
2.2 To the north, lies Close Brynderi; a cul-de-sac of seventeen detached two storey dwellings. The application site adjoins the side boundary of no. 16 Clos Brynderi. It incorporates part of the side/rear garden of no. 15 Clos Brynderi together with a small part of the front garden of 14 Clos Brynderi, located to the north west.
94
2.3 The site also adjoins the rear garden of the neighbouring single storey dwelling at 5 Gernant and the side (northern) boundary of the bungalow at 3 Gernant.
2.4 The garden is currently neglected and incorporates several mature and sapling fruit trees together with other tree species and is enclosed, in part, with hedges.
3. SITE HISTORY
3.1 None directly applicable.
4. POLICY FRAMEWORK
4.1 The application site is shown as an existing housing area on the Proposals Map of the City of Cardiff Local Plan. Relevant policies of the Local Plan include:
Policy 11 (Design and Aesthetic Quality) Policy 17 (Parking and Servicing Facilities) Policy 30 (Insensitive or Inappropriate Infilling)
4.2 Deposit Cardiff Unitary Development Plan (October 2003) relevant policies include:
Policy 2.20 (Good Design) Policy 2.24 (Residential Amenity) Policy 2.57 (Access, Circulation and Parking Requirements)
4.3 Supplementary Planning Guidance : Access, Circulation and Parking Supplementary Planning Guidance : Trees and Development. Supplementary Planning Guidance : Design Guidance for Infill Sites Supplementary Planning Guidance : Biodiversity
4.4 Relevant national planning guidance is contained in Planning Policy Wales Edition 4, February 2011, TAN 12 Design and TAN 22 Planning for Sustainable Buildings.
5. INTERNAL CONSULTEE RESPONSES
5.1 The Operational Manager, Transportation notes that the amended proposal is for a residential development accessed off Clos Brynderi adjacent to a private driveway which will now serve two dwellings off a 4.5 metre wide access, reducing to 3.0 metres in width after the first 5.0 metres. The Officer advises that such an access, in principle, would be considered acceptable at this location.
He notes that two off road car parking spaces for each of the new dwellings are indicatively shown, which complies with the Councils SPG - Access,
95 Circulation and Parking Standards – January 2010.
The Officer advises that there are currently no carriageway markings or associated signage at the existing roundabout to indicate the direction of flow and that there is an existing lighting column which may require relocating due to the proposed access works and which may also require upgrading in order to accommodate the new access proposals at this location;
Mindful of the objection/concerns raised by residents and local members, he advises that a Road Safety Audit was undertaken by the Council’s Transport Projects Team in respect of the original scheme, which proposed three dwellings served off a single point of access, in order to ascertain whether the access proposals would be acceptable on safety grounds. He states that a number of recommendations were put forward which where appropriate have been incorporated into the revised scheme or can be addressed by condition. The Officer has concluded that no objections be raised on highway grounds to the application, as amended, subject to the following conditions.
(i) Parking Provision (Dwellings) - No development shall take place until details showing provision within the layout for garage or car parking spaces for each dwelling, have been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority (LPA), including sufficient manoeuvring space. The development shall not be brought into beneficial use until the garages or spaces are laid out in accordance with the approved details and thereafter the garages and/or spaces shall not be used for any purpose other than the parking of vehicles incidental to the enjoyment of the dwelling houses as such. Reason: To make provision for the parking of vehicles clear of the roads so as not to prejudice the safety, convenience and free flow of traffic;
(ii) Details of Access Road Junction - No development shall take place until construction details of the junction between the proposed access road and the adopted highway, including carriageway markings, signage and street lighting have been submitted to and approved in writing by the LPA. Those details shall be implemented prior to beneficial occupation of the development. Reason: To ensure that the use of the proposed development does not interfere with the safety and free flow of traffic passing along the highway abutting the site;
(iii) Construction Management Plan - Prior to commencement of development a scheme of construction management shall be submitted to and approved by the LPA to include details of construction traffic routes, site hoardings, site access, wheel washing facilities and parking of contractors vehicles. The development construction shall be managed strictly in accordance with the scheme so approved. Reason: In the interests of highway safety and public amenity;
Informative
(iv) That the developer be advised to liaise with Operational Manager,
96 Highway Operations in order to obtain the necessary licence required to implement the access works conditioned above.
5.2 The Operational Manager, Environment (Pollution Control) advises that he has no objections to the application recommending conditions/informatives D7Z (Imported Materials), E7Z (Imported Aggregates) and R4 Contamination and Unstable Land Advisory Notice.
5.3 The Operational Manager, Drainage Management advises that if the access arrangement serving the proposed development is to remain ‘private’ as opposed to an adopted public highway, the applicant should note that no surface water run off from such an access would be permitted to drain to the public highway at Clos Bryn Deri or its associated highway drainage system.
He notes that it is currently proposed to drain surface water from the access road(s) and presumably the wider development to a 'main' (Public Sewer). He states that this is likely to be resisted by DCWW and therefore the use of SUDS techniques, including permeable paving or soakaway drainage, should be investigated as a first option.
The Officer advises that any subsequent proposal to discharge surface water directly to the nearby Rhydwaedlyd Brook would require specific consent from the Principal Engineer (Drainage) and, if approved, may be subject to a requirement for discharge flows to be attenuated to a rate determined by the Authority .
The Officer recommends in the light of the above and in order to ensure an orderly development, that the following condition be added to any planning consent that may be granted.
No development shall take place until ground permeability tests have been undertaken to ascertain whether sustainable drainage techniques can be utilised and comprehensive details of a drainage scheme for the disposal of both surface water and foul sewage have been submitted to and approved by the Planning Authority.
The Officer requests that details of this application be forwarded to Dwr Cymru Network Welsh Water Development Consultants for comment.
5.4 The Operational Manager Waste Management advises that waste would have to be collected from Clos Brynderi on specific collection days. The application is referred to the Supplementary Planning Guidance : Waste and Collection and Storage Facilities for further relevant guidance.
6. EXTERNAL CONSULTEES RESPONSES
6.1 Welsh Water/Dwr Cymru recommends drainage conditions to ensure no detriment to the environment, neighbouring occupiers or the Company’s assets. Reference is also drawn to a public sewer crossing the application site (Note: A copy of the Company’s representations have been forwarded to
97 the Agents for their information).
7. REPRESENTATIONS
7.1 In respect of the planning application as initially submitted for consideration, Councillors J Cowan and B Jones objected for the following reasons:
(i) the impact on Clos Brynderi would be detrimental to the residents of this small close and any additional traffic would be problematic; (ii) there is concern that the proposal is in outline without specific detail on exact proportions, number of bedrooms etc. (iii) they are advised that bats live on the application site and request that an appropriate survey to be carried out; (iv) if the application was granted it would set a dangerous precedent.
7.2 A 35 signature petition of objection from residents of Clos Brynderi has been submitted in relation to the planning application. No specific grounds of objection have been stated in the petition.
7.3 Neighbouring occupiers were consulted on the application as initially submitted for consideration. Some 20 letters/emails of objection were received, primarily from residents of Close Brynderi and Gernant.
In summary, the following objections/concerns have been raised:
(i) highway safety/increased traffic nuisance/increased parking pressure in Clos Brynderi. Reference is made to issues with large vehicles such as refuse lorries/emergency vehicles accessing the Close due to the number of parked vehicles in the way. The increased traffic resulting from the development could impact on the ability of children in the Close being able to play safely outside; (ii) loss of trees/hedges/greenery/loss of wildlife habitat; (iii) possible disturbance to bat habitat; (iv) adverse effect on character/appearance of the area; (v) adverse impact on outlook/views from existing dwellings; (vi) concern that as all matters except access are reserved, residents are not able to comment on the appearance, landscaping, scale or layout of the proposals which could have a significant affect on the character of the area; (vii) noise/disturbance/disruption during building works; (viii)it is noted that the applications intend to make use of land which is not adopted by the Council and is owned by neighbouring residents. It is queried why the applicant does not have agreement from the residents concerned; (ix) unacceptable garden grabbing; (x) The current bungalow at no. 4 is considered to be in keeping with the largely homogenous group of bungalows that together with the communal green areas, make up Gernant. There is concern that the visual impact of three 2 storey houses would be out of character with Gernant; (xi) there is concern that if access is denied via Clos Brynderi, it may be
98 sought through Gernant; (xi) devaluation of existing properties; (xii) loss of natural soakaway; (xiii)the proposal is considered to be out of accord with planning policy guidance, e.g. policies 2.20 and 2.24 of the Deposit Cardiff Unitary Development Plan (October 2003), SPG Design Guidance for Infill Sites, SPG on Biodiversity Part 1; (xiv)the development will compromise a low crime, safe play area in Clos Brynderi.
7.4 The owner of 14 Clos Bryn Deri, whose front garden is, in part, included in the application to facilitate access to the site, advises that she strongly objects to the proposal and states that access to her land would be denied.
7.5 The owner/occupier of 15 Clos Brynderi states with regard to planning application 11/425DCO and 11/428DCO that the applicant has no right of access across his property and that he has no intention of providing such access. In summary, he considers that the proposals would significantly destroy and harm the local landscape and ecology and would create access and parking issues. He states that the applications would leave his property as a virtual island between roads. He states that the current ecology of the site allows for a large area of soakaway and water uptake from the trees on the site.
7.6 Comments have been received on behalf of the Rhiwbina Civic Society. In summary, the representation considers the main concern of those living close to the site to be loss of privacy and the threat of being overlooked. It states that any detailed planning application would need to incorporate sufficient screening so as to reduce as far as possible, the loss of privacy that might ensue from the development. The Society considers that the appearance of new housing often leaves a great deal to be desired and it would like an assurance that the character of any potential houses would be in keeping with the other properties in the area.
7.7 Local Members and neighbouring occupiers have been consulted on amended plans proposing two dormer bungalows on the site.
7.8 19 further letters of objection have been received in response to this re- consultation. The objections generally replicate the concerns expressed in relation to the scheme as initially submitted, and, in summary, relate to the following matters:
(i) access/traffic and parking concerns. The access proposals are considered to be impractical, both during construction and thereafter. Access relies on land in the ownership of nos. 14 and 15 Clos Brynderi, the occupiers of which are opposed to the proposals. No traffic impact assessment has been submitted. Clos Brynderi, is already congested at times with many cars parked in the road and problems causes for refuse and emergency vehicles. It is considered that the proposed development would add to existing problems. A shingle road surface would be
99 impractical; (ii) adverse effect on landscape/trees and fauna including birds, bats, and amphibians. The current ecology of the site allows for a large area of the soakaway and water uptake from trees. (iii) adverse effect on Gernant, considered to be a unique group of bungalows which have been kept in their traditional form over the years. The proposal would dramatically change the character of Gernant for the worse. The view on entering the Close would be changed with the dwellings being visible and out of context, creating a cramped development. (iv) adverse effects on neighbouring/nearby occupiers (overshadowing. overlooking). (v) adverse effect on views from Clos Brynderi. (vi) noise/disturbance during construction and from the activities of future occupiers. (vii) drainage/flooding concerns. Impact on surface water drainage in the vicinity by hard surfacing a large garden. A resident queries whether the Council would be liable if flooding were to occur at some time in the future. It is suggested investigative land and soil testing should be undertaken before any major decision is made. (viii)as the proposal is in outline, it is not possible to properly assess the true impact on the existing dwelling Clos Brynderi/Gernant. (ix) loss of property value; (x) the owner/occupier of 15 Clos Brynderi reiterates his previous objections pointing out with regard to applications 11/425 and 11/428 that the applicant has no right of access and that he does not intend to provide such access. He is concerned that all three applications would leave his property as an island, between roads. With respect to applications 11/425 and 11/429, he states that the proposed access is via an unadopted road which has been maintained by residents since the construction of Clos Brynderi. He states that the access to the unadopted roads is already restricted. (xii)Where large gardens exist, they should be cherished for their increased biodiversity. (xiii)A resident states that this is Gernant application and that access should be from Gernant where traffic flows are considerably lighter than at Clos Brynderi.
7.9 Further to consultation on the amended plans, Councillors J Cowan and B Jones have requested a site visit so that Members of Planning Committee can view the site prior to the determination of the application. They consider the proposed development to be unneighbourly and an over development of the site which would be out of keeping and detrimental to the street scene. They also express concerns about additional traffic and believe that the proposal, if approved, could set a precedent for future applications.
7.10 Councillor J Cowan has also submitted a drawing from a local resident providing his impression of one of the proposed dwellings viewed from the access road in front of 4 Gernant which he states is ‘in the absence of equivalent architectural elevation drawings’. It is evident that the drawings
100 has been forwarded to all Members of Planning Committee. The sketch appears to depict a two storey pitched roof dwelling (rather than a dormer bungalow) visible in the ‘gap’ between nos. 3 and 4 Gernant viewed from the access road and public ‘realm’ of Gernant.
8. ANALYSIS
8.1 This planning application was deferred on 16th November, 2011, for a Committee site visit which took place on 5th December, 2011.
8.2 Outline planning permission is sought for the residential development of the large rear and side garden at 4 Gernant, Rhiwbina. The application is one of three applications for the same plot. The agent advises that the reason for the three applications is that the site is land locked and the applicant is seeking to establish options for gaining permissible access into the site from the public highway.
8.3 It is evident that the owners of nos. 14 and 15 Clos Brynderi have both objected to the proposed developments which rely on land owned by them. This, however, does not preclude the positive determination of the planning applications provided the schemes are considered to be acceptable on planning grounds. Whether or not the applicant owns the land is not a material consideration in determining planning application. Were the application to be favourably determined, it would be for the applicant to resolve any access issues with the owners.
8.4 The main planning issues are considered to relate to:
(i) the likely effect of the proposed development on the character and appearance of the area; (ii) the likely effect on the amenities/living conditions of neighbouring occupiers and future residents of the development; (iii) the affect on trees and ecology; (iv) the acceptability of the development in terms of highway safety/parking.
8.5 The current application proposes vehicular access onto Clos Brynderi across land in the ownership of no. 14 Clos Brynderi. All matters of detail are reserved for subsequent approval save for access which is to be considered at this stage.
8.6 The proposal as initially submitted was accompanied by drawings showing the sub-division of the site into three plots, depicting two storey dwellings and garages, with a view to illustrating the feasibility of such a development.
8.7 In support of the proposal, the DAS indicated that the plots (varying from 0.022 ha to 0.33 ha) would be compatible or generally larger than the plots in Clos Brynderi. It was also indicated that the scale and massing of the proposed dwellings would be comparable to the dwellings at Clos Brynderi, which are typically 3 or 4 bedroom detached two storey family houses. Whilst the application proposed the removal of several trees within the site (none of
101 which are protected) the scheme sought to retain many of the existing trees and boundary hedges.
8.8 With regard to the effect of the proposal on the character and visual impact of the street scene, it is important that any development is appropriate for the site and its wider setting. Whilst the proposal is to be accessed from Clos Brynderi, the impact of the development is considered to be equally important in relation to its effect on Gernant, which is characterised by single storey dwellings set within more generous plots.
8.9 Concern was subsequently expressed to the Applicant’s agent regarding to the potential of the site to accommodate the scale of development shown on the illustrative plan, having regard to proximity of neighbouring dwellings and the requirement to protect residential amenity, the need to respect the low rise scale and character of Gernant, and the desire to retain existing landscaping were appropriate, and provide some opportunity for replacement planting.
8.10 Consequently, the illustrative layout has been amended and now depicts a development comprising two dormer bungalows compatible in terms of eaves and ridge height to the existing Gernant dwelling at 4 Gernant.
8.11 The reduction in the number of dwellings from three to two and in their scale from two storeys to single storey with dormers is considered to be more appropriate from a design perspective having regard to the site context.
8.12 The proposed plots compare favourably in size with most of those in Clos Brynderi and are similar in area to nos. 2 and 3 Gernant. The bungalows at Gernant occupy plots of varying size and it is evident that No. 4 is by far the largest. The application proposes to retain a plot at no. 4 which would not be dissimilar in size to its neighbours at nos. 2 and 3 Gernant and which is considered to provide adequate amenity space for its occupants.
8.13 With respect to the visual impact of the proposed development from the ‘public’ realm of Gernant, views would primarily comprise glimpses of single storey dwellings comparable in scale to the existing bungalows. The illustrative proposal indicate that there would be no dormer windows in the roof planes facing towards the rear of no. 4. Having regard to the screening effect of adjacent houses and proposed retained landscaping, it is not considered that the proposed dormer bungalows would impact prominently in the street scene, viewed from Clos Brynderi.
8.14 With regard to the concern that the proposed access road would to some degree have an isolating effect on 15 Clos Brynderi, this would not be dissimilar to any detached dwelling in a corner plot flanked by detached dwellings with their own private drives. In this case, it is proposed that the access, in terms of its construction should not appear over-engineered, with a gravel filled cellular system proposed to provide a low visual impact.
8.15 With respect to the effect of the proposed development on the amenities of neighbouring occupiers, it is considered that two dormer bungalows of a scale
102 comparable to the existing dwellings in Gernant, could be sited on the land without having an unduly overbearing or dominating impact. The detailed design and siting of the dwellings would be for a future reserved matters application, the assessment of which would need to carefully consider such matters as the location of any windows within the roof space, to ensure that the privacy of neighbouring occupiers was appropriately safeguarded. At ground floor level it is considered that adequate privacy could be maintained by the provision/retention of solid fencing and landscaping.
8.16 The Operational Manager, Transportation, who is mindful of the objections/concerns raised by residents and local members, has advised that he considers the proposed development (as amended to 2 no. dwellings) to be acceptable on highway safety/parking grounds, subject to conditions/informatives outlined in at paragraph 5.1 of this report.
8.17 The proposed development site comprises a neglected garden containing several mature and sapling fruit trees and other tree species. A number of the trees are proposed to be removed to facilitate the proposed development, however, none are protected by Preservation Order.
8.18 The application has been examined by the Tree Officer who has identified certain trees considered worthy of retention on amenity grounds and others that are not desirable for retention in a development context. In this regard, the Officer has identified the desirability of retaining a large Ash tree (T7) located towards Clos Brynderi, adjacent to the proposed access, an apple tree (T5) in the north west corner of the site and Hawthorn (T2) within a group also comprising a willow (T1) and Lawson’s Cypress (T3), next to be boundary with 5 Gernant.
8.19 The amended illustrative layout plan shows the intention to retain these and several others. Specifically, with regard to the large Ash tree (T7), the retention of which is considered important on visual amenity grounds, the Officer has sought further technical information from the Agent to demonstrate that the proposed vehicular access can be constructed without significant detriment to the tree, with the intention to use a no-dig construction method and a cellular confinement system, utilising a no fines aggregates sub base.
8.20 The illustrative plan is annotated to indicate the general retention/ reinforcement of existing native species hedges. Notwithstanding this intention, in the event that outline planning permission is granted, a detailed landscape scheme will need to be prepared for the site in pursuance of the approval of reserved matters.
8.21 The Ecologist has advised that there is a very low likelihood of any protected species being present on the site, stating that the habitat itself would not qualify as a Site of Importance for Nature Conservation under published Wildlife Sites Guidance Wales.
8.22 The Officer advises that all species of bats and their roosts (whether occupied or vacant), are protected through European legislation and that in order to
103 fully implement protection it is necessary to consider both the likelihood of their presence and the affect the development would have on the sustainability of the population. Guidelines for assessing the likelihood of bats being present in a structure/tree is set out in paragraph 1.5.17 of the Council’s Biodiversity Supplementary Planning Guidance. The Officer considers that the trees on the site have low potential for bat roosts and that the presence of bats feeding in the area would not unexpected. The Officer concludes that the loss of feeding area resulting from the development would not have a detrimental affect on the population. Having regard to the low likelihood that bats are roosting in the trees and the minimal loss of feeding area, the Officer considers that it would be inappropriate to request a bat survey from the applicant.
8.23 Residents concerns regarding site drainage are noted, however, no objections have been raised to the proposed development by the Council’s Operational Manager, Drainage Management or Welsh Water/Dwr Cymru on drainage grounds subject to the attachment of an appropriate drainage condition (refer to paragraphs 5.2 and 6.1).
8.24 On balance, it is considered that the proposed development, as amended, is acceptable on planning grounds and that outline planning permission for the development of two dormer bungalows on the site should be granted, subject to the attached conditions.
8.25 At Planning Committee on 14th December, 2011, Members deferred a decision on the application to enable officers to draft reasons for refusal based upon concerns relating to neighbour impact, the visual effect on the character of Gernant and effect on trees.
8.27 As instructed, the following reasons are offered:
(i) The proposed development would be likely to harm the character and appearance of Gernant by virtue of the ‘incongruous’ appearance of the proposed dwelling at plot 2, in views from the ‘public’ area of Close. As such, it is considered that the proposal would conflict with Policy 11 (Design and Aesthetic Quality) of the adopted Local Plan, Policy 2.20 (Good Design) of the Deposit Cardiff Unitary Development Plan (October 2003) and the Council’s Supplementary Planning Guidance ‘Infill Design Guide (April 2011). (ii) The proposal, by reason of the siting and scale of the proposed dwellings would be likely to result in an unneighbourly and overbearing form of development to the detriment of the amenities of the adjoining occupiers, contrary to Policy 2.24 (Residential Amenity) of the Deposit Cardiff Unitary Development Plan (October 2003) and paragraph 4.11 of Supplementary Planning Guidance : Infill Design Guide (April 2011). (iii) The proposed access would be likely to harm a large Ash tree (T7) considered to be worthy of retention on visual amenity grounds, but virtue of its construction in very close proximity to the tree. As such the proposal is considered to be contrary to policy 2.45 (Trees Woodlands and Hedgerows) of the Deposit Cardiff Unitary Development Plan
104 (October 2003), and paragraph 3.35 of Supplementary Planning Guidance : Infill Design Guide (April 2011 and Supplementary Planning Guidance : Trees and Development (March 2007)).
8.28 Before debating these reasons, Members of Committee are respectfully reminded that the application is submitted in outline with the illustrative layout depicting a development of two dormer bungalows, that would be compatible in terms of their eaves and ridge height to the existing dwelling at 4 Gernant. A planning condition is recommended which would restrict the development to a maximum of two dormer bungalows, as proposed on the illustrative layout, and also limit the height of the dwellings so that they would be comparable with 4 Gernant.
8.29 As indicated in paragraph 8.16, the detailed appearance and layout of the dwellings would be for a future reserved matters application, when consideration would need to be given to such matters as the location of any windows within the roof space, to ensure that the privacy of neighbouring occupiers was appropriately safeguarded.
8.30 With respect to reason (iii) above, Members are advised that the Agent has submitted technical information demonstrating that the proposed vehicular access can be constructed without causing undue detriment to the tree, with the intention of using a no-dig construction method and a cellular confinement system. The Council’s tree officer has not raised objection to these details and condition 13 is recommended to address its implementation.
8.31 Members are respectfully reminded that the Council should have clear technical evidence to demonstrate why the proposed methods are not satisfactory if this reason for refusal is to be defended at appeal.
105 106 107 108 109 110 LOCAL MEMBER OBJECTION
COMMITTEE DATE: 11/01/2012
APPLICATION No. 11/1205/DCO APPLICATION DATE: 11/07/2011
ED: RHIWBINA
APP: TYPE: Full Planning Permission
APPLICANT: BUTE PROPERTY SERVICES LTD LOCATION: LLANISHEN FACH PRIMARY SCHOOL, HEOL UCHAF, RHIWBINA, CARDIFF, CF14 6SS PROPOSAL: PROPOSED RELOCATION OF EXISTING PRE-FABRICATED BUILDING TO SITE, ALTERATIONS TO EXISTING CAR PARKING AND VEHICULAR ACCESS ARRANGEMENTS ______
RECOMMENDATION 1: That planning permission be GRANTED subject to the following conditions:
1. The consent relates to the application as amended by the revised plans numbered SK_400E, AL(01)02A and AL(01)01D attached to and forming part of this planning application. Reason: The plans amend and form part of the application.
2. This consent relates to the application as supplemented by the information contained in the Opus Transport Statement dated November 2011 incorporating Travel Plan dated 13th July 2011; drawing number AL(90)01; Tree Survey dated 26th August 2011; Tree Constraints Plan dated 31st October 2011 and Opus Infiltrating Testing report dated 23rd September 2011. Reason: The information provided forms part of the application.
3. This consent relates to the application as supplemented by the Supporting Statement from Headmistress dated 23rd November and from the agent dated 29th September, 2011. Reason: The information provided forms part of the application.
4. No development shall take place until details of the car park and access arrangements through the site have been submitted to and approved by the Local Planning Authority (LPA) in writing. These details to include (but not be limited to) the provision of speed reducing features throughout the length of the 'one way' system, together with associated signage and carriageway markings and the provision of a pedestrian / cycle link to the south east of the site. The car park and associated works shall be constructed, surfaced and laid out in accordance with the approved details before the development is brought into beneficial use. Thereafter the car park shall be maintained and shall not be used for any purpose other than the parking of vehicles.
111 Reason: To make provision for the parking of vehicles clear of the roads so as not to prejudice the safety, convenience and free flow of traffic.
5. No development shall take place until details showing the provision of a minimum of 10No additional cycle parking spaces have been submitted to and approved in writing by the LPA. The approved details shall be implemented prior to the development being put into beneficial use. Thereafter the cycle parking spaces shall be maintained and the numbers reviewed / increased as appropriate in accordance with the approved Travel Plan (conditioned below) and shall not be used for any other purpose. Reason: To ensure that adequate provision is made for the sheltered and secure parking of cycles
6. Details of the proposed highway works at the junction of Heol Llanishen Fach / egress from the site shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the LPA. These details to comprise (but not be limited to) footway build-outs, upgrading of the existing footway including kerbing, re- surfacing and permanent bollards. The scheme so approved to be implemented to the satisfaction of the LPA prior to the beneficial occupation of the development. Reason: to ensure that vehicles associated with the site do not interfere with the convenience and free flow of traffic at this location.
7. Prior to commencement of each phase of development a scheme of construction management shall be submitted to and approved by the LPA. This scheme shall include details of how the existing school will continue to operate whilst the construction is taking place, together with construction traffic routes, site hoardings, site access, parking of contractor’s vehicles and wheel washing facilities. The development construction of the relevant phase shall be managed strictly in accordance with the scheme so approved. Reason: In the interests of highway safety, public amenity and to avoid any conflict situations with pupils and/or staff attending/working on this site.
8. No part of the development hereby permitted shall be occupied until the Existing School Travel Plan has been updated and submitted to and approved in writing by the LPA. The Travel Plan (TP) shall set out proposals and targets, together with a timetable to limit or reduce the number of single occupancy car journeys to the site, and to promote travel by sustainable modes. The approved TP shall be implemented in accordance with the timetable as set out, unless otherwise agreed in writing with the LPA. Reports demonstrating progress in promoting the sustainable transport measures detailed in the TP shall be submitted annually to the LPA, commencing from the first anniversary of beneficial occupation of the development. Reason: To accord with the Council's Access, Circulation and Parking Standards Supplementary Planning Guidance
112 9. The area beneath the canopy spread of T1 shown on drawing SK_400E shall not be used as a permanent playground. Reason: the footfall of regular play will compact soils and thereby impede water percolation and gaseous diffusion, with a consequent detrimental impact on tree health.
10. The footway construction within the Root Protection Area of T1 as shown on drawing SK_400E must be ‘no-dig’ and fully permeable Barriers to prevent parking in the rooting zone area may be required. Reason: To minimise direct root loss and a contraction in rooting volume
11. Details of the construction method and materials of the footpath shown to be within the nominal Root Protection Area of T1 as shown on drawing SK_400E, shall be submitted to and approved in writing to the Local Planning Authority prior to the commencement of the construction of the proposed footpath. The footpath shall be implemented in accordance with the approved details. Reason: To minimise direct root loss and a contraction in rooting volume
12. C4P Landscaping Design & Implementation Pro
13. C4R Landscaping Implementation
14. Within one month of the date of this permission, details shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority, showing the erection of a solid means of enclosure along the school’s common boundary with No. 71 Heol Uchaf. The height of the solid means of enclosure shall be agreed in consultation with the owner/occupier of No. 71 Heol Uchaf. The approved solid means of enclosure shall then be erected with three months of the date of this permission. Reason: In the interests of the privacy of the residents at No. 71 Heol Uchaf.
RECOMMENDATION 2: The applicant is advised that foul and surface water discharges must be drained separately from the site. No land drainage run-off shall be permitted to connect (either directly or indirectly) to the public sewerage system and the developer should contact the Local Authority Drainage Services for advice if it is intended to drain surface water to the public sewerage system. If connection is required to the public sewerage system, the developer is advised to contact Dwr Cymru Welsh Water’s Development Services on 0800 917 2562.
RECOMMENDATION 3: The applicant is advised to employ a fully qualified and insured arboriculturist, to periodically undertake a ‘Tree Hazard Assessment’ of T1 as shown on drawing SK_400E. The school should then act as quickly as possible on the recommendations of the assessment. The positioning of a crèche and play area so close to T1, increases the risks of people or property being harmed by the failure of part of the tree.
RECOMMENDATION 4: That a financial contribution be secured to enable
113 surveys to be undertaken in the immediate vicinity of the site - and if appropriate to fund the implementation of the associated TRO/s. This sum to be £3,120 (incl. the 4%).
RECOMMENDATION 5: The applicant is advised to liaise with the Councils Transport Projects Team, City Development in order to agree an acceptable access scheme linking Heol Erwin with the site.
RECOMMENDATION 6: The applicant is advised to liaise with the Councils Transport Projects Team, City Development in order to agree the details of the highway works conditioned above.
1. DESCRIPTION OF PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT
1.1 This full application seeks permission for the siting of a single storey modular building, to be located to the south of the existing school nursery modular building. The structure measures 12 metres in length, 12.2 metres in width and has a dual pitch roof with a ridge height of 3.5 metres and eaves height of 2.5 metres. The building is a pre-fabricated timber and rendered structure with a tiled pitch roof. The building is sited approximately 15m from the school’s western boundary with Nos. 79 and 81 Heol Uchaf.
1.2 The building is to be used as a crèche to care for up to 18 children with four full-time employees. The crèche would open from 8am – 6pm Monday – Friday to offer an on -site ‘wrap around’ child care facility for parents who need child care for the hours before or after nursery. This is similar to the current Playcare at Llanishen Fach School (PALS), which provides families with ‘before and after’ school care alleviating child care difficulties (for children aged 4-11) of working parents in the area. The crèche would be open during the school holidays. It is noted that the school intake is to remain the same. 1.3 The provision of the crèche facility is part of the schools aim to continually evolve as a ‘community focused school’ (a major part of the Welsh Assembly Government’s vision for 21st century schools) and to deliver the Local Authority's aim of using the facilities offered by the school, to the local community as much as possible. 1.4 The modular building has already been erected without the benefit of planning permission. It has been occupied by the children with conditions such as cerebral palsy who are taught in the school, this being a temporary arrangement, decided by headmistress, whilst construction of a specialist base unit (approved under planning permission 11/01432/DCO) took place.
1.5 Proposals include alterations to the car parking and access areas, which are sited to the east of the dwellings on Heol Uchaf. The proposals include the provision of formalised parking spaces comprising: 6 staff car parking spaces at the school’s entrance to the north of No. 71 Heol Ucaf (the area is currently using as an informal staff parking area); 4 disabled spaces (opposite to the staff parking area); 7 visitor/staff car parking spaces to the south of the modular building with a pick up/drop off area in front of these spaces; a row of 26 spaces adjacent to boundaries with properties on Heol Uchaf and 9 spaces
114 opposite to the existing nursery. Aside from 4 demarcated spaces there is currently no formal parking allocated within the school. Ten cycle bays are also proposed adjacent to this area.
1.6 Three protected trees are located adjacent to the development areas, one adjacent to the demountable structure and two to the parking areas to be developed. Two unprotected trees within the site, adjacent to proposed parking areas have also been assessed.
1.7 Amended plans were submitted, which show: the retention of a one way vehicular route through the school instead of the two way route as initially proposed; a revised car parking layout; the repositioning of the modular building as erected and proposals to the existing trees on the site within the development area.
1 DESCRIPTION OF SITE
1.1 The site is comprised of a primary school complex sited within a residential area. The site is enclosed by residential development with dwellings sited adjacent to the schools eastern boundary (on Heol Uchaf); southern boundary (on Heol Llanishen Fach); western boundary (on Clos Ton Mawr) and northern boundary (on Heol Urwin). The school’s main entrance is on Heol Uchaf. The school complex comprises: the single storey block to the northwest; the two storey detached block to the northeast; the detached single storey nursery block to the south of the permanent school buildings; playground areas and the extensive playing fields to the south.
1.2 The school already holds breakfast and after school clubs (07:55-08:55am and 3:30 – 6:00pm) for over 600 children a week and encourages community use of the school’s facilities Saturdays and during school holidays by sports clubs and musical theatre groups and offers the local community access to the ICT suite for IT lessons.
2 SITE HISTORY
2.1 11/01432/DCO – proposed extension to existing school – granted and implemented
2.2 10/01335/DCO – creation of a single storey link between 2 buildings used solely for access purposes – granted and implemented
2.3 98/00859/N – provision of a new timber framed structure to be used as nursery – granted
3.4 94/01449/N – roof conversion from flat to pitched configuration of a school building – no objection raised
4. POLICY FRAMEWORK
4.1 Planning Policy Wales (February 2011):
115
4.2 Paragraph 3.4.3 ‘When a new building is proposed, an existing building is being extended or altered, or a change of use is proposed, developers should consider the need to make it accessible for all those who might use the building’.
4.3 City of Cardiff Local Plan (January 1996)
Policy 11 (Design and Aesthetic Quality) Policy 17 (Parking and Servicing Facilities) Policy 18 (Provision for Cyclists) Policy 19 (Provision for Pedestrians) Policy 20 (Provision for Special Needs Groups)
4.4 Supplementary Planning Guidance (adopted)
Access, Circulation and Parking Standards (January 2010) Trees and Development (March 2007) Buildings for Childcare (September 1998) (see paragraphs below)
3.1 ‘Day child-care facilities provide a valuable service for parents and carers’….’To meet the needs of users, facilities need to be easily accessible to housing areas, shopping areas or other employment areas.’
3.2 ‘Because of their effect on residential amenity, the preferred location for childcare facilities is within employment areas or shopping centres’….’Proposals for facilities seeking to operate outside normal working hours (i.e. 8am to 6pm, Mondays to Fridays) will normally be restricted to such locations. ‘
3.7 ‘In determining whether demonstrable harm is likely to be caused, the Council will have regard to the following factors: Type of property (preferred properties being detached etc) The character of the area (the essential residential character of an area should not be undermined having regard to the existence of other non- residential uses in a street or area) The number of children to be cared for and staff employed (traffic, parking, play requirements and noise have to be accommodated without adversely affecting highway safety or causing nuisance to neighbours.
4.2 ‘Properties which enable dropping off and collection to take place within the site will be more acceptable.’
4.6 Restrictions on opening hours may be included as a condition on any planning permission. Consent within residential areas will normally be limited to operation between 8am and 6pm on Mondays to Fridays unless it can be demonstrated that no harm would be caused to the amenity of neighbours.
4.5 Deposited Cardiff Unitary Development Plan (October 2003)
116 Policy 2.20 (Good Design) Policy 2.24 (Residential Amenity) Policy 2.45 (Trees, Woodlands and Hedgerows) Policy 2.57 (Access, Circulation and Parking Requirements) Policy 2.64 (Air, Light and Noise Pollution)
5 INTERNAL CONSULTEE RESPONSES
5.1 City Development Transportation has no objection to the principle of the proposed new crèche facility subject to the conditions and recommendations set out above.
5.2 City Development Natural Environment Trees has some concerns with regard to a protected tree and two mature trees to the north of the parking areas (T1, T4 and T5). Subject to amended proposals to areas adjacent to the trees and adequate planning conditions, the proposal is considered to be acceptable.
5.3 City Services Drainage Management Following the results of the permeability tests undertaken on site ‘ It is apparent from the information now provided that the ground on site is not suitable for the use of infiltration drainage and therefore discharges to the local public sewerage system, either directly or indirectly, can be considered although any such proposals will require the agreement of Dwr Cymru Welsh Water.’
5.4 Regulatory and Supporting Services Pollution Control (Noise and Air and Contaminated Land) has no comments.
5.5 City Services Waste Strategy and Minimisation advises that the details provided are acceptable.
5.6 School Services Education has not commented on the application.
5.7 School Services Nursery School has not commented on the application.
6 EXTERNAL CONSULTEE RESPONSES
6.1 Welsh Water has provided comments relating to the discharge of foul and surface water (see advisory notes above).
7 REPRESENTATIONS
7.1 Forty-seven neighbouring properties were consulted.
7.2 Objections and concerns have been received from the residents of Nos.81, 100 and 110 Heol Uchaf and No. 133 Heol Llanishen Fach.
The objections and concerns relate to:
• Overlooking
117 • Proposal being an over-development of the site • Safety of pedestrians • Would result in loss of mature trees • Increase in congestion • Obstruction of views of Heol Uchaf School crossing from parents parking across residents drives • One way system works well • Width of the gates and lane rear of shops not wide enough for ingress and exit of vehicles without causing congestion • Road improvements in area are for the safety of children but the ever increasing numbers at school increases risk of a child being injured. • The small school now has the highest number of primary school pupils in all Cardiff • Erection of structure prior to the end of the 21 day consultation process • Lack of consultation
7.3 Letters have been received from Councillor Cowan. One letter refers to concerns of the resident of No. 71 Heol Uchaf who has a mature tree close to her property and has a number of cars parked at the side of her house and feels that it is an intrusion and at times feels claustrophobic. People parked at the side of her house can look directly into her kitchen window. Another letter from Councillor Cowan refers to the concerns of residents of the school not following the correct procedure in respect of submitting an application; the potential extra number of pupils attending the school and the impact they would have in the locality and the development being an un-neighbourly application.
7.4 Jonathan Evans MP was notified, by his constituents, of the unlawful development forming part of this application. He voices his concerns over the erection of the demountable structure less than nine days after the neighbour notification letters were delivered to neighbouring residents, which he believes might suggest that the Council has already approved the application. He also points out that works continued to be carried out even after residents informed planning of the unlawful structure, questioning the integrity of the planning system.
7.5 A petition of 40 signatures and four letters in support of the application has been received from local parents whose children attend the school. The letters explain that the new development:
• will not cause further traffic problems in area • will enhance the facilities already provided • will cause less disruption for children attending the crèche • is a step forward for the school
It is considered that without the facility, parents will have to look elsewhere for this resource adding to the number vehicles on the road.
118 8. ANALYSIS
8.1 This application is for the addition of a demountable structure within the grounds of the school for use as a crèche facility, to offer care for children of ages 6 months – 5 years of age. The school already provides additional educational and recreational activities (both for its pupils and for local community residents) outside of normal school hours and during the weekend, as reported above. This is part of its aim to become a ‘community focused school’, which is defined by the Welsh Assembly Government as ‘one that provides a range of services and activities, often beyond the school day, to help meet the needs of its pupils, their families and the wider community’. Due to this and the scale of the proposed development, in providing spaces for no more than 18 children, within a school complex that accommodates 440 full-time and 80 part-time pupils) it is considered that the proposal is ancillary to the use of the school, and furthermore the existing educational use and proposed crèche use fall within the same D1 Use Class. Planning permission is not required for this proposed use just the physical works. No material change of use, within part of the school’s grounds, is proposed.
8.2 Although the crèche is considered to be ancillary to the school, the siting of the demountable building, to the south of existing school buildings, as well as the alterations to the car parking area, must be assessed to ensure that no detrimental impact is caused on the neighbouring residents or on highway and pedestrian safety as a result of the development.
8.3 With regard to the impact of the development on neighbour amenity, the structure is sited approximately 15m from the boundary of the residential gardens of properties on Heol Uchaf and over 30m from the houses themselves. Due to these distances there are considered to be no concerns relating to residential amenity due to the nature of the use of the facility. There is also considered to be no adverse impact relating to the privacy of the neighbouring occupants due to the distances of the structure to their properties.
8.4 The operating hours of the crèche of 8am to 6pm is considered to be acceptable as this directly relates to the operating times of the existing before and after clubs provided at the school. The facility will also be available during outside school terms but it is noted that there are no restrictions on the current school use. There is no reason to restrict the proposed use.
8.5 With regard to the impact on highway and pedestrian safety, City Development Transportation has assessed the information submitted and has no objection to the proposed parking areas subject to conditions and recommendations (as above).
8.6 It is noted that many of the proposed formalised parking spaces are sited close to the rear boundaries of the dwellings on Heol Uchaf, to the west of the development area. However, it is not considered that there would any detrimental impact on the amenity of the neighbouring residents as a result of this, especially when considering that vehicles can already park in this area.
119 With regard to the concerns of the resident at No. 71 Heol Uchaf, relating to the parking of vehicles to the north of her house resulting in her feeling claustrophobic and suffering a loss of privacy, it is conditioned that a high boundary means of enclosure be erected along the boundary with No. 71 to overcome these concerns.
8.7 The development will not have a detrimental impact on the trees that have been assessed within the site subject to the conditions and recommendations above.
8.8 In response to the other issues raised, it is not considered that the development constitutes an over-development of the site due to the scale of the demountable building in relation to the size of the school complex. The fact that the school now has the highest number of primary school pupils in all Cardiff is not a material planning consideration.
8.9 The proposal is recommended for approval subject to conditions.
120 121 122 123 124 LOCAL MEMBER OBJECTION
COMMITTEE DATE: 11/01/2012
APPLICATION No. 11/1359/DCO APPLICATION DATE: 18/08/2011
ED: PENTYRCH
APP: TYPE: Full Planning Permission
APPLICANT: Mr Gass LOCATION: TYLA MORRIS FARM, CHURCH ROAD, PENTYRCH, CARDIFF, CF15 9QN PROPOSAL: RETENTION OF USE OF LAND FOR RECREATIONAL PAINTBALL GAMES, TOGETHER WITH ERECTION OF ANCILLARY STRUCTURES. ______
RECOMMENDATION 1: That planning permission be GRANTED subject to the following conditions:
1. This consent relates to the application as supplemented by the information contained in the letter from the agent dated 17th November and 21st December 2011. Reason: The information provided forms part of the application.
2. No member of the public shall be admitted to or allowed to remain on the premises between the hours of 17:30 and 08:45 on any day. Reason: To ensure that the amenities of occupiers of other neighbouring properties in the vicinity of the site are protected.
3. No paint grenades, smoke bombs, flash grenades or any other form of pyrotechnics or explosive equipment shall be used at any time. Reason : In the interests of amenities of the neighbouring occupiers.
4. Once the use of the site, subject of this planning permission ceases all structures associated with the use of the site for paintballing shall be removed, and the site shall be returned to its former condition within 6 months of the cessation of the use of the site for paintballing. Reason: In the interests of the protection of the environment.
5. Planning permission for the use of the site for paintballing does not extend to the entire site, but to the locations as identified as part of this submitted application. Any future expansion of the gaming areas would require the submission of a new planning application. Reason: The merits of the application have been assessed on the current use of the site. Any intensification of the use of the site would require further consideration.
125 6. The land, associated structures and buildings shall be used only for the purposes specified in the application and for no other purpose (including any other purpose in Use Class D2 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 amending, revoking or re- enacting that Order). Reason: The use of the land, associated structures and buildings for other purposes within Use Class D2 would be likely to detract from the amenities of nearby occupiers and permission for the particular use applied for is only granted because of the special considerations peculiar to it.
7. Within 2 months of the date of this permission full site plan details showing areas of heavy footfall to be covered with wood chippings shall be submitted to the Local Planning Authority for approval. The wood chippings shall be applied as indicated within the submitted details within 2 months of the date of approval of the submitted details, and shall thereafter be maintained as approved. Reason: In order to mitigate for soil compaction and to offer protection for tree roots.
8. The car park shown on the approved plans shall be maintained hereafter and shall be used for no other purpose other than the parking of vehicles associated with the paintballing use of the site. Reason:
9. Within 2 months of the date of this permission details showing allocated car and mini bus parking together with a drop off facility for use by private cars and /or taxis shall be submitted to the Local Planning Authority. Within 2 months of the date of written confirmation provided by the Local Planning Authority of the acceptability of the submitted details, the works shall be implemented and shall thereafter be maintained and the parking used for no other purposes other than indicated on the approved plans. Reason: To ensure that the use of the development does not interfere with the safety and free flow of traffic passing along the highway abutting the site.
10. C3S Cycle Parking
11. The rating level of the noise emitted from fixed plant and equipment on the site shall not exceed 5dBA at any residential property when measured and corrected in accordance with BS 4142 : 1997. Reason: To ensure that the amenities of occupiers of other premises in the vicinity are protected.
12. C4X Treatment of Japanese Knotweed
13. All game zones will be rested on rotation between October and March (2 zones) and March to August (1 zone) as set out in section 5.1 of the Habitat Survey Report. In addition to resting times, the edges of all game
126 zones and paths will be clearly demarcated and buffer zones of at least 5 metres shall be maintained at the boundaries between game zones in accordance with section 5.3 of the Habitat Survey Report. Reason: To protect the features of importance for nature conservation for which the SINC has been designated.
14. No materials, waste, arisings or plant shall be stored or operated within the Former Penrhos Branch Line SINC, outside the site boundary identified within the planning application, or allowed to fall, be washed or blown into it. Reason: To protect the features of importance for nature conservation for which the SINC has been designated.
15. No removal of trees, shrubs, bushes or hedgerows shall take place between 1st February and 15th August without prior written approval from the Local Planning Authority. Reason: To avoid disturbance to nesting birds which are protected under the Wildlife and Countryside Act 1981: Part 1, 1(1)(b). it is an offence to intentionally take, damage or destroy the nest of any wild bird while that nest is in use or being built.
16. The cesspool on site shall be operated in accordance with the requirements set out in the Environment Agency’s letter dated 21st December 2011 (forwarded to the applicant’s agent on same date). Reason: In order to minimise the risk of pollution from the cesspool on site.
17. No sound amplification equipment shall be used on site. Reason : To ensure that the amenities of neighbouring residential occupiers in the vicinity are protected.
RECOMMENDATION 2: That the applicant be aware that bats and dormice and their habitats are protected against disturbance by both UK and European legislation. The countryside Council for Wales should be contacted if evidence of either animal if discovered during development.
. RECOMMENDATION 3: That the applicant be aware that Badgers and their setts are legally protected under the Protection of Badgers Act (1992). It is illegal to disturb or harm any badger or sett. There is a high potential that badgers are using the site. Any activities to be undertaken outside of the current footprint should be preceded by a badger survey by a suitably qualified ecologist
1. DESCRIPTION OF DEVELOPMENT
1.1 Retrospective planning permission is sought for the use of recreational paintball games and ancillary structures. There are numerous structures contained within the site, ranging from café/ central meeting point and changing areas / toilets through to structures used for gaming such as imitation village huts and troop landing boats and parking for 45 vehicles. The
127 facility employs 1 full time member of staff and 12 part time.
2. DESCRIPTION OF SITE
2.1 The site is located to the north of the M4, outside of the settlement boundary and within open countryside. The site measures 6.03 hectares in total and is largely wooded. The site is located within the Coedgae Fawr Site of Importance for Nature Conservation (SINC) and adjacent to the Former Penrhos Branch Line SINC.
3. SITE HISTORY
3.1 None.
4. POLICY FRAMEWORK
4.1 The application site is identified in the proposals map of the adopted City of Cardiff Local Plan as open countryside.
4.2 Relevant Local Plan policies include:
Policy 5 (The Countryside Including the Urban Fringe) Policy 8 (Nature Conservation) Policy 17 (Parking and Servicing Facilities) Policy 18 (Provision for cyclists) Policy 19 (Provision for pedestrians)
4.3 The following policies of the Deposit Cardiff Unitary Development Plan (October 2003) are considered to be relevant to the proposal.
Policy 2.20 (Good Design) Policy 2.24 (Residential Amenity) Policy 2.39 (General Countryside Protection) Policy 2.43 (General Landscape Protection) Policy 2.45 (Trees Woodlands and Hedgerows) Policy 2.47 (Sites of Local Importance for Nature conservation) Policy 2.48 (Biodiversity) Policy 2.57 (Access, Circulation and Parking Requirements) Policy 2.64 (Air, noise and light pollution) Policy 2.74 (Provision of Waste Management Facilities in Development)
4.4 The following Supplementary Planning Guidance (SPG) is considered relevant:
(i) Access, Circulation and Parking (ii) Waste Collection and Storage
5. INTERNAL CONSULTEE RESPONSES
5.1 The Chief Transport, Infrastructure and Waste Officer (Drainage) has no
128 comments.
5.2 The Operational Manager, Environment (Pollution Control) advises that due to complaints received previously regarding the use of the site Pollution Control would prohibit the use of flash, paint and smoke grenades on site. In addition a condition requiring the control of plant noise on site, ensuring that levels do not exceed 5dB(A) above background noise is recommended.
5.3 The Operational Manager Waste Management advises that the submitted plans make no reference to the storage of waste and recycling and presentation for collection waste must be included on site plans and retained for future use. A commercial contract is required for the collection and disposal of all commercial waste (see Waste Collection and Storage Facilities SPG)
5.4 The Operational Manager Transportation advises: ‘Further to the additional information provided, I can confirm that Transportation would have no objection to the proposal as submitted, on the basis that the trip generation will be low, i.e. 30 vehicles in the morning (8:45am - 9:15am) and 30 vehicles in the afternoon (3:30pm - 4:30pm), as stated in the Transport Statement (TS), and that this occurs generally 3 days a week. In addition, the existing access arrangements are deemed to be acceptable in principle, but I would request that details be submitted which show the existing dimensions - including the visibility splays (which the TS states is adequate);
The number of car parking spaces is accepted in principle on the basis that these are as existing, but it would be recommended that the layout be formalised and as such a condition is required , to include mini-bus spaces and a drop off facility for use by private vehicles and/or taxis’
5.3 The Countryside Team advise:
Policy Background Planning Policy Wales 7.3.3 Local Planning Authorities should adopt a positive approach to development associated with farm diversification in rural areas. 11.1.8 Planning Authorities should provide the framework for well-located, good quality tourism, sport, recreational and leisure facilities. TAN 6 Planning for Sustainable Rural Communities
3.7 Farm diversification 3.7.1 When considering planning applications for farm diversification projects, planning authorities should consider the nature and scale of the activity taking a proportionate approach to the availability of public transport and the need for highway improvements. While consideration should be given to converting existing buildings for employment use, sensitively located and designed new buildings will often be appropriate. 3.7.2 Many economic activities can be sustainably located on small farms. Small on-farm operations such as……..sports and recreation services…..are likely to be appropriate.
129
Mid Glamorgan Structure Plan Approved Plan incorporating Proposed Policy S3 There will be a presumption against :- Development in the open countryside unless it is in the interests of agriculture or forestry, except for the conversion of suitable redundant buildings to private residential or tourist accommodation or business class.
Policy RT4 There will be a presumption in favour of the development of suitable recreational facilities such as a golf course, playing fields and informal recreation uses on the fringe of urban areas.
Deposit UDP Policy 2.39: General Countryside Protection Development will only be permitted outside Settlement Boundaries if: It is essential for agriculture, forestry or minerals extraction; It will facilitate access to an enjoyment of the countryside, including outdoor sport and outdoor recreation uses; It will support acceptable farm diversification; or It is for the provision of necessary utility services that cannot be more satisfactorily accommodated with settlement boundaries Wherever possible, development in the countryside should be in harmony with and not cause unacceptable harm to the character and quality of the area.
Policy 2.43: General Landscape Protection Development will not be permitted that would cause unacceptable harm to the character and quality of the landscape The application site is outside the settlement boundary as defined by the Deposit UDP.
Landscape Study 2008 The site falls outside the Garth Hill Ridges and Pentyrch Valleys proposed SLA and within the Pentyrch Ridges and Valleys Landscape Character Area. I have looked at the Landmap data for this area states the following:- Visual and Sensory Aspect is classed as moderate. Character details are outlined below:- the area is characterised by gently undulating rural landscape which lies at the foot to the steeper slopes to the north small to medium pastures enclosed by strong hedgerows with some larger fields to the north of the M4. settlement is predominantly rural and scattered but in places suburban in character some smaller busy roads deciduous woodlands the varied topography and tree cover limits wider views.
2. Historic Landscape is classed as High given the area contains a well- preserved irregular fieldscape, limited encroachment, network of intact hedgerows/banks and a pattern of dispersed isolated farmsteads.
130 3. Landscape Habitats is classed as High given the woodlands has been designated as a SINC. Geological Landscape classed a Moderate.
Planning History It appears from information submitted that the paint ball centre has been in operation at the site since 2004. Enforcement action has prompted the submission of an application to formalise the use.
Site Details The site is a private woodland which forms part of Tyla Morris Farm. It is surrounded by open fields with hedgerows to the north, west and east and a wooded area to the south east. It is accessed off a lane from Church Road which leads to a large car park to the west of the woods. The M4 corridor runs to the SE of the site.
Proposed use Although Policy S3 of the Mid Glamorgan Structure Plan suggests there is a presumption against development in the countryside if it is for a use other than Agriculture and Forestry, Policy RT4 suggests that suitable recreational facilities may be appropriate. More recent policy guidance (UDP 2.39 and national guidance) generally suggests that outdoor sport and recreation may be acceptable within the countryside providing it is in harmony with and does not cause unacceptable harm to the character of the area. The submission also states that the land on which the Paintball centre is located is rented out by the farming operation at Tyla Morris Farm and therefore constitutes a farm diversification scheme. Although farm diversification is supported by current policy, subject to the tests of unacceptable harm, no supporting evidence has been submitted with the application.
Assessment of harm The paint ball ‘games zone’ and ‘base camp’ are located within the woodland and although the character of the woodland has changed, it is well screened from wider views into the site, including the PROW’s in the vicinity and not located within the proposed Special Landscape Area. Having assessed the Landmap data, it is also considered that, on balance, the proposal would not adversely affect the character of the area, (character assessment as outlined above) and subject to comments from the Ecologist and Tree Preservation Officer with regard to the SINC. However, I would suggest that consideration is given to attaching conditions to ensure there is not an intensification of use following any consent. I would have concerns, for example, if more advertising boards were erected or anything more visible/permanent ancillary structures were erected within the car park or around the edge of the woodlands, as this would be likely to detract from the landscape character of the area.
5.6 Council’s Ecology Team advise:
‘Japanese Knotweed is present on the site therefore we recommend the
131 following condition is attached to any permission granted:
A detailed scheme for the treatment and disposal of soil affected by Japanese Knotweed to be submitted to the LPA. Such a scheme shall accord with the advice in the publication The Eradication of Japanese Knotweed (WDA: Cardiff 1998) and Guidance for the Control of Invasive Plants Near Watercourses (Environment Agency 2001). Thereafter activities on the site shall be carried out in accordance with the approved scheme. Reason: To ensure the safe destruction and prevention of spread of Japanese Knotweed.
The development site is mostly contained within the Coedgae Fawr Site of Importance for Nature Conservation (SINC). The SINC is designated for its ancient woodland ground flora. The Habitat Survey Report notes the detrimental affect of the activities on the ground flora. The report sets out (5.0) Management, Mitigation and Enhancements. It is also adjacent to the Former Penrhos Branch Line SINC. We would like the following conditions attached to any permissions granted:
(i) All game zones will be rested on rotation between October and March (2 zones) and March to August (1 zone) as set out in section 5.1 of the HSR. In addition to resting times, the edges of all game zones and paths will be clearly demarcated and buffer zones of at least 5 meters should be maintained at the boundaries between game zones in accordance with section 5.3 of the HSR. Reason: To protect the features of importance for nature conservation for which the SINC has been designated.
(ii) No materials, waste, arisings or plant shall be stored or operated within the Former Penrhos Branch Line SINC, outside the site boundary identified within the planning application, or allowed to fall, be washed or blown into it. Reason: To protect the features of importance for nature conservation for which the SINC has been designated.
(iii) No removal of trees, shrubs, bushes or hedgerows shall take place between 1st February and 15th August without prior written approval form the LPA. Reason: To avoid disturbance to nesting birds which are protected under the Wildlife and Countryside Act 1981: Part 1, 1(1)(b). it is an offence to intentionally take, damage or destroy the nest of any wild bird while that nest is in use or being built.
Given the nature of the site there is a likelihood of bats using the trees to roost. Therefore, we would like the following advisory note put on any permissions granted:
Bats often roost in trees. All bats and their roosts are protected against disturbance under UK and European legislation. If works to trees have already commenced and bats are found, or if any evidence that bats are using the site
132 as a roost is found, work should cease and CCW should be contacted immediately.
The area of marshy grassland identified in Figure 1 (Phase 1 Habitat Map) has been identified as carrying a relatively high ecological value. In order to protect this area and unused areas of the woodland we recommend adherence to section 5.4 of the HRS.
Dormice – this site has a high potential for Dormice to be present due to its connection to a known population (evidence found at land north of M4 J32, 2.2 kilometres to the West of the site). Dormice and their habitat are protected against disturbance by UK and European legislation. As surveys were not undertaken for the HSR we have no reason to believe that they are not present on the site. Any work involving clearance of trees, bushes and scrub would need to be preceded by a full Dormouse survey by a licensed surveyor. If Dormice are found then no work can be done on site until a licence from WAG is obtained. CCW should be contacted as soon as a survey indicates the presence of Dormice. If Dormice are found during routine works on site, work must stop and CCW contacted immediately. Any habitat destruction resulting in damage/disturbance to Dormice and their habitat is a legal matter between the owner/occupiers and the police/CCW.
Badgers – Badgers and their setts are legally protected under the Protection of Badgers Act (1992). It is illegal to disturb or harm any badger or sett. The badger survey was limited and there is a high potential that badgers are using this site. Any activities to be undertaken outside of the current footprint should be preceded by a badger survey by a suitably qualified ecologist.
These comments contribute to this Authority’s discharge of its duties under Section 40 of the Natural Environment and Rural Communities (NERC) Act 2006, wherein: (1) Every public authority must, in exercising its functions, have regard, so far as is consistent with the proper exercise of those functions, to the purpose of conserving biodiversity. (3) Conserving biodiversity includes, in relation to a living organism or type of habitat, restoring or enhancing a population or habitat’.
5.7 Council Tree and Landscape Officers advise:
‘It would appear that the site has been used in its current layout, or similar, since 2004 and that this application does not propose construction of any additional facilities within the site. With regard to impact on the woodland and the trees within it, the site obviously experiences a high level of pedestrian traffic. This traffic is spread extensively over the site rather than being limited to well used and delineated footpaths that would normally be found within a recreational woodland environment. As a result the area will feature extensively compacted soil that has the potential to compromise trees by limiting water percolation and gaseous diffusion. This may potentially lead to a level of root death resulting in issues relating to the long term health and structural integrity of the trees. This in turn may have implications with regard to health and safety and the owner’s statutory duty of care with regard to
133 visitors onto the land. The high levels of pedestrian traffic may also serve to lessen, or even negate natural regeneration within the woodland.
We would not seek to prevent the continued use of the woodland as a recreational facility but consideration should be given to the long-term implications for the site in relation to the above comments. It is noted that in the design and access statement the use of wood chip is mentioned in relation to areas of heavy footfall. The more extensive use of wood chip at the site would certainly be encouraged as not only does it to some extent directly lessen the impact of heavy pedestrian traffic, it also has a number of associated benefits in relation to the rooting environment of trees including;
• moisture retention • encouragement of beneficial soil flora and fauna • relief from compaction (especially by encouraging earthworm activity) • mitigation of extremes of soil temperature • absorption of toxic materials • release of nutrients into the soil’
6. EXTERNAL CONSULTEES RESPONSES
6.1 The Countryside Council for Wales advises:
‘In summary, CCW does not object to this proposal. We welcome the Phase 1 Habitat Survey by JFA Environmental Planning dated June 2011 that was submitted with this consultation.
European Protected Species We concur with the ecological consultant’s report that no further surveys are required, providing that the paintball activities and site design remain at its current state. However, should any European Protected Species be encountered at the site, we recommend that CCW are contacted in the first instance for advice. In addition, if the applicant wishes to carry out further vegetation clearance or extend the paintball games site, CCW recommends that the applicant consults his ecologist and appropriate surveys of the site are undertaken.
Japanese Knotweed We note the consultant found Japanese knotweed and Himalayan balsam on site. We recommend that you consult the Environment Agency for advice, particularly regarding treatment and disposal of Japanese knotweed treatment since this planning application is for retention of recreational use. High use of the site by the public could lead to the spread of these invasive plant species. Local Biodiversity Please note that we have not considered possible effects on all species and habitats listed in section 42 of the Natural Environment and Rural Communities (NERC) Act 2006, or on the Local Biodiversity Action Plan or other local natural heritage interests. To comply with your authority's duty under section 40 of the NERC Act, to have regard to conserving biodiversity, your decision should take account of possible adverse effects on such
134 interests. We recommend that you seek further advice from your authority's internal ecological adviser for local biodiversity issues’.
6.2 The Environment Agency has advised that it is satisfied with the foul drainage details which have been submitted. The EA advises the applicant:
• The cesspool requires regular emptying and must not be allowed to overflow. We recommend you install an alarmed level warning device to indicate when it is nearly full. • Whoever empties your cesspool is a registered waste carrier and duty of care transfer notes are retained for each disposal. • The cesspool is regularly inspected and maintained. We suggest that a service and maintenance contract is sought.
6.3 The Police Architectural Liaison Officer has no objections.
7. REPRESENTATIONS
7.1 An objection has been received from Councillor R McKerlich. The representations raise concerns regarding: 7.2 (i) Noise pollution prejudicing the amenities of neighbouring residential occupiers. (ii) Fumes / smoke prejudicing the amenities of neighbouring residential occupiers. (iii) Impact upon wildlife such as badgers and brown hares. (iv) The burning of refuse on site. (v) The removal of woodland. (vi) If planning permission is granted then equipment used on site should be restricted, hours of operation should be restricted to 10am-4pm, the site should only be used Saturdays, Sundays and for one other day per week and the field closest to Pantawel Lane and the disused railway line should not be used.
7.3 Letters of objection have been received from the occupiers of nos. 1 and 2 Pantawel Cottages, The following issues are raised: 7.4 (i) Noise pollution (ii) Air pollution from smoke and fumes (iii) Removal of woodland (iv) Damage to wildlife population including numerous species of birds, brown hares, badgers, foxes, frogs, toads and newts. (v) Burning of refuse on site. (vi) Paintballing takes place more often than stated on application forms, and Cardiff is a designated national centre and on the Delta Force website national centres are open 365 days per year. (vii) Paintballing takes place until as late as 7pm on summer nights, not 4.30pm as stated in application.
135 (viii) There are toilets provided on site and no details of foul drainage contained within the application. (ix) Games should be restricted to Saturdays and Sundays and one other day per week. (x) The habitat survey was carried out in May 2011 after 7 years of destructive use of the site for paintballing. The survey does not therefore reflect the past ecological richness of the site. Much of the site now consists of bare earth. (xi) The associated structures on site are clearly visible from the public highway. (xii) The application states that there are no waterways or drainage ditches on site, this statement is incorrect. (xiii) Concerns regarding the remediation of the site should paintballing cease at the site, for example the removal of gravel pathways and oil drums etc.
7.3 Letters of support have been received from companies / organisations and individuals who have used the paintballing centre and wish to show their support for the application. There are approximately 21 letters of support (from South Wales) which were received during the processing of the application. The applicant submitted letters with the application stating support for Delta Force Paintballing but these letters are not being counted as support for this particular facility as they likely relate to other paintballing facilities operated by the company. Approximately 2 letters of support were received from members of staff at the facility.
8. ANALYSIS
8.1 This is a retrospective planning application which was submitted following an investigation by the Council’s Planning Enforcement team. The paintball facility has been operational since June 2004.
8.2 Policy 5 of the Cardiff Local Plan states: ‘The Countryside including the urban fringe will be conserved for agriculture, forestry and recreation and other uses appropriate within a rural area. Planning permission will only be granted for development in the countryside which would be in harmony with and not cause unacceptable harm to the character, amenity, landscape and nature conservation value of the area’.
8.3 The development is largely screened from view by woodland surrounding the site. The Countryside Team provide a thorough assessment of the visual impact in paragraph 5.4 above and summarise as follows: ‘The paint ball ‘games zone’ and ‘base camp’ are located within the woodland and although the character of the woodland has changed, it is well screened from wider views into the site, including the Public Rights of Way in the vicinity and not located within the proposed Special Landscape Area. Having assessed the Landmap data, it is also considered that, on balance, the proposal would not adversely affect the character of the area’.
136 8.4 The site is located within the Coedgae Fawr Site of Importance for Nature Conservation (SINC). The SINC is designated for its ancient woodland ground flora. The application does include a Habitat Survey Report which notes the detrimental affect of the activities on the ground flora. The report sets out Management, Mitigation and Enhancements and the Council’s ecology officers , along with CCW are satisfied that subject to suitable conditions the development is acceptable. See paragraphs 5.6 and 6.1 above.
8.5 One of the key issues in assessing this application is the impact upon the amenities of neighbouring residential occupiers. It is considered that the use of the site at present is unacceptably prejudicing the amenities of neighbouring occupiers at Pantawel cottages by virtue of noise and air pollution from the pyrotechnics being used on site. It is considered that the site could be operated in a manner which would not unacceptably prejudice the amenities of neighbouring residential occupiers. In order to protect neighbouring occupiers conditions are recommended restricting the use of equipment on site to paintball guns and preventing the use of any pyrotechnics such as smoke bombs, flash grenades, paint bombs etc, restricting the hours of operation and preventing the use of amplified sound, music/loudhailers etc.
8.6 Objections received from the Local Member and neighbouring occupiers raise the issue that activities on the site should be restricted to Saturdays and Sundays and one other day per week. It is not considered that such a condition could be justified in planning terms due to:
(i) Issues relating to residential amenity of neighbouring occupiers are being addressed through conditions relating to noise, equipment etc. as discussed in paragraph 8.5 (ii) The Tree and Landscape Officers are satisfied that the impact upon trees can be satisfactorily mitigated, see condition 7.
8.7 In response to objections received which have not already been addressed within the report:
(i) No trees on site are subject of Tree Preservation Orders. The applicant has not committed an offence by removing trees on the site prior to the submission of the application. (ii) Impact upon property value is not a material planning consideration. (iii) Foul drainage details were not initially submitted with the application. Following a request for information details of a cesspool (or sealed tank) on site was submitted. The Environment Agency was consulted on the additional information and had no objections subject to operational requirements, (which are covered by Condition 16)
8.8 It is recommended that planning permission be granted, subject to conditions.
137 36/%714..,07)%.1>7-(236.&+>7&%.',))
&%d'-'.e*$(%)e+ 93/"),'3/)!-"<:;&3?=>>.3.##3"<:;&$3"8$8"+87.3 1<68'683'*%58"3>===?= (.30#)&&873264#83-3 !,"# '.%5,2*72"7&<= 7407=5;; 098!:7<#=5;;7$7%3
138 139 140 141 LOCAL MEMBER CONCERN PETITION
COMMITTEE DATE: 11/01/2012
APPLICATION No. 11/1894/DCO APPLICATION DATE: 02/11/2011
ED: WHITCHURCH/TONGWYNLAIS
APP: TYPE: Full Planning Permission
APPLICANT: Education Cardiff Council LOCATION: EGLWYS WEN/MELIN GRUFFYDD SCHOOLS, ERW LAS, WHITCHURCH, CARDIFF, CF14 1NL PROPOSAL: PROPOSED EXTENSION AND REFURBISHMENT OF THE EXISTING SCHOOLS PLUS ASSOCIATED EXTERNAL WORKS ______
RECOMMENDATION 1: That planning permission be GRANTED subject to the following conditions:
1. C01 Statutory Time Limit
2. This consent relates to the application as supplemented by the additional Information from Agent in the email communication from Halcrow Limited dated 16th November, 2011, (relating to pupils numbers) and from the Agent dated 22nd and 24th November, 2011, (relating to the construction of the bin store). Reason: The information provided forms part of the application.
3. The consent relates to the application as amended by the Revised Transport Assessment Version 2 received on 17th January, 2011, attached to and forming part of this planning application. Reason: The plans amend and form part of the application.
4. C4P Landscaping Design & Implementation Pro
5. C4R Landscaping Implementation
6. No development shall take place until a site assessment, including ground permeability testing as appropriate, has been undertaken to determine the practicality of utilising SUDS techniques such as soakaway drainage and permeable paving as a first option for the disposal of surface water run off, as well as other forms of sustainable drainage techniques, and a drainage scheme for the disposal of both surface water and foul sewage has been submitted to and approved by the local planning authority. No part of the development shall be occupied until the scheme is carried out and completed as approved. Reason: To ensure an orderly form of development.
142
7. The development shall be carried out in accordance with the recommendations outlined in Section 5 of the Ecological Appraisal from Halcrow Group Limited dated 6th October, 2011, unless otherwise agreed in writing by the local planning authority. Reason: To mitigate the potential impact of the development proposal on the ecological value of the site
8. The development shall be carried out in accordance with the recommendations outlined in Section 5.2 of the Bat Survey Report from Halcrow Group Limited dated 6th October, 2011, unless otherwise agreed in writing by the local planning authority. Reason: To reduce or ameliorate potential impact on bats.
9. D4W Tree Protection - Complex Sites but No O
10. D7Z Contaminated materials
11. E7Z Imported Aggregates
12. No site clearance/demolition works to take place between 1st February and 15th August, unless otherwise approved in writing by the local planning authority. Reason: To avoid disturbance to nesting birds which are protected under the Wildlife and Countryside Act 1981 : Part 1, 1(1)(b).
13. Prior to commencement of development details of any proposed external lighting shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the local planning authority. The approved scheme shall be implemented prior to beneficial use and be permanently maintained. Reason: To ensure that the amenities of occupiers of other premises in the vicinity are protected.
14. No development shall take place until further details of the car park within the curtilage of the site have been submitted to and approved by the Local Planning Authority in writing. These shall include details of the 'one way' system of operation at its northern end and associated signage/carriageway markings, together with a vehicle track analysis demonstrating how deliveries will take place. The car park shall be constructed, surfaced and laid out in accordance with the approved details to the development being brought into beneficial use. Thereafter the car park shall be maintained and shall not be used for any purpose other than the parking of vehicles. Reason: To make provision for the parking of vehicles clear of the roads so as not to prejudice the safety, convenience and free flow of traffic.
15. No development shall take place until details showing the provision of cycle parking spaces have been submitted to and approved in writing by the local planning authority. The approved details shall be implemented
143 prior to the development being put into beneficial use. Thereafter the cycle parking spaces shall be maintained and shall not be used for any other purpose. Reason: To ensure that adequate provision is made for the sheltered and secure parking of cycles.
16. Prior to commencement of each phase of development, a scheme of construction management shall be submitted to and approved by the Local Planning Authority. This scheme shall include details of how the existing school will continue to operate whilst the construction is taking place, together with construction traffic routes, site hoardings, site access, parking of contractors’ vehicles and wheel washing facilities. The development construction of the relevant phase shall be managed in accordance with the approved scheme. Reason: In the interests of highway safety, public amenity and to avoid any conflict situations with pupils and/or staff attending/working on this site.
17. No part of the development hereby permitted shall be occupied until the existing site Travel Plan has been updated, submitted to and approved in writing by the LPA. The Travel Plan (TP) shall set out proposals and targets, together with a timetable to limit or reduce the number of single occupancy car journeys to the site, mindful of the extended catchment area - in order to promote travel by sustainable modes. The approved TP shall be implemented in accordance with the timetable as set out, unless otherwise agreed in writing with the LPA. Reports demonstrating progress in promoting the sustainable transport measures detailed in the TP shall be submitted annually to the LPA, commencing from the first anniversary of beneficial occupation of the development. Reason: To accord with the Council's Access, Circulation and Parking Standards Supplementary Planning Guidance.
18. Notwithstanding the submitted details, a phasing strategy for the construction of the development including the temporary relocation of any demountable units within the site, shall be submitted to and agreed by the local planning authority. The development shall be constructed in accordance with the phasing strategy unless otherwise agreed in writing by the local planning authority. Reason: To ensure an orderly development of the site and to protect the amenities of the area.
RECOMMENDATION 2: To protect the amenities of occupiers of other premises in the vicinity attention is drawn to the provisions of Section 60 of the Control of Pollution Act 1974 in relation to the control of noise from demolition and construction activities. Further to this the applicant is advised that no noise audible outside the site boundary adjacent to the curtilage of residential property shall be created by construction activities in respect of the implementation of this consent outside the hours of 0800-1800 hours Mondays to Fridays and 0800 - 1300 hours on Saturdays or at any time on
144 Sunday or public holidays. The applicant is also advised to seek approval for any proposed piling operations.
RECOMMENDATION 3: The contamination assessments and the affects of unstable land are considered on the basis of the best information available to the Planning Authority and are not necessarily exhaustive. The Authority takes due diligence when assessing these impacts, however you are minded that the responsibility for
(i) determining the extent and effects of such constraints and; (ii) ensuring that any imported materials (including, topsoils, subsoils, aggregates and recycled or manufactured aggregates / soils) are chemically suitable for the proposed end use. Under no circumstances should controlled waste be imported. It is an offence under section 33 of the environmental Protection Act 1990 to deposit controlled waste on a site which does not benefit from an appropriate waste management license. The following must not be imported to a development site: • Unprocessed / unsorted demolition wastes. • Any materials originating from a site confirmed as being contaminated or potentially contaminated by chemical or radioactive substances. • Japanese Knotweed stems, leaves and rhizome infested soils. In addition to section 33 above, it is also an offence under the Wildlife and Countryside Act 1981 to spread this invasive weed; and
(iii) the safe development and secure occupancy of the site rests with the developer.
Proposals for areas of possible land instability should take due account of the physical and chemical constraints and may include action on land reclamation or other remedial action to enable beneficial use of unstable land.
The Local Planning Authority has determined the application on the basis of the information available to it, but this does not mean that the land can be considered free from contamination.
. RECOMMENDATION 4: Bats often roost in houses and other buildings, and work on these buildings may disturb a bat roost. All bats and their roosts are protected against disturbance under UK and European legislation. If works are planned on a building in which bats are roosting, the Countryside Council for Wales (CCW) must be contacted. They must be given reasonable time to advise as to whether the works should be carried out and, if so, the method to be used. This legislation does not apply to bats in the living area of a dwelling-house.
If work has already commenced and bats are found, or if any evidence that bats are using the site as a roost is found, work should cease and CCW should be contacted immediately.
For buildings other than a dwelling-house, no works of site clearance,
145 demolition or construction should take place unless a licence to disturb these species has been granted in accordance with the relevant legislation.
The Cardiff office of CCW can be contacted at :
Unit 7, Castleton Court Fortran Road St Mellons Cardiff CF3 0LT Tel : 02920 772400 Fax : 02920 772412
For further advice on bats please contact :
The Bat Conservation Trust Unit 2, 15 Cloisters House 8 Battersea Park Road London, SW8 4BG Tel : 02920 7627 2629 Fax : 020 7627 2628
RECOMMENDATION 5: The applicant is requested to provide a sum of £3,120 to enable surveys to be undertaken within the vicinity of the site and if appropriate to fund the implementation of the associated Traffic Regulation Order/s.
RECOMMENDATION 6: The applicant is advised to liaise with the Council’s Transport Projects Team, City Development, to ensure that the existing ‘School Safety Zone’ signage is updated to reflect the proposal.
RECOMMENDATION 7: The applicant is advised to liaise with the Council’s Cycling Officer, City Development in order to agree an acceptable signage scheme linking the site and cycle routes 80 and 81.
1. DESCRIPTION OF PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT
1.1 This planning application from the Chief Schools and Lifelong Learning Officer proposes extensions and refurbishment of buildings at the primary school site, Erw Las, Whitchurch. The application is part of a wider plan to reconfigure English and Welsh medium primary education by the Local Education Authority. The buildings and grounds at Erw Las are currently occupied by the English medium Elgwys Wen Primary School and the Welsh medium Ysgol Gymraeg Melin Gruffydd. Under the reorganisation proposals, the site at Erw Las is intended to become the new location of the Whitchurch English Medium Primary School with a significant part of the new school relocating from Eglyws Newydd Primary School, Glan y Nant Road. It is intended that Eglwys Newydd will provide Welsh Medium Primary Education and a separate planning application has been submitted by the Chief Schools and Lifelong Learning Officer proposing extensions and alteration at that site
146 (ref. 11/1895/DCO).
1.2 With respect to the current application, the scheme is for the development of a 2.5FE (540 pupils) English medium school at Erw Las, with an additional 40 FTE Nursery . The proposed design is intended to accommodate a 3 FE (630 pupils) intake in September 2012, which will reduce over the following years to 2.5FE. The Agents advise that the current schools have a combined cohort of 629 pupils.
1.3 In addition to the Design and Access Statement, the planning application is supported by a variety of other documents including a Transport Assessment (TA), Travel Plan, Ecological Appraisal, Bat Survey Report and Tree Survey.
1.4 The site consists of existing 1950’s permanent school buildings and some 12 no. demountable units of varying quality. The proposals will facilitate the removal demountable accommodation on the site. It is proposed that one demountable unit would be relocated to form temporary nursery and reception accommodation adjacent to the Eglwys Wen Nursery near the site entrance.
1.5 In summary, the principal alterations/extensions are as follows:
(i) Two single storey extensions linked to the existing building and located towards the southern end of the site. Each of these ‘hubs’ measures approximately 15.0 metres x 13.0 metres in plan and rises to a height between 3.0 metres and 5.0 metres. (ii) Construction of a new single storey infant/reception/nursery building located towards the north of the main school building on land partly occupied by existing demountable units. This structure is rectangular in plan, measuring approximately 48.0 metres x 16.0 metres and rises to a height of between 3.0 metres and 5.0 metres. (iii) Works to the entrance of the school building. (iv) A variety of new/reconfigured hard play/breakout areas, entrance plazas and an external dining area. A hard landscape strategy has been developed for the site. (v) The site access from Erw Las remains as existing, however, parking and drop off areas have been altered to enable better pedestrian/vehicle separation and circulation within the site. The reconfigured car park provides 36 parking spaces including 3 no. disabled parking bays. The submitted TA advises that there is currently on-site parking for 34 cars and a bike stand for 20 bicycles. (vi) It is proposed to resite a number of existing external features including a timber play area which will be relocated towards the playing field and enhanced through the inclusion of ‘natural’ play features such as grass mounds and stone boulders. It is also proposed to translocate an existing semi mature hedge, currently sited within the School’s nature conservation garden area to a location adjacent to the playing field. (vii) The scheme proposes felling a limited number of trees within the nature conservation garden to accommodate one of the new ‘hub’ extensions. The majority of the existing nature conservation area will remain. The landscape strategy for the site seeks to mitigate the loss
147 of these trees through new tree planting across the site. It is intended that the small pond within the garden will be renewed and improved. (viii) The improvement of the existing pedestrian route between Ty Newydd and the main school entrance by way re-surfacing and the localised raising of the service road to prioritise pedestrian movement. (viii) A new waste and recycling bin enclosure is to be installed near the current location, inside the main entrance gates on Erw Las.
1.6 Details of the proposed extensions/alterations are shown on the attached plans.
1.7 The Agent’s advise that they have been in close liaison with the South Wales Police Architectural Liaison Officer with a view to achieving ‘Secured by Design’ Certification.
1.8 The application is supported by a Transport Assessment (TA) and outline Travel Plan. The TA has been independently reviewed prior to submission, in accordance with the Local Highway Authority’s requirements. Its conclusions and summary are as follows:
The assessment of traffic attraction has been based on the school travel plan survey responses from each of the three schools affected by the proposed changes to primary education in Whitchurch. The analysis has been based on a worst case scenario of 56% of pupils being driven to school, as currently occurs at Eglwys Newydd, which is a significantly higher percentage than currently occurs at the site. The subsequent future reduction in pupil numbers to the 2.5 form entry proposed will further reduce the likely number of vehicles.
The site has an effective travel plan that has formed the basis for the plan that accompanies this document and significant measures have been introduced in the recent past to mitigate and control access by car. These include a designated safety zone on approach, an additional zebra crossing adjacent to the pedestrian access on Ty Newydd, additional parking restrictions in the vicinity of the school, and bollards placed within the grass verges to prevent parking on them.
Non Motorised Access
The school is well located in the context of its catchment area and is well served by both public transport and pedestrian facilities The site is in an established residential area that is well served by a network of footpaths that are mainly in reasonable to good repair. Properties are generally set back from the roadside, many of them having off road parking. Public transport facilities in the area are good with frequent services Cycle facilities are less conducive to use by younger children, however 14% of pupils that currently attend Ysgol Melin Gruffydd at the site report that they cycle. A significant increase in pupils cycling to the school should therefore be an aspiration for the new school.
148 An outline travel plan that has been based on the plans that exist for the existing schools on the site and the travel modes utilised by the Ty Newydd pupils that will transfer in should be updated, adopted and in place prior to the transfer of the schools.
Summary
This assessment provides a robust analysis and indicates that there will be minimal transport impact resulting from the proposals. There are no off site mitigation measures necessary to accommodate the re-development and future transport issues can be mitigated by education, continued promotion of the travel plan, liaison with the local authority, police, residents and parents such that the new school successfully provides for future English medium education in Whitchurch.
2. DESCRIPTION OF SITE
2.1 The application site, which extends to an area of approximately 2.9 hectares, comprises the established playing fields and play areas of Eglwys Wen Primary School and Ysgol Gymraeg Melin Gruffydd, together with the permanent school buildings and a large number of demountable units of varying quality. The buildings are primarily single storey with a central two storey block.
2.2 The site is enclosed by the rear gardens of residential properties in Ty Newydd, Erw Las, Bishops Road and Bishops Close, with the exception of its south eastern corner, where an area containing two demountable units directly adjoins the adjacent highway. Vehicular access to the site is provided from Erw Las to the south. There is a separate pedestrian access from Ty Newydd to the east, adjacent to no. 28.
3. SITE HISTORY
3.1 There have been numerous planning applications granted at the site for a variety of demountable classrooms and nursery units.
4. POLICY FRAMEWORK
4.1 The application site is shown as ‘education’ land on the Proposals Map of the adopted City of Cardiff Local Plan.
4.2 The following Local Plan policies are considered relevant to the determination of the application.
Policy 11 (Design and Aesthetic Quality) Policy 17 (Parking and Servicing Facilities)
4.3 The following policies of the Deposit Cardiff Unitary Development Plan (October 2003) are relevant:
149
Policy 2.20 (Good Design) Policy 2.24 (Residential Amenity) Policy 2.57 (Access, Circulation and Parking Requirements)
4.3 Supplementary Planning Guidance : Access, Circulation and Parking (January 2010). Supplementary Planning Guidance : Biodiversity Parts 1 and 2 (June 2011) Supplementary Planning Guidance : Trees and Development. (March 2007) Supplementary Planning Guidance : Waste and Collection and Storage Facilities (March 2007).
4.4 National Planning Guidance is contained in Planning Policy Wales Edition 4, February 2011.
5. INTERNAL CONSULTEE RESPONSES
5.1 The representations of Operational Manager, Transportation have been incorporated into the analysis section of this report.
5.2 The Operational Manager, Environment (Pollution Control) has no objections to the application but recommends the following conditions/informatives, D7Z (Imported Materials), E7Z (Imported Aggregates) external lighting scheme, and R4 (Contamination and Unstable Land Advisory Notice) and R1 Construction Site Noise.
5.3 The Operational Manager, Drainage Control advises that It is not clear whether the use of infiltration drainage techniques have been investigated for the disposal of surface water run off. In the light of this and in order to ensure proper drainage of the site, he requests request the following condition be added to any planning consent granted:
' No development shall take place until a site assessment, including ground permeability testing as appropriate, has been undertaken to determine the practicality of utilizing SUDS techniques such as soakaway drainage and permeable paving as a first option for the disposal of surface water run off as well as other forms of sustainable drainage techniques and a drainage scheme for the disposal of both surface water and foul sewage has been submitted to and approved by the Planning Authority in consultation with Dwr Cymru Welsh Water . '
The Officer also requests that details of this application should be forwarded to Dwr Cymru Welsh Water Network Development Consultants for comment and consideration.
5.4 The Operational Manager Waste Management advises that plans detailing refuse storage are acceptable.
5.5 The advice of the Tree Officer and Ecologist (City Development) has been incorporated into the analysis section of the report.
150
6. EXTERNAL CONSULTEES RESPONSES
6.1 Welsh Water/Dwr Cymru recommends drainage conditions to ensure no detriment to the environment, residents and the Company’s assets.
6.2 South Wales Police Architecture Liaison Officer advises that the Design and Access Statement reflects the recommendations previously given in pre- application discussions and there is no objection to the application.
7. REPRESENTATIONS
7.1 Neighbouring occupiers have been notified of the application and the proposal has been advertised by the display of site notices.
7.2 Local Members have requested that the application be subject of a Committee site visit prior to determination.
7.3 A petition of objection has been received signed by 208 residents. The petitioners ask that the following factors be considered when reviewing the planning application:
(i) Increased Traffic
(a) Due to all 600+ children having the same start and finish times for the new English Medium School whereas EW and YMG currently have different start and finish times which staggers the arrival of traffic; and (b) Nursery provision – increasing traffic in the middle of the day with the same start and finish time for all children.
(ii) Insufficient parking for over 100 staff on site. Therefore, more parking on the surrounding roads.
(iii) Additional traffic across Whitchurch Village with many children currently living in the Coryton area.
7.4 Thirteen letters of objection have been received from residents. In summary, the grounds of objection are as follows:
(i) that the proposed reorganisation of schooling, moving pupils from one site to another, will mean that nearly 700 children will have to travel across Whitchurch to access their new school. (ii) Some pupils living on the extremities of each catchment areas will have further to travel and could contribute to more cars travelling across Whitchurch thereby adding to the congestion. (iii) It is considered that this will lead to extensive and extended times of grid- lock within the village and its approach. (iv) The proposed nursery will result in additional traffic at lunchtime in additional to morning and evening times.
151 (v) Insufficient staff parking. (vi) Increased traffic congestion resulting from the new school having one start and finish time as opposed to the current staggered start finishing times at the existing schools on the site. (vii) Difficulty of access for emergency vehicles due to traffic congestion and the parking of vehicles by parents. (viii)Inconsideration parents parking across driveways. (ix) The placing of bollards to prevent parking on grass verges has resulted in parents blocking entrances to driveway and roads. (x) Traffic calming measures and controlled zone are ineffective. (xi) ‘Outdoor’ classrooms are noisy and affects privacy. Items have been thrown over the boundary wall. (xii) It is understand that most of the inhabitants of Whitchurch are very concerned and opposed to the proposals in their present form.
7.5 The Governors of Whitchurch High School objects to this application and to planning application 11/1895/DCO relating to Eglwys Newydd Primary School, Glan y Nant Road. Their principle comments and concerns are outlined in the report relating to that application.
They state that the implications for the pupils, parents and staff of Whitchurch High School have not been considered by the Council’s Development Management Service nor discussed with the governing body.
As the proposed new English-medium primary school at Erw Las will involve former Eglwys Newydd Primary school pupils having to travel to the new school site, they are concerned that this will increase the traffic within the village i.e. between both of the sites.
They state that as legal owners of the Whitchurch High School site and buildings, the Council’s Development Management Service has failed in its duty to notify the school of the planning applications. (Note: Although Whitchurch High School was not notified of planning application 11/1894/DCO as it is not a neighbouring occupier, file records indicate a neighbour notification letter was sent to the lower school concerning planning application 11/1895/DCO).
8. ANALYSIS
8.1 This planning application was deferred on 14th December, 2011, for a further site visit which took place on 4th January, 2012.
8.2 The planning application seeks permission for extensions and alterations at the primary school site, Erw Law, Whitchurch, and forms part of LEA’s wider plan to reconfigure English and Welsh medium primary education in the City.
8.3 The main planning issues in the assessment of the application are considered to relate to:
(i) the acceptability of the proposed extension and alterations in terms of
152 their design and effect on the appearance of the street scene; (ii) the effect of the proposed development the residential amenity of neighbouring occupiers; (iii) the highway/transport impact of the development and potential mitigation measures; (iv) landscape/trees/ecology issues.
8.4 The proposed extensions and alterations to the school are considered acceptable in terms of their design and finished appearance. All of the proposed development is single storey, in keeping with the existing building which is primarily single storey with a central two storey block. The proposed development will allow for the removal of many of the numerous demountable units at the site which is positive aesthetic benefit of the scheme.
8.5 The proposals will have little visual impact on the character and appearance of the wider area as the School is largely screened from the surrounding streets by existing residential properties.
8.6 A hard and soft landscape strategy has been developed for the site which provided for the enhancement of the spaces between the buildings, circulation routes and the school entrance area.
8.7 The scheme will necessitate the removal of a limited number of unprotected trees within the school’s nature conservation garden to accommodate one of the ‘hub’ extensions, together with the translation of a short length of hedge. However, the garden is shown to be largely retained and improved as an outdoor teaching area.
8.8 The landscaping strategy seeks to mitigate the loss of any trees though new tree planting across the site.
8.9 It is not considered that the proposed extensions and remodelling of the school, including the provision and re-configuration of external teaching/play areas, would impact unacceptably on residential amenity.
8.10 The proposed infant/reception/nursery building is a low rise structure of between 3.0 metres and 5.0 metres in height with its side elevation located some 8.0 metres from the rear gardens of the nearest houses backing onto the school grounds on Ty Newydd. There are existing demountable units in this part of the school, which the new building would replace. Having regard to the relatively low height of the proposed building, its separation from the boundary together with the screening afforded by the existing enclosures (supplemented with proposed additional planting), it is not considered that the structure would be unduly overbearing or unneighbourly in its effect in the nearby occupiers. The proposed external dining and nursery play area, located between the existing school building and the new block is broadly in the same location as an existing external play area.
8.11 Towards the southern corner of the site, the nearest of the two ‘hub’ extensions will be sited approximately 8.5 metres for the rear garden
153 boundaries of the adjoining properties in Bishops Close. Having regard to this separation distance, the low rise nature of the extension, the screening afforded by existing enclosures (to be supplemented with new planting) and the presence of an existing play area, it is not considered that the proposed development on this part of the school site would impact unacceptably on residential amenity.
8.12 The proposed alterations to the car parking area will be screened from the adjoining houses in Erw Las by mature conifer trees and tall fencing.
8.13 The Operational Manager, Environment (Pollution Control) has raised no objections to the proposals on noise or air pollution grounds.
8.14 An ecological appraisal of the grounds and buildings, including a bat survey report, has been carried out and the submitted reports have not identified any material constraints to development. Recommended measures to mitigate any potential; impact are subject to conditions 7, 8, 12 and informative 3 (Bats).
8.15 With regard to the likely transportation/highway impact of the development, the application is supported by a Transportation Statement and outline Travel Plan. The Operational Manager, Transportation has considered the proposals and his advice is set out as follows:
(i) A Transport Assessment (TA) has been submitted in support of the application which examines the likely effect of traffic associated with the proposed school development. The assessment is based upon surveys that were undertaken by Cardiff Council on 13th, 14th and 15th September 2011 during the AM and PM School Peak Hours at the following junctions:
Ty-Newydd / College Road; College Road / Merthyr Road; St Davids Road / Merthyr Road; and Bishops Road / Merthyr Road;
(ii) The TA identifies that based on 56% of pupils being driven to school, as currently occurs at Eglwys Newydd, that one additional vehicle trip will need to be accommodated on the existing highway network as a result of the proposed development. As such the impact would be 0.4% over and above the current situation. The total number of pupils is anticipated to decrease in 2018 and as such any impact will be further reduced in the future scenario.
(iii) The TA has been independently audited by Peter Brett Associates and examined by Officers and is considered to represent a robust analysis in this respect.
(iii) The School currently operates a site specific Travel Plan (TP) which will be required to be updated to include the proposed development. This
154 document will be progressed in liaison with the Council's Travel Plan Officer in order to ensure that the number of vehicle journeys associated with this site are reduced and that more sustainable modes of travel are encouraged once the school is in operation;
(v) The proposed car parking layout provides parking for 36No spaces (including 3 disabled bays), which are acceptable in principle. The first 9 spaces adjacent to the access have less than 5.0 metres behind bays for manoeuvring. It is recommended that a minimum of 6.0 metres be provided or the bays increased in width. In addition the carriageway adjacent to the 'drop off bay', measures approx. 3.5 metres, which would only be wide enough for a single vehicle to pass. A condition is proposed requiring further details to be submitted for approval, including a 'track' diagram demonstrating that a delivery vehicle can access / egress the loading bay;
(vi) This site currently benefits from sheltered and secure cycle parking which is either to be retained, or an alternative facility put forward for consideration. It is recommended that details of cycle parking provision be addressed by condition.
(vii) Cycle routes 80 and 81 both terminate within the vicinity of the site and would benefit from additional signs to provide linkage between these routes and the school. A recommendation is therefore included in order that this can be progressed in liaison with the Councils Cycling Officer;
(viii)On street parking currently takes place adjacent to the junction of Erw Las and Ty Newydd. During the school PM peak this can be problematic in terms of visibility. It is therefore recommended that surveys be undertaken in order to ascertain whether further restrictions are necessary at this location.
(ix) There is an existing 'School Safety Zone' associated with this site which includes signage/logo for the existing schools. These will require updating as part of the proposals. As such a recommendation is included this effect.
(x) On the basis of the above, there are no objections to the proposed development subject to the conditions and informatives as detailed in the recommendation (refer to conditions 14, 15, 16, 17 and Informatives 4, 5 and 6).
8.16 Further to these observations, the Officer makes the following additional comments, mindful of the objections received:
(i) The calculations within the submitted Transport Assessment are based on the maximum capacity of the schools and the analysis based on a worse case scenario of 56% of pupils being driven to school, as currently occurs at Eglwys Newydd. No allowance has been made for the staggering of times and as such the assessment is considered to be robust in this
155 respect. Furthermore, the subsequent reduction in pupil numbers to the 2.5 form entry proposed will further reduce the number of vehicles associated with this site in the future;
(ii) Traffic associated with the nursery in the middle of the day would occur outside of the peak hours and as such any impact on the surrounding highway network would be minimal;
(iii) The number of staff proposed for this site is approx. 61 Full Time Equivalent with 36No car parking spaces. It is considered that through the Travel Plan staff will be encouraged to use alternative modes of transport other than the private car and to 'car share'. As such the number of car parking spaces proposed is considered to be at an appropriate level;
(iv) Although the catchment area is extending, the majority of pupils will live within an 800 metre radius of the school site and, as such, it is considered to be well located in this context;
(v) Issues relating to highway safety in the immediate vicinity of the site will be addressed through the undertaking of surveys and implementation of any Traffic Regulation Orders that are deemed necessary, i.e. through the introduction of parking restrictions to improve visibility at/adjacent to junctions.
8.17 Having regard to the Officer’s advice and to the assessment of the other key planning issues outlined above, the application is recommended for approval subject to the attached conditions and informatives.
156 157 158 159 160 161 LOCAL MEMBER OBJECTION PETITION
COMMITTEE DATE: 11/01/2012
APPLICATION No. 11/1895/DCO APPLICATION DATE: 02/11/2011
ED: WHITCHURCH/TONGWYNLAIS
APP: TYPE: Full Planning Permission
APPLICANT: Education- Cardiff Council LOCATION: EGLWYS NEWYDD PRIMARY SCHOOL, GLAN-Y-NANT ROAD, WHITCHURCH, CARDIFF, CF14 1AP PROPOSAL: DEMOLITIONS EXTENSIONS INTERNAL ADAPTION AND REFURBISHMENT OF EXISTING BUILDINGS NEW MULTI USE GAMES AREA HARD COURT AREA AND EXTENDED CAR PARK ______
RECOMMENDATION 1: That planning permission be GRANTED subject to the following conditions:
1. C01 Statutory Time Limit
2. This consent relates to the application as supplemented by the information contained in the e-mail communications dated 17th and 21st November, 2011, from the applicant and agent (relating to the use of the hard surfaced multi use games area) and from the Agent dated 22nd and 25thNovember, 2011 (relating to crime reducing measures and vehicle tracking analysis within the car park areas) together with the additional drawings of SLLC 7089 SL(1)01 and SL(1)02 (Sheets 1 and 2, Predicted Flooding Areas). Reason: The information provided forms part of the application.
3. C4P Landscaping Design & Implementation Pro
4. C4R Landscaping Implementation
5. No development shall take place until ground permeability testing has been undertaken to determine the practicality of utilizing soakaway drainage and permeable paving as a first option for the disposal of surface water run off, as well as other forms of sustainable drainage techniques, and comprehensive proposals showing how foul and surface water flows from the site will be dealt with have been submitted to and approved by the local planning authority. No part of the development shall be occupied until the drainage scheme is carried out and completed as approved. Reason: To ensure an orderly form of development.
162 6. No site clearance/demolition shall take place between 1st February and 15th August unless otherwise approved in writing by the local planning authority. Reason: To avoid disturbance to nesting birds which are protected under the Wildlife and Countryside Act 1981.
7. The development shall be carried out in accordance with the recommendations outlined in Section 5 of the Ecological Appraisal for Halcrow Group Limited dated 6th October, 2011, unless otherwise agreed in writing by the local planning authority. Reason: To mitigate the potential impact of the development proposal on the ecological value of the site.
8. The development shall be carried out in accordance with the recommendations outlined in Section 5.2 of the Bat Survey Report from Halcrow Group Limited dated 6th October, 2011, unless otherwise agreed in writing by the local planning authority. Reason: To reduce or ameliorate potential impact on bats.
9. D4W Tree Protection - Complex Sites but No On Site Monitoring
10. D7Z Contaminated materials
11. E7Z Imported Aggregates
12. No development shall take place until details of the proposed fencing around the car park and hardcourt/paved games areas have been submitted to and approved by the Local Planning Authority. The fencing shall be constructed in accordance with the approved details prior to the extended car park and games areas being put into beneficial use. Reason: To ensure that the amenities of the area are protected
13. No development shall take place until further details of the car park within the curtilage of the site have been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The details shall include the provision of 3No disabled parking bays. The car park shall be constructed, surfaced and laid out in accordance with the approved details before the development is brought into beneficial use. Thereafter the car park shall be maintained and shall not be used for any purpose other than the parking of vehicles. Reason: To make provision for the parking of vehicles clear of the roads so as not to prejudice the safety, convenience and free flow of traffic.
14. No development shall take place until details showing the provision of cycle parking spaces have been submitted to and approved in writing by the local planning authority. The approved details shall be implemented prior to the development being put into beneficial use. Thereafter the cycle parking spaces shall be maintained and shall not be used for any other purpose. Reason: To ensure that adequate provision is made for the sheltered and
163 secure parking of cycles;
15. Prior to commencement of development, details of a new pedestrian crossing facility shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the local planning authority. The scheme shall include (but not be limited to) details of a Zebra Crossing and associated works on Merthyr Road, including dropped kerbs, tactile paving, edging, carriageway markings, surfacing, signing, illuminated beacons, ducting and cabling. The agreed scheme shall be implemented prior to beneficial use of the development. Reason: To ensure that the additional pedestrian / cycle demand crossing Merthyr Road is catered for and to facilitate access to the development;
16. Prior to commencement of development, details of the cycle / pedestrian path adjacent to 'Whitchurch Brook' shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the local planning authority. The scheme shall include (but not be limited to) details of the upgrading of the existing footpath to provide a shared surface, including lighting, ducting and cabling. The approved scheme shall be implemented prior to beneficial use of the development. Reason: To ensure that both pedestrians and cyclists can access the site by means of a traffic free route, in order to encourage sustainable modes of travel.
17. Prior to commencement of each phase of development, a scheme of construction management shall be submitted to and approved by the LPA. This scheme shall include details of how the existing school will continue to operate whilst the construction is taking place, together with construction traffic routes, site hoardings, site access, parking of contractor’s vehicles and wheel washing facilities. The development construction of the relevant phase shall be managed in accordance with the approved scheme. Reason: In the interests of highway safety, public amenity and to avoid any conflict situations with pupils and/or staff attending/working on this site.
18. No part of the development hereby permitted shall be occupied until the existing site Travel Plan has been updated, submitted to and approved in writing by the LPA. The Travel Plan (TP) shall set out proposals and targets, together with a timetable to limit or reduce the number of single occupancy car journeys to the site, mindful of the extended catchment area - in order to promote travel by sustainable modes. The approved TP shall be implemented in accordance with the timetable as set out, unless otherwise agreed in writing with the local planning authority. Reports demonstrating progress in promoting the sustainable transport measures detailed in the TP shall be submitted annually to the local planning authority, commencing from the first anniversary of beneficial occupation of the development. Reason: To accord with the Council's Access, Circulation and Parking Standards Supplementary Planning Guidance
19. C2F Details of Floor and Ground Levels
164
20. F7Q Kitchen Extraction
21. H7G Plant Noise
22. Notwithstanding the provisions of the Town and Country Planning (General Permitted Development) Order 1995 (or any Order amending, revoking, or re-enacting that Order) no buildings shall be erected within the area demonstrated to be in the 1% plus climate change flood extent on drawing reference SLLC7089(1)01. Reason: To reduce the potential flood risk on the site and elsewhere.
RECOMMENDATION 2: To protect the amenities of occupiers of other premises in the vicinity attention is drawn to the provisions of Section 60 of the Control of Pollution Act 1974 in relation to the control of noise from demolition and construction activities. Further to this the applicant is advised that no noise audible outside the site boundary adjacent to the curtilage of residential property shall be created by construction activities in respect of the implementation of this consent outside the hours of 0800-1800 hours Mondays to Fridays and 0800 - 1300 hours on Saturdays or at any time on Sunday or public holidays. The applicant is also advised to seek approval for any proposed piling operations.
RECOMMENDATION 3: The contamination assessments and the affects of unstable land are considered on the basis of the best information available to the Planning Authority and are not necessarily exhaustive. The Authority takes due diligence when assessing these impacts, however you are minded that the responsibility for
(i) determining the extent and effects of such constraints and; (ii) ensuring that any imported materials (including, topsoils, subsoils, aggregates and recycled or manufactured aggregates / soils) are chemically suitable for the proposed end use. Under no circumstances should controlled waste be imported. It is an offence under section 33 of the environmental Protection Act 1990 to deposit controlled waste on a site which does not benefit from an appropriate waste management license. The following must not be imported to a development site: • Unprocessed / unsorted demolition wastes. • Any materials originating from a site confirmed as being contaminated or potentially contaminated by chemical or radioactive substances. • Japanese Knotweed stems, leaves and rhizome infested soils. In addition to section 33 above, it is also an offence under the Wildlife and Countryside Act 1981 to spread this invasive weed; and
(iii) the safe development and secure occupancy of the site rests with the developer.
Proposals for areas of possible land instability should take due account of the physical and chemical constraints and may include action on land reclamation
165 or other remedial action to enable beneficial use of unstable land.
The Local Planning Authority has determined the application on the basis of the information available to it, but this does not mean that the land can be considered free from contamination.
RECOMMENDATION 4: Bats often roost in houses and other buildings, and work on these buildings may disturb a bat roost. All bats and their roosts are protected against disturbance under UK and European legislation. If works are planned on a building in which bats are roosting, the Countryside Council for Wales (CCW) must be contacted. They must be given reasonable time to advise as to whether the works should be carried out and, if so, the method to be used. This legislation does not apply to bats in the living area of a dwelling-house.
If work has already commenced and bats are found, or if any evidence that bats are using the site as a roost is found, work should cease and CCW should be contacted immediately.
For buildings other than a dwelling-house, no works of site clearance, demolition or construction should take place unless a licence to disturb these species has been granted in accordance with the relevant legislation.
The Cardiff office of CCW can be contacted at:
Unit 7, Castleton Court Fortran Road St Mellons Cardiff CF3 0LT Tel : 02920 772400 Fax : 02920 772412
For further advice on bats please contact :
The Bat Conservation Trust Unit 2, 15 Cloisters House 8 Battersea Park Road London, SW8 4BG Tel : 02920 7627 2629 Fax : 020 7627 2628
RECOMMENDTION 5: The applicant is requested to provide a financial contribution of £8,840 to, (i) enable surveys to be undertaken along Glan-y- Nant Road and in the adjacent lanes/streets, and, if appropriate, to fund the implementation of the associated Traffic Management Measures; (ii) enable the cyclepath/footpath works subject of condition 16 to be implemented by the revoking of the existing Traffic Regulation Order which currently prohibits cycling and also to facilitate the revoking of the Traffic Regulation Order relating to the footpath linking the site with Merthyr Road (to the south of the
166 school).
RECOMMENDATION 6: The applicant is requested to liaise with the Council’s Transport Projects Team, City Development, in order to agree the design and specification for the works associated with the Zebra Crossing facility on Merthyr Road and the upgrading of the existing footpath to the east of the site, subject of condition 16.
RECOMMENDATION 7: The applicant is advised to liaise with the Council’s Transport Projects Team, City Development to ensure that the existing direction road sign to Eglyws Newydd, located on Old Church Road and Glan- y-Nant Road is updated to reflect the proposal.
RECOMMENDATION 8 : The Applicant’s attention is drawn to the advice contained in the submitted Flood Consequences Assessment and in the representations from the Environment Agency dated 2nd December, 2012, concerning the implementation of measures in relation to the management of flood risk.
1. DESCRIPTION OF PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT
1.1 This planning application has been submitted by the Chief Schools and Lifelong Learning Officer and proposes works of demolition, general adaptation, refurbishment and extension to the existing buildings at Ysgol Newydd Primary School, Glan y Nant Road, Whitchurch, together with the provision of new hard paved games play areas and an extended staff/visitor car park.
1.2 The application is part of a wider plan to reconfigure English and Welsh medium primary education by the Local Education Authority. The buildings and grounds in Glan y Nant Road are currently occupied by the English Medium Eglwys Newydd Primary School. Under the reorganisation proposals, it is intended that the site will become the new location of the Welsh Medium, Ysgol Gymraeg Melin Gruffyd, which would transfer from Erw Las.
1.3 The proposals would establish a new 2 FE School with a capacity of 420 places including 32 full time equivalent nursery spaces from September, 2012. (The submitted Transport Assessment indicates that the existing school had 307 pupils in January 2011 and a maximum capacity of 379 pupils).
1.4 It is envisaged that the works will be undertaken in phases, with the need to employ three temporary demountable classroom units, which would be removed on completion of the building works. The units are proposed to be located in the area indicated to accommodate the new hard court games areas and it is the intention that the units would be in situ for a maximum period of two years whilst the main building works are undertaken.
167 1.5 In addition to the Design and Access Statement, the planning application is supported by various other documents including a Transport Assessment (TA), Outline Travel Plan, Ecological Appraisal, Bat Survey Report and Tree Survey. A Flood Consequences Assessment (FCA) has also been prepared.
1.6 In summary, the principal alterations/extensions are as follows:
(i) The extension and refurbishment of the school with a new single storey block constructed at the southern end of the existing building. The proposed extension, which measures 43.0 metres by 16.0 metres in plan, has been designed to reflect the scale and traditional appearance of the existing school building. A number of photovoltaic panels are shown to be attached to its west facing roof. (ii) New hard paved multi use games area and hard court games/play area together with an extended and gated 31 space car park, to be constructed on the south eastern corner of the school playing field. A tracking diagram has been provided to show that a vehicle such as a fire appliance car enter and exit the extended car park in a forward gear. (iii) A new footpath access link is proposed from the existing footpath running alongside the southern boundary of the playing fields, which connects to the public car park off Merthyr Road. (iv) An extension of the junior classrooms at the northern end of the existing building to comprise a hipped roof, single storey structure, finished in smooth red facing brick and plain grey concrete tiles to match the adjacent building; (v) The adaption of the existing red brick boundary wall fronting Glan y Nant Road to achieve a similar appearance to the boundary wall in front of the existing school buildings, with the introduction of infill vertical bar railings and new openings with gates, to facilitate pedestrian access to the proposed southern extension; (vi) The scheme proposes the removal of several trees, principally on the boundary with the adjacent Whitchurch Brook, due primarily to the effects of disease. None of the trees are protected by Preservation Order. The indicative landscape scheme submitted with the application proposes replacement and new tree planting, including the provision of landscaping adjacent to the new hard surfaced games areas.
1.7 Details of the proposed extensions/alterations are shown on the attached plans.
1.8 The application is supported by a Transport Assessment (TA) and outline Travel Plan. The TA was independently reviewed prior to submission in accordance with the Local Highway Authority’s requirements. Its conclusions and summary are as follows:
The assessment of traffic has been based on the existing school travel plans for and Eglwys Newydd and Ysgol Melin Gruffydd who will move to
168 this site. The analysis has been based on a worst case scenario of full attendance at the re-developed school and the higher percentage of car journeys that are currently made to the site, than are made by the school population who are currently at the Erw Las campus. On that basis, it is calculated that there will be minimal additional trips made to the school and assessment of junctions in the surrounding area is therefore unnecessary.
The site has an effective travel plan that has formed the basis for the plan that accompanies this document. Significant efforts have been made within the life of the existing plan to mitigate and control access by car.
The provision of a new footpath access from the car park off Merthyr Road will assist in that endeavour. It gives great opportunity to implement a significant aspiration of the current school for a remote parking/drop off area from where pupils can be walked to the school. Formation of a walking bus from the car park is likely to find good support from the children, who, from our experience elsewhere find them fun and gives them opportunity to meet their friends for a least part of their journey.
This assessment provides a robust analysis of the likely impacts of the proposed development and indicates that there will be minimal adverse transport issues realised as a result of the proposals.
The surrounding highway network is well provided for in terms of footway and road crossing provision. There are therefore no off site mitigation measures necessary to accommodate the redevelopment. Future transport issues can be mitigated by education, continued promotion of the school travel plan, liaison with the local authority, police, residents and parents such that the new school successfully provides for future Welsh medium education in Whitchurch.
2. DESCRIPTION OF SITE
2.1 The school is located at Glan y Nant Road, Whitchurch, east of the Merthyr Road district centre and west of Whitchurch High School (lower school).
2.2 Glan y Nant Road is a cul de sac accessed from Glan y Nant Terrace and Old Church Road to the north.
2.3 The school is located on a ‘J’ shaped plot with the main building on the east side of the road, a detached annex building and caretakers house to the south and car parking to the south west. The school playing fields lie to the west and are adjoined by a rear lane serving the properties of Glan y Nant Road to the east, a public car parking to the west, flats at Rialto Court and Trewartha Court to the north and a public footpath to the south. The footpath provides a link between the car park and Merthyr Road to the west and Mervyn Road/Glandwr Place to the south.
169 2.4 Whitchurch Brook and a further public footpath run alongside the length of the eastern school boundary and separate it from Whitchurch High School playing fields. The primary school has a pedestrian link to the footpath.
2.5 The main school access is via two pedestrian entrances located at each end of the existing building. Two lengths of ‘resident only’ parking are located near the entrances on the opposite side of the road. The properties in Glan y Nant Road primarily comprise traditional terraces, however, there are five bungalows at the southern end of the street.
2.6 To the south of the playing fields, on the opposite side of the public footpath referred to in paragraph 2.3, lies Warren Evans Court; a three storey development of flats.
2.7 The existing school buildings comprise the original block built circa 1901, which retains many of its original features, a further block completed soon afterwards and a link block completed during the 1970’s. All these buildings are finished in red facing brick with areas of original stone features evident. Two further blocks located to north east and south of the main buildings comprise modern flat roofed temporary accommodation and are proposed to be demolished.
2.8 At the southern end of the site, lies a relatively modern dining and kitchen facility, which is also to be demolished.
3. SITE HISTORY
3.1 10/164W Retention of demountable classroom.
3.2 05/1485W Replacement of windows.
3.3 04/1825W Erection of single storey development for pre and after school club.
4. POLICY FRAMEWORK
4.1 The application site is shown as ‘education’ land on the Proposals Map of the adopted City of Cardiff Local Plan.
4.2 The following Local Plan policies are considered relevant to the determination of the application.
Policy 11 (Design and Aesthetic Quality) Policy 17 (Parking and Servicing Facilities)
4.3 The following policies of the Deposit Cardiff Unitary Development Plan (October 2003) are relevant:
Policy 2.20 (Good Design) Policy 2.24 (Residential Amenity)
170 Policy 2.57 (Access, Circulation and Parking Requirements)
4.4 Supplementary Planning Guidance : Access, Circulation and Parking (June 2011) Supplementary Planning Guidance : Trees and Development (March 2007) Supplementary Planning Guidance : Waste and Collection and Storage Facilities (March 2007) Supplementary Planning Guidance : Biodiversity Parts 1 and 2 (June 2011)
4.5 National Planning Guidance is contained in Planning Policy Wales Edition 4, February, 2011.
4.6 TAN 15 Development and Flood Risk.
5. INTERNAL CONSULTEE RESPONSES
5.1 The representations of the Operational Manager, Transportation has been incorporated into the Analysis section of this report.
5.2 The Operational Manager, Environment (Pollution Control) has raised no objections to the application on noise or on pollution grounds but recommends conditions F7Q3 (Kitchen Extraction), H7G (Plant Noise) and Informative R1 Construction Site Noise/
5.3 The Operational Manager, Drainage Control advises as follows:
Although the construction of new buildings will not in itself increase hard areas on the site, any new construction should nonetheless be drained to soakaways provided that ground conditions will support these.
If ground conditions are not adequate to allow for soakaway drainage, and should it be proposed to make any direct or indirect discharges to the Whitchurch Brook, the applicant should contact the Principal Engineer (Drainage) for further advice regarding discharge limitations which will apply to this site .
The development proposals include the creation of new hard areas in the form of new car parking and hard court areas and these should also be drained to soakaways or by the use of permeable surfacing as appropriate.
A Flood Consequence Assessment for the site has been carried out and this has utilised, in part, information from a flood study commissioned by the Principal Engineer (Drainage) and carried out by Eden Vale Young LTD.
The FCA has identified flood risks to the whole site and has quantified anticipated flood depths and velocities.
171
Finished floor levels for the new buildings have not yet been determined, although it is anticipated that these will be higher than the existing floor levels on the site.
It is noted that a number of trees situated along the eastern boundary of the site adjacent to the Whitchurch Brook are to be removed as part of the development. Care should be taken when removing any trees in order to avoid any damage to the stream bank or stream training walls as any such damage could result in future erosion.
If any trees are to be planted as part of the scheme, they should be located such that future root growth will not threaten the structural integrity of any stream training walls or otherwise intrude into the watercourse channel.
In the light of the above and in order to ensure proper drainage of the completed development the following condition is requested:
'No development shall take place until ground permeability testing has been undertaken to determine the practicality of utilizing soakaway drainage and permeable paving as a first option for the disposal of surface water run off as well as other forms of sustainable drainage techniques and comprehensive proposals showing how foul and surface water flows from the site will be dealt with, have been submitted to and approved by the Planning Authority in consultation with Dwr Cymru Welsh Water. "
The Officer advises that details of the application should be forwarded to Dwr Cymru/Welsh Water and the Environment Agency for their comments. Consultants for comment and consideration of the applicant's proposal to discharge foul flows (and surface water flows if sustainable drainage techniques.
5.4 The Operational Manager Waste Management advises that details of refuse storage are acceptable. The Officer recommends that the storage facility remains fully secure to prevent access by children.
6. EXTERNAL CONSULTEES RESPONSES
6.1 Welsh Water/Dwr Cymru recommends drainage conditions to ensure no detriment to the environment, residents and the Company’s assets. Details of a public sewer crossing has also been provided.
6.2 The South Wales Police Architectural Liaison Officer has provided guidance to reducing the opportunities for crime, such as the installation of CCTV, minimising the number of entrances to the school, erecting appropriate boundary fencing installing doors and windows that meeting appropriate security standards, The Officer’s advice has been forwarded to the Agent for his consideration.
172 6.3 The Environment Agency Wales advises as follows:
The application site lies entirely within zone C1, defined by the Development Advice Map (DAM) referred to under Technical Advice Note 15: Development and Flood Risk (TAN15). Flood Map information, which is updated on a quarterly basis, confirms the site to be within the 1% (1 in 100 year) and 0.1% (1 in 1000 year) annual probability fluvial flood outlines of the Whitchurch Brook. Our records show that the proposed site has also previously flooded from the Whitchurch Brook. Therefore, the applicant needs to demonstrate through the submitted flood consequences assessment (FCA), that the consequences of flooding can be managed over the lifetime of the development. We have no objection to the proposed development and offer you the following advice.
The submitted Flood Consequences Assessment (Ysgol Eglwys Newydd) prepared by RVW Consulting and dated 23rd October, 2011 to be read alongside Drawing No. SLLC7089 SL(1)01, 02 and )3 states:
The proposed new buildings, as part of the proposed development, are not located within the 1% (1 in 100 year) plus climate change fluvial flood event. The drawing SLLC7089 SL(1)01 indicates that an area at the southern end of the development boundary floods in a predicted 1% plus climate change event. However, the existing outbuilding sited in this area is to be demolished and replaced by soft and hard external play areas, providing betterment in terms of flood risk. The FCA and associated drawings also indicate that the majority of the site (and proposed new buildings) flood during a predicted 0.1% (1 in 1000 year) flood event. Our advice, while acknowledging part of the proposed development is within the 1% plus climate change flood event, is that given the development comprises an extension to an existing school, we would have no objection subject to your Authority controlling the following measure. We recommend that a planning condition is attached to any planning permission granted removing the permitted development rights of the area demonstrated to be in the 1% plus climate change flood extent on Drawing No SLLC1089 SL(1)01. This will reduce any potential flood risk on the site and elsewhere resulting from permitted development structures.
Further Advice The submitted Flood Consequences Assessment recognises that part of the development boundary is in the 1% plus climate change extent and has proposed various measures in relation to management of flood risk via the following: 1. Recommending the formation of flood plans and procedures by the way of erection of warning signs and the preparation of safe and effective flood warnings and evacuation plans agreed with the local authority and emergency services, including subscription to our Floodline Warnings Direct service. However, we advise you that we do not provide specific warnings on Whitchurch Brook. 2. Flood proofing and mitigation could be considered with the design of the development namely, raising electrical sockets/appliances, using hard flooring, lime plaster and non return valves fitted to pipes. We advise that the developer can also access advice and information on protection from flooding from the ODPM publication ‘Preparing for Floods:
173 Interim Guidance for Improving the Flood Resistance of Domestic and Small Business Properties’, which is available from the Planning Portal website: www.planningportal.gov.uk
It is for your Authority to determine whether the risks and consequences of flooding can be managed in accordance with TAN15.
7. REPRESENTATIONS
7.1 Councillor Brian Griffiths advises that he attended a public meeting on 29th November, 2011, concerning the application. He states that the size of the application and the extra number of children it will accommodate (nearly double the present school) was of great concern regarding the traffic generation that would be caused for the immediate neighbourhood.
He considers that the roads leading to the school are not adequate for this increase. He says that the area from where the children will come from is far larger than that of the present school and together with the proposed nursery provision, it will have disastrous consequences for residents.
The Councillor states that a lack of consultation on the application with the adjacent schools and residents living immediately opposite the school was noted at the meeting, with concerns expressed that the Council could undertake a development of the scale proposed without due transparency.
Under the circumstances, the Councillor requests that more time be allowed for the receipt of objections and that the reporting of the application to Committee be deferred until January, 2012.
(Note: With respect to the consultation process, file records indicate that notification letters were sent to neighbouring occupiers in the vicinity of the site and three notices were displayed next to the school and in its vicinity).
7.2 Councillor Linda Morgan has requested that the application be subject of a Committee site visit prior to determination.
7.3 Councillor T Davies objects to the application, stating as follows:
My objections are based on the fact that already there exists at this site severe congestion and the conclusion by Traffic Engineers is there will be minimal addition traffic movements is pure fantasy.
Presently Eglwys Newydd school has about 307 pupils on role and it is proposed to increase this number to 420 plus as additional 64 attending the nursery. The nursery attendance being AM or PM. Welsh Government Technical Advise Note 18-Transport. SectionD.5 states the level of detail should be proportionate to the scale of the development. A 50% increase in pupils deserves a very detailed survey of traffic movement, pedestrian and cycle use. This has not been done. The assessment of traffic movements has been based on existing travel plans for the 2 school and no surveys have
174 been done at critical junctions which is fundamental when examining the potential increase in traffic. The nursery alone will generate the same number of movements as 64 older pupils
Access to the new school will be shared with access to Whitchurch High School along Glan y Nant Terrace and the junction at Old Church Road is presently very congested but no analysis has been undertaken at this point.
How on earth it is possible to claim that traffic movements around a school having 307 pupils on role is only very slightly more when 420 plus 64 nursery pupils are on role is unbelievable.
It has been suggested that a great deal more pupils cycle to school at Ysgol Melin Gruffydd than Eglwys Newyd. Both schools have programs to increase cycle use and I have no doubt that on occasions cycle us is significant but I visited Melin Gruffydd on a dry Nov morning and the Headmaster and I counted 11 bikes. On the same day Glanynant has 7 bikes in the racks. Since that visit I have noticed the number of bikes at Melin Gruffydd ( the cycle rack is visible form the road ) is not significantly different. The roads around Melin Gruffydd are more conducive to young riders but I have no doubt cycle use will greatly reduce when young children have to use and cross main roads to get to Glan y Nant Road. Page 25 states 'Guidance from Cardiff Council suggests some of the roads in the immediate area of Glanynant Road are only suitable for confident cyclists'
Page 13 of the Travel Plan lists the potential problems as:
1 Relatively poor accessibility to the Glan y Nant site exacerbates car use problems 2 Illegal parking taking place in the vicinity of the site such as parking on zig zag lines 3 Pupils being dropped off at unsafe locations including the centre of the road 4 Complaints from residents about blocking access 5 Inappropriate use of a lane in Glan y Nant Road 6 Relatively busy junctions in the vicinity of the school 7 New catchment area could encourage car use from those living further away from the school
Measures implemented to date have not resolved the problems. The new entrance will help pedestrian access but will greatly increase congestion at Mervyn Road which in at capacity now. A potential improvement suggested is the identification and designation of drop off/pick up points in the vicinity of the school. It is so sad that Council tax payers’ money is being wasted on such a ludicrous suggestion as evidently the writer has absolutely no knowledge of the locality.
The catchment area of Ysgol Melin Gruffydd is much greater than Eglwys Newydd, 57 pupils come from the catchment area of Ysgol Pencae (Llandaff area) and it not unreasonable to suggest that most will come by car, this
175 factor alone is sufficient to suggest traffic movements will increase significantly in the area.
The report suggests car usage (% terms) is less for Ysygol Melin Gruffyd than Eglwys Newydd but if the same ratio's are used the number of car movement will be more with the greatly increased student numbers.
For the Council not to consult the Governors of Whitchurch High School about these proposals is unacceptable, the Chair of the Governors comments are on record and are very valid. The Council claims a letter was sent to the Lower School Office but this should have been addressed to Governors.
As a result of previous consultations across Cardiff the overwhelming view was that school playing fields were not to be used in school re-organisation proposals and as a result this administration stated school playing fields would be protected. This proposal uses a very significant part of the present playing field as a car park and is contrary to its stated policy.
For the record I am a Governor of Whitchurch High School and Ysgol Melin Gruffyd but my comments are on planning issues only and are no way influenced by any decisions of the Council regarding school re-organisation proposals.
I also will be joining my colleagues is seeking a site visit so that all members of the planning committee are familiar with the locations
7.4 A petition of objection has been received, signed by 143 residents. The petitioners ask that the following factors be considered when restructuring the application:
(i) Increased Traffic
a. Increased Number of Children and Staff b. Nursery provision – increasing traffic in the middle of the day. c. Change to a Welsh Medium School means a larger catchment area and therefore more children arriving by car rather than walking.
(i) No traffic impact assessment of Mervyn Road, Heol Gwrgan, Heol Stradling etc. currently used as parking and cut through to the site from the south/east side of Whitchurch.
(iii) Increased Flood Risk with Whitchurch Brook already identified as a risk area by the Council.
a. Additional Building on Land b. Additional Playground Surface c. Additional Car Parking Area
7.5 The Chair of Governors at Whitchurch High School states that the
176 Governing Body objects to this application and to planning application 11/1894/DCO relating to Eglwys Wen/Melin Gruffydd Schools, commenting as follows:
The Governors outline their objections to the proposals as follows:
• The implications for the pupils, parents and staff of Whitchurch High School have not been considered by the Council’s Development Management Service nor discussed with the governing body • Whitchurch High School has nearly 2,500 pupils on two sites and nearly 300 staff. There is currently significant congestion at lower school site at the start and end of the school day as pupils are dropped off and picked up by parents. The Council’s proposal to increase car parking space at the new site of Ysgol Melyn Gruffydd will increase the risk to pupils in the Glan y Nant Road and Terrace and Heol Gwrgan/Mervyn Road areas as this is likely to increase the traffic in three no-through roads putting pupils at greater risk • The proposed new English-medium primary school will involve former Eglwys Newydd Primary school pupils having to travel the new school site. This will again increase the traffic within the village i.e. between both of the High School sites • Whitchurch High School is a split site school however some subjects are only taught on the lower school site. This means that throughout the day staff, pupils and parents have to travel between school sites. The governors are concerned that the risk to pupils in particular has not been fully assessed. It will potentially mean that staff moving from one side to the other may be late to carry out teaching lessons or undertaking contractual safeguarding of pupils. • Whitchurch High School has actively promoted safer routes to school developments and seen a considerable uptake of students walking and cycling to school. This is a trend the governors are working with the school and parents to further develop and promote. It is the governors’ belief, particularly for Welsh Medium primary schools, that there is a significant proportion of pupils who will be brought to school by car as the majority of pupils will not be in a position to walk with parents to school living so far away from school. This will be exacerbated by the dead end access to the school. • We would draw to your attention that Whitchurch High School staff and students are expected to be on school sites at 8.30 and many need to commute between school sites 08.50 to 9.05 in the morning. Ignoring other lesson changeovers during the day. Lunchtimes are between 12:15 to 1:00 (Friday 12:00 to 12:45) and school finishes at 3:15 (Fridays 3:00).
The Planning Committee may feel that secondary age pupils are less at risk in matters of road safety so I would like to remind them that tragically one of our pupils was killed outside the lower school last year. Sadly we annually have pupils injured by traffic as well as many reported near misses even near the zebra crossings outside lower and upper school sites. You will therefore, understand the strength of our concern regarding
177 any proposed increased traffic in the Whitchurch area.
Whitchurch High School (lower) site is subject to flooding from the adjacent brook. The proposed building on the site of the current Eglwys Newydd Primary School would, without any mitigation works, cause increased risk of flooding to the lower school site. The risk of flooding necessitated considerable discussions and investment when the Power League Development was built in 2008 adjacent to the brook upstream of the Eglwys Newydd site. Whitchurch High School has not been informed of any flood impact assessment of the lower school site as a result of the planning application, nor have we been consulted about the need for any mitigation works.
The Planning Committee should be made aware that, as the governors own the site and land, the governing body would have to consider and approve any planned mitigation works to Whitchurch High School as part of this planning application.
On behalf of the governing body I would suggest that full consultation with the school and governors’ takes place before any planning application is progressed.
The Chair of Governors also states that as legal owners of the Whitchurch High School site and buildings, the Council’s Development Management Service has failed in its duty to notify the school of the planning applications. (Note: Although Whitchurch High School was not notified of planning application 11/1894/DCO as it is not a neighbouring occupier, file records indicate that a neighbour notification letter was sent to the lower school in respect of planning application 11/1895/DCO relating to the Eglwydd Newydd site).
7.6 Twenty eight letters of objection from residents have been received. In summary, the grounds of objection are as follows:
(i) Traffic surveys have not been rigorous enough and have not take account of the increased pupil numbers proposed. The fact that pupils will be travelling from further afield, will result in more children being driven to school increasing congestion and compromising the safety of children accessing the site. The introduction of a nursery will increase traffic in the middle of the day as well as during the opening and closing times of the main school.
(ii) Increased traffic congestion and lack of parking, exacerbating existing difficulties. Safety of children and existing residents. Difficulty of access for emergency vehicles.
Reference is made to the use of the narrow lane between nos. 28 and 30 Glan y Nant Road as a ‘rat run’. Residents have experienced damage to vehicles and their properties through the use of this land by school related traffic. Photographs have been submitted to illustrate
178 the safety risks of using the land as a thorough fare. Glan y Nant Road is not considered suitable to deal with the large volume of traffic.
It is believed that the figures for increased vehicles in the Transport Assessment Report are wrong and underestimated. The impact of the proposals on the local roads and accesses have not been properly assessed.
(ii) No check has been carried out on the capacity of the car park in Whitchurch Village to provide an effective pick up and drop off area. As it has not been demonstrated that this can be provided and that it has the required capacity, it cannot be considered as mitigation. Safety concerns for young children in using remote drop off points.
(iii) Inappropriate to grant planning permission until the matter of the on going judicial review into the Welsh Assembly Government’s decision to approve the schools reorganisation is resolved.
(iv) Increased flood risk. Whitchurch Brook has been identified by the Council as previously at risk. A building of increased capacity will put further strain on the dated sewerage system.
(v) Adverse affects in terms of noise and air pollution (as a result of increased traffic).
(vi) Overdevelopment of the site and detrimental to local residents. It is considered that the proposed development would be out of accord with policies 2.20 (Good Design) and 2.24 (Residential Amenity).
(vii) Loss of green space and reduction in playing field size.
(viii)Lack of consultation with the community. It is requested that Planning Committee defers making its decision to allow the schools and residents from Glan-y-Nant and the surrounding area to discuss their concerns together.
(ix)The timescale proposed to complete the works, if the school is to open from September 2012, is considered too short.
(x) Contrary to policies designed to reduced Cardiff’s carbon footprint.
(xi) It is understood that most inhabitants of Whitchurch are concerned and opposed to the proposals in their present form.
8. ANALYSIS
8.1 This planning application was deferred on 14th December, 2011, for a further site visit which took place on 4th January, 2012.
8.2 This planning application seeks permission for extensions, general
179 adaption and refurbishment works, together with the provision of new hard paved games areas and an extended staff/visitor car park at Eglwys Newydd Primary School to facilitate the proposed relocation of Ysgol Gymraeg Melin Gruffydd to the site.
8.3 The main planning issues in the assessment of the application are considered to relate to:
(i) The acceptability of the proposed alterations in terms of their design and effect on the appearance of the street scene. (ii) The effect of the proposed development on the residential amenity of neighbouring/nearby occupiers. (iii) Highway/transportation considerations. (iv) Landscape/trees/ecology. (v) Flooding.
8.4 With respect to the first issue, the proposed extensions have been designed to reflect the scale and traditional appearance of the original school and will be finished in materials to match the existing building (principally smooth red facing brick, re-constituted slates, red coloured ridge and hip tiles). The existing solid red brick boundary wall fronting Glan y Nant Road is to be modified to achieve a similar appearance to the length of boundary wall in front of the existing school, with infill bar railings between brick piers. The proposals will facilitate the removal of several structures erected at the site in more recent years, including the detached kitchen/dining block to the south, which is of a utilitarian, flat roof appearance.
8.5 It is considered that the proposed extensions and alterations would impact positively on the character and appearance of the street scene.
8.6 Whilst the proposals will result in the removal of a number of unprotected trees, primarily adjacent to Whitchurch brick boundary, the landscape proposals seek to mitigate the loss of trees through new tree planting.
8.7 It is not considered that the proposed extensions and remodelling of the school would impact unacceptably on the residential amenity of neighbouring/nearby occupiers. The main extension to the south of the existing school building would be sited approximately 21.0 metres from three bungalows (at nos. 44-48 Glan y Nant Road) which would face the structure from the opposite side of the road. The extension would be partly screened by the modified boundary wall, and, at an eaves height of only 2.7 metres, rising to a ridge height of approximately 5.7 metres, it is not considered that the structure would be over bearing.
8.8 The proposed car park extension will be separated from the rear of 48 Glan y Nant Road by the existing rear lane. Existing/proposed tree planting between the car park and the lane would soften its visual impact.
8.9 The proposed multi-use games and hard court play areas, to be
180 constructed in the south eastern corner of the playing fields are also shown to have new tree planting along their southern edges which would soften their appearance in views from the adjacent public footway and the rear of the nearby Warren Evans Court flats.
8.10 The Applicant has confirmed that it is not intended to install flood lighting as part of the proposals for the play areas. The Operational Manager, Environment (Pollution Control) has raised no objections to this aspect of the scheme on noise or air pollution grounds.
8.11 It is evident that the proposed increase in car park area is small relative to the overall area of the existing grass playing field. The Agent advises that the remaining grassed pitch area, not including the new hard play games court provision is circa 8700 square metres. He says that Building Bulletin 99 ‘Briefing Framework for Primary School Projects’ suggests a minimum grassed pitch area of 8400 square metres for a 420 pupil primary school and that the remaining playing field provision is sufficient to accommodate the required type and quantity of pitches at the school.
8.12 The works will require the provision of two temporary demountable classroom units and a single temporary demountable nursery unit which are proposed to be located in an area indicated to accommodate the new hard court games area. The Agent has advised that the units would be retained for a maximum period of two years whilst the main building works are being undertaken with the hard court games areas being established as shown on the submitted plans, on their removal.
8.13 An ecological appraisal of the grounds and buildings, including a bat survey, has been carried out and the submitted reports have not identified any material constraints to development. Recommended measures to mitigate any potential impact are subject of conditions 6, 7, and 8 informative 4 (Bats).
8.14 A Flood Consequences Assessment (FCA) has been submitted in support of the application. The FCA notes that there is a record of historical flooding at the site with the latest recorded occurrence taking place in summer 2009. As a result of this occurrence, the FCA advises that the Council undertook clearance works to the adjacent water course; cut back vegetation removed obstructions and sediment build up and commissioned a flood study of the Whitchurch Brook watercourse.
8.15 The FCA has identified flood risks to the whole site and has quantified anticipated flood depths and velocities. Finished floor levels for the new buildings have not yet been determined, although it is anticipated that these will be higher than the existing floor levels on the site.
8.16 The FCA states that the proposed development of the site will not in any significant way result in the displacement of flood water to the detriment of other properties. It concludes, based upon published guidelines and relevant provisions of the TAN 15, that the proposed development meets
181 acceptability criteria.
8.17 The FCA states that the applicant is aware of the limited potential for flooding and will implement flood management procedures if required. In this regard, it states that escape routes onto adjacent higher land, deemed to be outside the extent of the flood risk zone area, are available and that if considered necessary, formal flood plans and procedures can be established as part of an operating plan for the premises. Flood proofing and mitigation measures could be considered within the design of the development in accordance with guidance available from the Environment Agency (EA).
8.18 The EA has been consulted on the application and advises that it has no objection to the proposed development (refer to paragraph 6.3). It recommends that a planning condition be attached removing permitted development rights on that part of the site demonstrated to be in the 1% plus climate change flood extent in order to reduce any potential flood risk on the site and elsewhere, resulting from permitted development structures. Condition 22 addresses this matter.
8.19 With respect to the likely transportation/highway impact of the development, the Operational Manager, Transportation has considered the proposals and advises as follows:
(i) A Transport Assessment (TA) was submitted in support of the application which examines the likely effect of traffic associated with the proposed school development. The assessment is based upon surveys that were undertaken by Cardiff Council on 13th, 14th and 15th September 2011 during the AM and PM School Peak Hours at the following junctions:
- A470 Northern Avenue / Manor Way / Tyn-y-parc Road; - Ty'n-y-pwll Road / Old Church Road / Glan-y-Nant Terrace; - Old Church Road / Merthyr Road / Church Road; and - Park Road / Ty'n-y-pwll Road / Kelston Road / Penlline Road;
(ii) The TA identifies that based on 51% of pupils being driven to school, as currently occurs at Ysgol Newydd, Glan-y-Nant, there will be an increase of 21 additional vehicle trips generated as a result of the proposed development during the morning and afternoon peak hours. The TA concludes that the increase in traffic can be accommodated on the existing highway network at these times. The TA has been independently audited by Peter Brett Associates and examined by Officers and is considered to represent a robust analysis in this respect;
(iii) The School currently operates a site specific Travel Plan (TP) which will be required to be updated to include the proposed development. This document will be progressed in liaison with the Council's Travel Plan Officer in order to ensure that the number of vehicle journeys
182 associated with this site are reduced and that more sustainable modes of travel are encouraged once the school is in operation;
(iv) The proposed car parking layout provides parking for 31spaces (including 1 disabled bay), which is accepted in principle, subject to a minimum of 3 disabled bays be provided.
(v) The existing footpath (to the south of the playing field) linking the site with Merthyr Road and the footpath that runs adjacent to 'Whitchurch Brook' (to the east of the school), both have existing Traffic Regulation Orders (TRO's) in place prohibiting cycling. It is recommended that these orders be revoked in order to encourage their use by both pedestrians and cyclists and, as such, a recommendation to this effect is requested.
(vi) Under this proposal and the associated application at Erw Las, the changes to the catchment areas is likely to result in more pupils crossing Merthyr Road. There are a number of existing zebra crossing facilities along this route, however it is anticipated that there will be an increased demand at the junction with St David's Road. The provision of a zebra crossing facility at this location would assist both cyclists and pedestrians attending Glan-y-Nant (via the path adjacent to the stream). In order to ensure the delivery of this, an appropriate condition is requested.
On the basis of the above, there are no objections to the proposed development, subject to conditions and informatives as detailed in the recommendation (refer to conditions 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18 and Informatives 5, 6 and 7).
8.20 Further to these observations, the Officer makes the following additional comments, mindful of the objections received:
(i) There will be an increase in the number of children and staff as a result of the proposal, however the submitted Transport Assessment (TA) identifies that the net increase in numbers of pupils travelling to the new school will be 41. Assuming the modal split as per Ysgol Newydd (which represents a worse case scenario, i.e. 51%) this equates to 21 additional vehicular movements associated with those pupils attending the school.
(ii) Traffic associated with the nursery in the middle of the day would occur outside of the peak hours and as such any impact on the surrounding highway network would be minimal.
(iii) The proposed catchment area for the new school is the same as the catchment area for the existing Ysgol Melin Gruffydd and as such the vehicle trips associated with this school currently have been included within the assessment. The School Travel Plan will be key to ensuring that staff and parents are actively encouraged to travel by sustainable modes where possible and that initiatives are put forward to dissuade parents from dropping off / picking up along Glan-Y-Nant Road.
183
(iv) The junctions assessed within the TA are considered to represent those that will likely be impacted as a result of the development and for which the TA has demonstrated that the percentage impact will not be significant. As such any traffic travelling away from these junctions will disperse further as they approach junctions outside of the assessment area. Therefore it was not considered necessary to analyse any additional junctions as part of the assessment process.
(v) Issues relating to highway safety in the immediate vicinity of the site will be addressed through the undertaking of surveys and implementation of any Traffic Management Measures that are deemed necessary together with the provision of additional crossing facilities on Merthyr Road.
(vi) The submitted TA demonstrates that the likely change in traffic volume at any of the surveyed junctions on routes to the school (at peak times) is less than 5%, which is accepted by officers as representing a negligible impact over and above the existing situation.
(vii) It is considered that cycling will be encouraged to this site through the revoking of the 'Prohibition of Cycling' Traffic Regulation Orders that are currently in place along the existing footpath linking the site with Merthyr Road (to the south of the playing field) and the footpath that runs adjacent to 'Whitchurch Brook' (to the east of the school). The latter footpath will also be upgraded to include street lighting, making this more attractive for both pedestrians and cyclists. In addition the provision of a new crossing facility on Merthyr Road will further assist with encouraging more sustainable mode choices.
(viii)The "inappropriate use of a lane in Glan-y-Nant Road" will be addressed through the undertaking of surveys in the lanes / streets adjacent, and, if appropriate the implementation of the associated Traffic Management Measures. Any illegal parking that takes place would be enforced by the Councils Civil Parking Enforcement (CPE) Team.
(ix) The applicant’s Transport Consultant has confirmed that the additional traffic has been calculated by sub-dividing the areas of the new catchment in to its lower super catchment areas, each of which represents 9% of the school catchment. Traffic from each of those areas was then assigned to the network along what are considered to be the most likely route to be used. The resulting additional trips were then calculated at each junction. None of those junctions were deemed likely to suffer an increase in traffic that would result in a lack of capacity. This methodology is accepted by officers.
(x) In accordance with Manual for Streets, the requirements for emergency vehicles are generally dictated by the fire service requirements. These are that a minimum of 3.7 metres would be required for operating space at the
184 scene of a fire. To reach a fire the access route could be reduced to 2.75 metres over short distances
8.21 Having regard to the Officer’s advice and the assessment of the other key planning issues outlined above, the application is recommended for approval, subject to the attached conditions and informatives.
185 186 187 188 189 190 191 PETITION LOCAL MEMBER OBJECTION
COMMITTEE DATE: 11/01/2012
APPLICATION No. 11/833/DCI APPLICATION DATE: 13/05/2011
ED: BUTETOWN
APP: TYPE: Full Planning Permission
APPLICANT: Mr Lancastle LOCATION: LAND ADJACENT TO 20 WINDSOR ESPLANADE, CARDIFF BAY PROPOSAL: CONSTRUCTION OF A NEW SEMI-DETACHED/END TERRACE HOUSE ON AN EXISTING VACANT PLOT IN CARDIFF BAY ______
RECOMMENDATION 1: That, subject to persons having relevant interest in the application site entering into a binding planning obligation in agreement with the Council under SECTION 106 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 encompassing the matters referred to in paragraphs 8.11 of the Chief Strategic Planning and Environment Officer's report, planning permission be GRANTED subject to the following conditions:
1. C01 Statutory Time Limit
2. The consent relates to the application as amended by the revised plans numbered PAX101; PAP100E; PAP101E; PAE100F; PAE101E, attached to and forming part of this planning application. Reason: The plans amend and form part of the application.
3. The consent relates to the application as supplemented by the rendered images numbered P3D105A; P3D106A; P3D107A attached to and forming part of this application. Reason: The information provided forms part of the application.
4. No development shall take place until samples of the external finishing materials have been submitted to and approved by the Local Planning Authority. The development shall be carried out in accordance with the approved details. Reason: To ensure that the finished appearance of the development is in keeping with the area.
5. No development shall take place until a scheme showing the architectural detailing of the front and gable elevations has been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority
192 and the development shall not be brought into use until the approved scheme is implemented. Reason: To ensure a satisfactory finished appearance to the development.
6. No development shall take place until details of facilities for the storage of refuse containers have been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The facilities approved shall be provided before the development is brought into beneficial use. Reason: To secure an orderly form of development and to protect the amenities of the area.
7. No development shall take place until a drainage scheme has been submitted to and approved by the Planning Authority in consultation with Dwr Cymru Welsh Water. Reason: To secure an orderly form of development.
8. Foul water and surface water discharges shall drain separately from the development. Reason: To protect the integrity of the public sewerage system.
9. Surface water shall not drain directly, or indirectly, to the public foul/combined sewerage system, unless otherwise approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. Reason: To prevent the hydraulic overloading of the public sewerage system, and in the interests of health and the environment.
10. Land drainage run-off shall not discharge, directly or indirectly, to the public sewerage system. Reason: To prevent hydraulic overload of the public sewerage system and the pollution of the environment.
11. 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, a remediation strategy detailing how this unsuspected contamination shall be dealt with. The remediation strategy shall be implemented as approved. Reason: The site is located upon land designated as historic landfill (Hamadryad) and there is a possibility that contaminated ground may be encountered.
12. The dwelling hereby approved shall meet the BRE Code for Sustainable Homes (Version 3) Level 3, and shall obtain a minimum of 1 credit under Ene 1 (Dwelling Emissions Rate).
193 Reason: To ensure that the development is constructed in accordance with national planning sustainable building standards.
13. Construction of the dwelling hereby permitted shall not begin until an ‘Interim Certificate’ has been submitted to the Local Planning Authority, certifying that a minimum Code for Sustainable Homes (Version 3) Level 3 and a minimum of 1 credit under Ene 1 (Dwelling Emission Rate) shall be achieved. Reason: To ensure that the development is constructed in accordance with national planning sustainable building standards.
14. Prior to occupation of the dwelling hereby permitted a Code for Sustainable Homes (Version 3) Level 3 ‘Final Certificate’ shall be submitted to the Local Planning Authority, certifying that a minimum Code for Sustainable Homes (Version 3) Level 3 and a minimum of 1 credit under Ene 1 (Dwelling Emissions Rate) has been achieved for the dwelling. Reason: To ensure that the development is constructed in accordance with national planning sustainable building standards.
15. Prior to commencement of development a scheme of construction management shall be submitted to and approved by the Local Planning Authority, to include details of site hoardings, site access and wheel washing facilities. Construction of the development shall be managed strictly in accordance with the scheme so approved. Reason: In the interests of highway safety, public amenity and access to the site.
RECOMMENDATION 2: The contamination assessments and the affects of unstable land are considered on the basis of the best information available to the Planning Authority and are not necessarily exhaustive. The Authority takes due diligence when assessing these impacts, however you are minded that the responsibility for
(i) determining the extent and effects of such constraints and; (ii) ensuring that any imported materials (including, topsoils, subsoils, aggregates and recycled or manufactured aggregates / soils) are chemically suitable for the proposed end use. Under no circumstances should controlled waste be imported. It is an offence under section 33 of the environmental Protection Act 1990 to deposit controlled waste on a site which does not benefit from an appropriate waste management license. The following must not be imported to a development site: • Unprocessed / unsorted demolition wastes. • Any materials originating from a site confirmed as being contaminated or potentially contaminated by chemical or radioactive substances.
194 • Japanese Knotweed stems, leaves and rhizome infested soils. In addition to section 33 above, it is also an offence under the Wildlife and Countryside Act 1981 to spread this invasive weed; and
(iii) the safe development and secure occupancy of the site rests with the developer.
Proposals for areas of possible land instability should take due account of the physical and chemical constraints and may include action on land reclamation or other remedial action to enable beneficial use of unstable land.
The Local Planning Authority has determined the application on the basis of the information available to it, but this does not mean that the land can be considered free from contamination.
1. DESCRIPTION OF PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT
1.1 This application was deferred at the last meeting of the Planning Committee to return to officers to draft reasons for refusal (see paragraph 9.2)
1.2 The proposals are for the construction of a semi-detached individual dwelling next to no. 20 Windsor Esplanade. The applicant, who is the owner of no. 20, has purchased the triangular patch of land immediately to the east of the property that currently serves as a landscaped area between the gable wall of no.20 and the public open space.
1.3 The terrace of 8 townhouses of which no. 20 forms part was granted PP in 2001 (00/01633/C) and is an end-of-terrace 3-storey townhouse. The proposed 4 storey townhouse will be built abutting this property. The footprint projects 1.8m forward of the building line to the front and 0.8m to the rear and will be approximately 1.5m higher than its 3 storey neighbour.
1.4 The new building will become the new end of terrace and the 3 circular windows to the gable of no. 20 will be extinguished.
1.5 The form is distinctive being a simple wedge-shaped box with a raked flat roof. The prominent gable is 12.2m high at its highest point and is clad with bronze-coloured metal panels. The leading edge of the gable has an opening to the 3rd floor balcony which extends downwards as a continuous recessed blank opening on the first and second floors, a continuous vertical strip window on the first, second and third floors lighting the staircase, and small square windows to the rear of the gable lighting first, second and third floor bathrooms and the ground floor entrance lobby.
1.6 The predominantly glazed lightweight front elevation is 6.5m wide and is contained within a full height rectangular frame clad in bronze-coloured metal
195 panels. The ground floor kitchen and living room has a door that opens on to a small front garden area.
1.7 To the rear the elevation is only 1.9m wide with front door and lobby to the ground floor and bathroom accommodation above.
1.8 Two off-street parking spaces are provided to the Lacuna car park at the rear of the development.
1.9 The Code for Sustainable Homes Pre- Assessment report indicates the building will achieve a BREEAM ‘Very Good’ rating.
1.10 Amended scheme: As a result of discussions the scheme has been amended and reconsulted on twice. The amendments are: • Raking the top of the building to follow the slope of the 3 storey townhouse roofs and reducing the projection to the front from 3.0m to 1.8m in order to reduce the scale of the building • Changing the colour of the proposed cladding and alterations to the window sizes and positions on the gable
1.11 The following information is submitted: • Design and Access Statement • Flood Consequences Assessment • Code for Sustainable Homes Pre-Assessment
1.12 The following additional supporting information has been submitted: • Detailed site plan (dwg. no. PAX101) showing proposals in wider context. • Rendered images showing the proposals in the context of the street • Shadow path diagrams showing the impact of the development on the neighbouring property.
2. DESCRIPTION OF SITE
2.1 The site is situated in a residential area fronting Cardiff Bay with a terrace of 8no. townhouses and Lacuna Apartments immediately to the west and an area of public open space to the east.
2.2 The town houses of which no. 20 forms part are 3 storeys in height, set back at each storey to form balconies, and with a continuous monopitch roof falling from front to back (maximum height 10.5m). The apartments which terminate the development at its western end rise from 4 storeys to a central drum of 6 storeys (maximum height of 24.0m).
2.3 To the other side of the public open space is the Grade II listed Windsor Esplanade terrace, a row of substantial 3-storey Victorian townhouses. The distance from the application site to the listed no. 19 Windsor Esplanade is
196 approx. 48m. The distance from the application site to nos. 15 & 16 Eleanor Place, which are the closest houses of a modern terrace to the north of the listed terrace and at right angles to it, is approx. 45m.
2.4 The elongated triangular flat site (approximately 77 sqm) is a wedge-shaped landscaped piece of land between the end of the terrace and the public open space immediately to the east. The application site includes an approx 1.5m wide strip of land, currently part of the rear garden of no. 20, which provides access from the car park to the rear of the proposed building, and 2no. off- street car parking spaces.
2.5 The site is bounded to the south by Windsor Esplanade and the Cardiff Bay Wetlands Reserve. To the north the rear garden of no. 20 backs on to the car parking area serving the 8no. townhouses and 40no. apartments. To the north of that is the elevated peripheral distributor road.
2.6 The site is not in a conservation area but the Pierhead Conservation Area is approx. 30m to the east.
2.7 There are no trees on the site which is covered with dense shrubbery. The edge of the open space adjacent to the site is a landscaped buffer strip 1.5m wide at its Windsor Place end and increasing gradually in width to approx. 2.5m wide at a point level with the rear of the proposed townhouse. This strip is planted with a thick hedge interspersed with a number of trees to the north to reinforce the landscaped buffer between the houses and the POS.
3. PLANNING HISTORY
• 00/1633C Application for construction of 40 apartments and 8 townhouses plus public open space and site access at South Hamadryad Peninsular granted planning permission in May 2001.
4. POLICY FRAMEWORK
4.1 Adopted City of Cardiff Local Plan Policy 11 (Design and Aesthetic Quality)
4.2 Deposit Cardiff Unitary Development Plan (2003) Policy 2.20 (Good Design) Policy 2.24 (Residential Amenity)
4.3 National Policy and Guidance Technical Advice Note 12 (TAN12): Design
197 5. INTERNAL CONSULTEE RESPONSES
5.1 Transportation: No comment.
Parks Services: The Parks Services Landscape Officer raises no objection but notes the following: • The loss of the planting at the front edge adjacent to the POS would affect the appearance of the POS and that remedial measures may be required. • There is likely to be increased overshadowing of the POS. • Should the developer require access to the POS for construction purposes a formal agreement would need to be put in place to ensure the POS is reinstated. • The financial contribution required for the compensatory tree planting amounts to £1,604 made up of £380 for the supply of 4no. trees, £784 for planting, and £440 for watering.
5.2 Drainage Management: The Drainage Engineer has no objection subject to a standard drainage scheme condition.
5.3 Waste Management: The Sustainable Planning Officer requires more details of the refuse storage arrangements. A standard refuse storage condition is attached.
5.4 Pollution Control (Contaminated land): No objection subject to a ‘Contamination and Unstable Land Advisory Notice’ recommendation.
5.5 Pollution Control (Noise & Air): No comment.
6. EXTERNAL CONSULTEE RESPONSES
6.1 Environment Agency: No objection subject to a condition requiring the submission of a remediation strategy in the event of finding contamination.
6.2 DCWW: No objection subject to standard conditions on separation of foul and surface water, and discharge of surface and land drainage run-off to the public sewer.
6.3 The Central Area Conservation Group: The Chair of the Group comments as follows: ‘The Group was split on this application. There is an argument that there should be no development on this site at all. However if reassurances can be given on the quality of the design and in particular the materials then this would be a good design, even given its contrast with the surrounding street scene.’ The Group also requested additional images showing the proposals in context be provided prior to determination. These have been provided as part of the amended scheme.
198 7. REPRESENTATIONS
7.1 An email was received from Cllr. Delme Greening on 14th November objecting to the application on grounds of design: • Out of character with the adjoining development and with the listed terrace; • Negative impact of increased height on the Wetland Reserve, and; • Uniqueness of design dominating the street. He also reports concerns raised by some residents in Eleanor Place that the height of the development would result in loss of light for their properties.
7.2 A valid petition of objection containing 70 signatures was received on 8.11.11. The petition objects to the application on the following grounds: 1. Not in keeping with the old or new architecture. 2. Aggressive (and oppressive) intrusion into the street scene. 3. Negative impact on nearby conservation area. 4. Inadequate parking provision. 5. Loss of light and overshadowing of neighbouring townhouse (no. 20 Windsor Esplanade). 6. Too high and too far forward of the building line and wrong design. 7. Alters the landscape. 8. Overshadowing of the adjoining public open space (Pocket Park).
7.3 A letter was received from the petitioner on behalf of the Windsor Esplanade Residents’ Association reiterating the grounds for objection of the petition and that there is no vacant plot and that the development could devalue properties in Lacuna.
7.4 A letter was received from the Butetown Ward Plaid Cymru Election 2012 candidate (Liz Musa) supporting the views of the Windsor Esplanade Residents’ Association meeting held on 7.11.11 that the building is out of character with the rest of the Esplanade (there would be less objection if built in a less historic location), that it is an eyesore, and that it raises traffic concerns.
7. 5 An email was received from Cllr. Margaret Jones forwarding an email from the petitioner to MP Alun Michael reiterating the grounds for objection in the petition
7.6 Neighbours were consulted. A total of 29 objections have been received from local residents, as follows: • Status of land and loss of open space/ landscaped buffer • Precedent leading to further erosion of POS • Scale of building – both height and footprint • Unsympathetic design, out of character/not in keeping • Appearance of building – colour and materials
199 • Loss of gable windows to no. 20 • Erroneous reference to existing bicycle store • Lack of car parking • Lack of garden space to front and rear • Viability of boundary hedge • Public realm improvements in the event of PP being granted • Lack of notification • Part of CA • Loss of views and light (Eleanor Place residents) • Loss of views (adjacent houses) • Impact of construction traffic on listed terrace
8. ANALYSIS
8.1 The main issues to consider are the acceptability of the design and its impact on the amenity of the adjacent POS and of no. 20 Windsor Esplanade.
Design 8.2 Policy 11 of the LP states that new development should be of a good design which has proper regard to the scale and character of the surrounding environment and does not adversely affect the aesthetic quality of the area. It goes on to say that the composition, proportion, form and materials should reflect the building’s use and location and that it should have regard for the historical context of sites and recognise the importance of existing landmarks, vistas and local views (LP 4.6.3).
8.3 TAN12 seeks to promote innovative design and points out that a contextual approach should not necessarily prohibit contemporary design.
8.4 The building forms part of the Lacuna development and is separated from the listed terrace by the POS. It is not in the Pierhead CA. It is however part of a historic street scene and a new addition in important local views – from the Bay and the wetland open space, and from the east on Windsor Esplanade.
8.5 The assessment looks at the building’s design in relation to its immediate context (the Lacuna development and the POS), and at its impact on the historic streetscene and on important local views.
8.6 The 3D cgis illustrate the building’s impact on Windsor Esplanade. When viewed from the west and south its increased height and footprint in relation to the 3 storey townhouses provides a visual stop to the terrace. Its scale in relation to the terrace and its strong vertical form successfully reworks the traditional gable ends that flank the listed terrace and acts in a similar way as a visual ‘bookend’ that both terminates and enhances the terrace. It has proper regard to the scale and character of the street and is acceptable.
200 8.7 The view from the east presents a gable which introduces a strikingly different form to the streetscene. Discussions have focussed on improving this view of the development from the conservation area, in particular the form and scale of the gable and the number, size and composition of the window openings.
8.8 The scale of this element has reduced in size as a result of design discussions and the form of the roof has also been modified through the introduction of a slope in order to reduce the impact of the building on the street when seen in this view. Window openings have been added and proportions made more vertical.
8.9 The overall scale and form of the development is acceptable. The predominantly glazed front elevation and the choice of a metal cladding is fundamental to the design concept and this is considered acceptable subject to details on panel size, jointing, texture and colour. Material samples and architectural details conditions are added.
8.10 It should be noted that the Central Area Conservation Group concluded that this would be a good design, even given its contrast with the surrounding street scene, provided that reassurances can be given on the quality of the design and in particular the materials.
8.11 Impact on POS: The landscaped buffer strip that forms part of the POS adjacent to the proposed dwelling is to be reinstated and enhanced as part of the s106 legal agreement. There is an opportunity to introduce taller growing species to soften the impact of the gable on the POS and on the views from the conservation area. To compensate the loss of the incidental landscaped area a financial contribution of £1,604 is sought to plant 4 new street trees to existing treepits on the south side of Windsor Esplanade opposite Wetlands Nature Reserve. These are to replace trees that have failed to grow.
8.12 The impact on the amenity of the POS is limited to overshadowing of a small area in the late afternoon at the equinox.
8.13 Impact on neighbours: The southeast orientation of the terrace reduces the potential overshadowing of no. 20 arising from the 1.8m projection of the proposed development. Sunpath diagrams show that overshadowing at 9.00am the equinox is restricted to less than half the area of the first floor balcony. At the summer solstice when the sun is further in the east this increases to about 75% of the balcony at 9.00am. For the great majority of the day at the equinox the balconies of no. 20 are not overshadowed.
8.14 In relation to overbearing impact it should be noted that the degree of projection (3.6m at first floor and approx. 4.6m at second floor) is similar to that at the western end of the development and is considered acceptable.
201 8.15 The impact on the immediate outlook of no. 20 is to cut off views to the east of the listed terrace. The views out over the Bay are not affected.
8.16 There is no impact on the immediate outlook of the residents of Eleanor Place.
8.17 The right to a view is not a material planning consideration however it should be noted that the impact on the views enjoyed by the residents of no. 20 is not significant. The impact on Eleanor Place residents is also insignificant.
8.18 There are no issues in relation to privacy or overlooking.
8.19 Adequate off-street parking (2 spaces) is provided.
Representations: 8.20 Addressing the Local Member’s points in turn: • The issue of whether the development is out of character with the street is addressed in paragraphs 8.6 to 8.10 of the committee report. • The impact on the Wetland Reserve is not considered to be any more significant than the impact of the Lacuna flats at the western end of the terrace. • The proposed is a piece of innovative architecture that is considered to enhance the Lacuna development. As argued in paragraph 8.6 of the report the design is considered ‘to have proper regard to the scale and character of the street’. In relation to concerns raised by the residents of Eleanor place over possible loss of light the nearest property on Eleanor Place is approximately 45m distant from the site and the proposed development is approximately 1.5m higher than the existing townhouses. There will be no discernible impact in terms of reduction in light.
8.21 The grounds for objection cited in the petition are addressed in the committee report as follows: • Grounds 1, 2 and 6 (acceptability of the proposed design) are addressed in paragraphs 8.2 to 8.10 of the committee report. • The impact on the Pierhead Conservation Area (Ground 3) is specifically addressed in paragraphs 8.4, 8.7, 8.8 and 8.10 of the report. • Inadequate parking provision (Ground 4) is addressed in paragraph 8.19 of the report. • Loss of light and overshadowing of no. 20 Windsor Esplanade (Ground 5) is addressed in paragraphs 8.13 and 8.14 of the report. • Alteration of landscape (Ground 7) is addressed in paragraphs 8.11 of the report. • Overshadowing of adjoining POS (Ground 8) is addressed in paragraph 8.12 of the report.
202 8.22 The grounds for objection raised by the Windsor Esplanade Residents’ Association relating to the status of the plot is addressed below. The effect of the development on property prices is not a planning matter. The other grounds for objection reiterate those of the petition and are addressed above.
8.23 The issues raised by the Butetown Ward Plaid Cymru Election 2012 candidate are those raised by the Residents’ Association and are addressed above.
8.24 The issues raised in the letter from the petitioner to MP Alun Michael and forwarded to us by Cllr. Margaret Jones are those contained in the petition and are addressed above.
8.25 The grounds for objection contained in the letters from local residents are addressed as follows:
8.26 Status of land and precedent: The application site is an area of land that lies between no. 20 and the public open space, currently landscaped with groundcover shrubs. The application form states that the applicant, who is the owner of no. 20, is the owner of the land. The consent for the Lacuna Development refers to this area of land as an incidental landscaped area.
8.27 A condition attached to the consent for the Lacuna development prevents the construction of any structure or extension within the curtilage of any dwelling. This application is however a standalone application for an individual dwelling that has to be judged on its own merits.
8.28 The current function of the land is to reinforce the landscaped buffer strip that forms the western edge of the POS.
8.29 In relation to the establishment of a precedent the adjoining land is public open space and any development would therefore be contrary to the Local Plan. It should be noted the proposal includes no loss of POS.
8.30 Design: The points raised in relation to the design are fully addressed in the analysis above.
8.31 Objections on the grounds that it is part of the conservation area, lack of car parking, viability of the boundary hedge, potential public realm improvements and loss of view are addressed in the analysis above.
8.32 Loss of gable windows to no. 20: The circular windows to the gable of no. 20 are a secondary window to the living room at first floor and bathroom windows on the first and second floor. The house is owned by the applicant and does not therefore raise issues of loss of light to the neighbouring property. In relation to the amenity of future occupiers the level of lighting to the living
203 room will not be significantly reduced and the other townhouses all have internal bathrooms.
8.33 Reference to erroneous bicycle store: The consent for the Lacuna Development requires that adequate provision be made for cycle storage. Whether this has been complied with or not is a separate matter. Cycle storage can be readily accommodated within the dwelling.
8.34 Lack of private amenity space: Given the proximity to public open space and the generous nature of the proposed dwelling the absence of a back garden is acceptable.
8.35 Notification: A number of comments were made on the notification process. Immediate neighbours were notified in accordance with normal procedures.
8.36 Impact of construction traffic on the listed terrace: This is considered acceptable given that the proposed development is for only one dwelling. A construction management condition has been included which requires that a scheme of construction management shall be submitted to and approved by the Local Planning Authority to include details of construction traffic routes, site hoardings, site access, and wheel washing facilities. Construction shall be managed strictly in accordance with the scheme so approved.
9. CONCLUSION
9.1 In conclusion the proposals represent a bold piece of modern innovative architecture that successfully terminates the townhouse terrace and enhances the street scene. The proposals do not raise any land use, transportation or amenity concerns.
9.2 The granting of planning permission is recommended subject to conditions being imposed and a legal agreement (Section 106) being signed to secure a financial contribution of £1,406 for the planting of replacement trees and the submission of a scheme for the reinstatement and enhancement of the landscaped buffer strip that forms part of the POS adjacent to the proposed dwelling. However if members are minded to refuse the application the following reason is offered:
The proposal by reason of its siting, scale, design and materials represents an incongruous form of development which is out of keeping with the character of the surrounding area and detrimental to the visual amenities of the street scene and nearby listed buildings and is contrary to the purposes of Policy 11 of the Local Plan and Policy 2.20 of the UDP.
204 205 AMENDED PLAN 111/0833/DCI 206 28.10.2011 207 208 PETITIONS x 2 LOCAL MEMBER OBJECTION AM OBJECTION
COMMITTEE DATE: 11/01/2012
APPLICATION No. 11/01168/DCI APPLICATION DATE: 05/07/2011
ED: BUTETOWN
APP: TYPE: Outline Planning Permission
APPLICANT: Dovey Holdings Limited LOCATION: STERLING WORKS, CLARENCE ROAD, BUTETOWN, CARDIFF, CF10 5FA PROPOSAL: DEMOLITION OF WAREHOUSE BUILDING AND FORMER CHURCH AND ERECTION OF 19 ONE AND TWO BED APARTMENTS ON THE SITE ______
RECOMMENDATION 1: That, subject to persons having relevant interest in the application site entering into a binding planning obligation in agreement with the Council under SECTION 106 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 encompassing the matters referred to in paragraphs 5.4, 5.6, 5.10 & 8.8 of the Chief Strategic Planning and Environment Officer's report, outline planning permission be GRANTED subject to the following conditions:
1. A. Approval of the details of the landscaping of the site (hereinafter called ‘the reserved matters’) shall be obtained from the LPA in writing before any development is commenced. B. Plans and particulars of the reserved matters referred to in condition 1A above, relating to the layout, scale and appearance of any buildings to be erected, the means of access to the site and the landscaping of the site, shall be submitted in writing to the local planning authority and shall be carried out as approved. C. Application for approval of the reserved matters shall be made to the Local Planning Authority before the expiration of three years from the date of this permission. D. The development hereby permitted shall be begun either before the expiration of five years from the date of this permission or before the expiration of two years from the date of the last of the reserved matters to be approved, whichever is the later. Reasons: A. In accordance with the provisions of Article (3)1 of the Town and Country Planning (General Development Procedure) Order 1995.
209 B, C and D. In accordance with the provisions of Section 92 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990.
2. The consent relates to the application as amended by the revised plans numbered 01A, 02A, 03A, 04A, 05A, 06A, 07B, 08B, 09A, 10A, 11A, 12A, & 13B. Reason: The plans amend and form part of the application.
3. The consent relates to the application as supplemented by the images of the building received from the applicant in an email dated 21.10.11. Reason: The information provided forms part of the application.
4. No development shall take place until samples of the external finishing materials have been submitted to and approved by the Local Planning Authority. The development shall be carried out in accordance with the approved details. Reason: To ensure a satisfactory finished appearance to the development.
5. No development shall take place until a scheme showing the architectural detailing of the principal elevations has been submitted to and approved in writing by the LPA and the development shall not be brought into beneficial use until the approved scheme is implemented. Reason: To ensure a satisfactory finished appearance to the building.
6. No development shall take place until details showing the provision of 20no. cycle parking spaces for the apartments (residents) have been submitted to and approved in writing by the LPA. The approved details shall be implemented prior to the development being put into beneficial use. Thereafter the cycle parking spaces shall be maintained and shall not be used for any other purpose. Reason: To ensure that adequate provision is made for the secure parking of cycles.
7. D3C Parking Within Curtilage
8. No development shall take place until a scheme of construction management has been submitted to and approved by the Local Planning Authority, to include details of site hoardings, site access and wheel washing facilities. Construction of the development shall be managed strictly in accordance with the scheme so approved. Reason: In the interests of highway safety and public amenity.
9. No part of the development hereby permitted shall be occupied until a scheme of environmental highway improvements to Pomeroy Street and Clarence Road adjacent to the site has been submitted to and approved in
210 writing by the LPA. The scheme should include as required, but not be limited to, the construction of the new access and reconstruction as footway/hard landscaping of the disused access, including surfacing, kerbs, edging; the resurfacing of footways and the provision/renewal of street lighting and street furniture as may be required as a consequence of the development. The agreed scheme to be implemented to the satisfaction of the LPA prior to beneficial occupation of the site. Reason: To ensure the comprehensive enhancement/improvement of the adjacent public highway in the interests of highway and pedestrian safety and to facilitate access to the proposed development.
10. No development to which this permission relates shall commence until an appropriate programme of historic building recording and analysis has been secured and implemented in accordance with an agreed written scheme of investigation which has been submitted to approved in writing by the local planning authority. Reason: As the building is of significance the specified records are necessary to mitigate the impact of the proposed development.
11. No part of the development hereby permitted shall be commenced until a scheme detailing the measures necessary for the purpose of monitoring gases generated on the site or land adjoining thereto and for any measures necessary to protect the development has been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. Any such scheme shall provide details of measures that are required to ensure the safe and inoffensive dispersal or management of gases and to prevent lateral migration of gases into or from land surrounding the application site. Gases includes landfill gases, vapours from contaminated land sites, and naturally occurring methane and carbon dioxide, but does not include radon gas. All measures specified in the above scheme shall (unless otherwise agreed in writing) be undertaken and completed prior to any development commencing or in accordance with a timetable as shall be previously agreed in writing with the Local Planning Authority and the measures shall be retained and maintained until such time as the Local Planning Authority agree in writing. Reason: To ensure that the safety of future occupiers is not prejudiced.
12. No part of the development hereby permitted shall be commenced until a scheme detailing the measures necessary for the purposes of identifying chemical and other contaminants on the site and to ensure that the land is suitable for the proposed development has been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. Any such scheme shall include details of any measures necessary to protect future occupiers/users of the land from chemical and other contaminants. All measures in the approved scheme shall be undertaken in accordance with
211 a timetable which shall be agreed in writing with the Local Planning Authority. Reason: To ensure that the safety of future occupiers is not prejudiced.
13. Any topsoil [natural or manufactured],or subsoil, to be imported shall be assessed for chemical or other potential contaminants in accordance with a scheme of investigation to be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority in advance of its importation. Only material approved by the Local Planning Authority shall be imported. All measures specified in the approved scheme shall be undertaken in accordance with the relevant Code of Practice and Guidance Notes. Subject to approval of the above, verification sampling of the material received at the development site is required to verify that the imported soil is free from contamination and shall be undertaken in accordance with a scheme agreed with in writing by the LPA. Reason: To ensure that the safety of future occupiers is not prejudiced.
14. Any aggregate (other than virgin quarry stone) or recycled aggregate material to be imported shall be assessed for chemical or other potential contaminants in accordance with a scheme of investigation to be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority in advance of its importation. Only material approved by the Local Planning Authority shall be imported. All measures specified in the approved scheme shall be undertaken in accordance with the relevant Code of Practice and Guidance Notes. Subject to approval of the above, verification sampling of the material received at the development site is required to verify that the imported aggregate is free from contamination and shall be undertaken in accordance with a scheme agreed with in writing by the LPA. Reason: To ensure that the safety of future occupiers is not prejudiced.
15. C2N Drainage details
16. Foul water and surface water discharges shall be drained separately from the site. Reason: To protect the integrity of the public sewerage system.
17. No surface water shall be allowed to connect, either directly or indirectly, to the public sewerage system unless otherwise approved in writing by the LPA. Reason: To prevent hydraulic overloading of the public sewerage system, to protect the health and safety of existing residents and ensure no detriment to the environment
18. Land drainage run-off shall not be permitted to discharge, either directly or indirectly, into the public sewerage system unless otherwise approved by
212 the Local planning Authority. Reason: To prevent hydraulic overload of the public sewerage system and pollution of the environment.
19. C7S Details of Refuse Storage
20. The dwellings hereby approved shall meet the BRE Code for Sustainable Homes (Version 3) Level 3, and shall obtain a minimum of 1 credit under Ene 1 (Dwelling Emissions Rate). Reason: To ensure that the development is constructed in accordance with national planning sustainable building standards.
21. Construction of the dwellings hereby permitted shall not begin until an ‘Interim Certificate’ has been submitted to the Local Planning Authority, certifying that a minimum Code for Sustainable Homes (Version 3) Level 3 and a minimum of 1 credit under Ene 1 (Dwelling Emissions Rate) shall be achieved. Reason: To ensure that the development is constructed in accordance with national planning sustainable building standards.
22. Prior to occupation of the dwelling hereby permitted a Code for Sustainable Homes (Version 3) Level 3 ‘Final Certificate’ shall be submitted to the Local Planning Authority, certifying that a minimum Code for Sustainable Homes (Version 3) Level 3 and a minimum of 1 credit under Ene 1 (Dwelling Emissions Rate) has been achieved for the dwelling. Reason: To ensure that the development is constructed in accordance with national planning sustainable building standards.
RECOMMENDATION 2: The highway works condition and any other works to existing or proposed adopted public highway are to be subject to an agreement under Section 38 and/or Section 278 Highways Act 1980 between the developer and Local Highway Authority.
RECOMMENDATION 3: The applicant is requested to provide future residents with a Welcome Pack detailing available public transport services, cycle routes and other transport alternatives to the private car. Leaflets and advice in connection with which are available by contacting Miriam Highgate, Cardiff Council Transportation Services, County Hall, Atlantic Wharf.
RECOMMENDATION 4: The contamination assessments and the affects of unstable land are considered on the basis of the best information available to the Planning Authority and are not necessarily exhaustive. The Authority takes due diligence when assessing these impacts, however you are minded that the responsibility for
(i) determining the extent and effects of such constraints and;
213 (ii) ensuring that any imported materials (including, topsoils, subsoils, aggregates and recycled or manufactured aggregates / soils) are chemically suitable for the proposed end use. Under no circumstances should controlled waste be imported. It is an offence under section 33 of the environmental Protection Act 1990 to deposit controlled waste on a site which does not benefit from an appropriate waste management license. The following must not be imported to a development site: • Unprocessed / unsorted demolition wastes. • Any materials originating from a site confirmed as being contaminated or potentially contaminated by chemical or radioactive substances. • Japanese Knotweed stems, leaves and rhizome infested soils. In addition to section 33 above, it is also an offence under the Wildlife and Countryside Act 1981 to spread this invasive weed; and
(iii) the safe development and secure occupancy of the site rests with the developer.
Proposals for areas of possible land instability should take due account of the physical and chemical constraints and may include action on land reclamation or other remedial action to enable beneficial use of unstable land.
The Local Planning Authority has determined the application on the basis of the information available to it, but this does not mean that the land can be considered free from contamination.
RECOMMENDATION 5: To protect the amenities of occupiers of other premises in the vicinity attention is drawn to the provisions of Section 60 of the Control of Pollution Act 1974 in relation to the control of noise from demolition and construction activities. Further to this the applicant is advised that no noise audible outside the site boundary adjacent to the curtilage of residential property shall be created by construction activities in respect of the implementation of this consent outside the hours of 0800-1800 hours Mondays to Fridays and 0800 - 1300 hours on Saturdays or at any time on Sunday or public holidays. The applicant is also advised to seek approval for any proposed piling operations.
1. DESCRIPTION OF PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT
1.1 An outline application seeking approval for access, appearance, layout and scale. The landscaping of the site is a reserved matter. The application proposes the demolition of the existing vacant Sterling Works industrial/warehouse building and the former Bethel Baptist church at the junction of Clarence Road and Pomeroy Street and the construction of a four storey residential block comprising 14no. 2 bed apartments and 5no. 1 bed apartments.
214 1.2 The main entrance to the apartments is from Clarence Road with a secondary access from Pomeroy Street to the parking area to the rear. The smallest 1 bed apartments have a floor area of 37m2. The smallest 2 bed apartments have a floor area of 54m2. Six of the 19 apartments are single aspect with views over Pomeroy Street.
1.3 Seven car parking spaces are provided on site with controlled access from Pomeroy Street. There is no external amenity space provided.
1.4 The development is a uniform 4 storeys in height with the top storey set back and contained within a mansarded roof space and a curved corner. Materials are brick in two colours with a zinc clad roof.
1.5 Amended plans have been received addressing the design and parking numbers. The application is accompanied by a design and access statement and a Code for Sustainable Homes Pre-Assessment report. Additional information in the form of rendered images of the building have been provided.
2. DESCRIPTION OF SITE
2.1 The application site is a disused warehouse/industrial building and Bethel Baptist Church on the corner of Pomeroy Street and Clarence Road adjacent to Clarence House, a 19th century 3-storey office building (formerly the Salvage Institution building) on a prominent corner site next to Clarence Road Bridge. The warehouse has been vacant for a number of years and is in a poor condition. It is a red brick-built structure about 3 storeys in height with pitched roofs and prominent gables on to Clarence Road.
2.2 The 19th century church is disused and boarded up with a main entrance to Pomeroy Street. Next to the church is a small area of open space used as a children’s play area. Opposite the site is an industrial building fronting Clarence Road and with access from Pomeroy street that is still in use, and 2 storey terraced housing (nos. 1 – 13 Pomeroy Street).
2.3 Pomeroy Street has been turned into a cul-de-sac and can no longer be accessed directly from Clarence Road. There is a bus stop and some tree planting on a small area of paving at the head of Pomeroy Street. To the front of the site is a larger area triangular area of paving which is sloping and in poor condition consisting of a mixture of block paving, tarmac, concrete and paving slabs.
2.4 The area is predominantly residential characterised by brick-built 2 storey Victorian terraces to the south of Clarence Road and the recently built Century Wharf apartments to the north. Along Clarence Road to the east are some old
215 industrial premises, newer offices and a number of new 4 storey apartment blocks built on infill sites (Avondale Court).
3. PLANNING HISTORY
3.1 01/223/C Outline permission granted in 2001 for demolition of existing building (Bethel Baptist Church) and redevelopment of 2no. houses.
Related planning history
3.2 98/377/C PP granted in 1999 for demolition of existing building (Avondale Works) and erection of 25no. flats (Avondale Court)
4. POLICY FRAMEWORK
4.1 Adopted City of Cardiff Local Plan Policy 11 Design and Aesthetic Quality Policy 17 Parking and Servicing Facilities Policy 31 Residential Open Space Requirements Policy 36 Alternative Use of Business, Industrial and Warehousing Land
4.2 Deposit Cardiff Unitary Development Plan (2003) Policy 2.20 Good Design Policy 2.21 Change of Use or Redevelopment to Residential Use Policy 2.24 Residential Amenity
4.3 Supplementary Planning Guidance Open Space Supplementary Planning Guidance (March 2008) Access, Circulation & Parking Standards (January 2010) Safeguarding Land for Business and Industry (June 06)
5. INTERNAL CONSULTEE RESPONSES
5.1 Transportation:
The Council’s Transportation Officer comments as follows: The adopted Access, Circulation and Parking Standards SPG identifies a parking requirement of zero to one car space per residential unit (zero visitor) for the City Centre and Bay; which equates to zero to 20 for the level of development proposed in the outline application. The proposed provision of 5 car parking spaces within a parking courtyard is therefore considered to be policy compliant.
216 5.2 In considering the parking requirement I must also take into account the level and type of parking and traffic generation that might occur in the event the existing permitted uses where to be re-established; in this case a place of worship and industrial warehouse. To which end the proposed residential use would be less intensive than the existing, particularly the place of worship which could generate a significant levels of both moving and parking traffic, and in the case of the industrial unit heavier vehicles. As such it is considered that the overall moving and parking vehicle impact would be reduced from the levels which would potentially occur in the event the existing uses were re-established. It must also be noted that the site is close to a district centre and within easy reach of the city centre, with good links to public transport and is therefore considered to be in a sustainable location in transport terms.
5.3 It is therefore considered that the proposed use is policy compliant, will generate no additional parking demand over the day and potentially result in fewer less intrusive vehicle trips than the existing place of worship and commercial based uses. I would therefore conclude that any objection on parking grounds would be unsustainable and any reason for refusal on this basis would not withstand challenge at Public Inquiry.
5.4 The application is considered acceptable subject to a standard Cycle Parking condition requiring a minimum of one cycle parking space per bedroom, a standard Car Parking within Curtilage condition, and Construction Management and Highway/Footway Works conditions, and to a Section106 financial contribution of £3,224 towards the provision and installation of an anti-crime CCTV camera in the bus stop on James Street adjacent to the site.
5.5 Parks Services:
The Parks Officer comments as follows: Under current policy the proposed development is subject to Policy 31 of the Local Plan (Provision of open space on new residential developments). Demand for formal recreational requirements would increase in the locality as a result of the Development. As no recreation/play space is being provided on-site the developers will be required to make a financial contribution towards the provision of open space off-site or the improvement (including design and maintenance) of existing open space in the locality.
5.6 In relation to this development the Council considers it appropriate that an off site contribution is made, calculated in accordance with the guidelines set out in the SPG. Utilising the revised residential information forwarded to me (5 no 1 bed apartments and 14 no 2 bed apartments) I calculate the contribution to be in the sum of £ 26,172 to be secured through a Section 106 legal agreement.
217 5.7 The Public Open Space Contribution shall be used by the Council towards the design, improvement and/or maintenance of public open space within the locality of the development site.
5.8 The Butetown Ward, in which the development is situated, currently meets the minimum standard of open space as measured by the Fields in Trust recommended standard of 2.43 hectares per 1000 population, but the quality and facilities of existing open spaces require improvement, with additional capacity to take into account the increased residential population resulting from the development.
5.9 The closest areas of recreational open space are Hamadryad Park and Canal Park. The final decision on expenditure of the contribution at the time of receipt would be determined by the requirements for improving any individual open space in the locality. This would be in consultation with various parties and be subject to Member approval.
Housing Strategy:
5.10 Housing Strategy note that given the size and design of the proposed scheme, the practicality of managing and maintaining affordable housing on-site may be compromised and could affect the overall sustainability of the scheme. Therefore, we would seek the affordable housing to be delivered in the form of a financial contribution. Having considered the economic viability of this proposed scheme internally with the Council’s Valuation Department, Housing Strategy can accept the applicant’s offer of a financial contribution of £91,000 in the current market conditions.
5.11 In order to future proof the s106 agreement, a deferred payment arrangement/review mechanism clause will be included within the legal document, up to the value of a 40% affordable housing contribution. The precise terms of the s106 would be drafted by Legal Services.
Drainage Management:
5.12 The Drainage Engineer has no objection subject to a condition requiring the submission of a drainage scheme for approval by the LPA in consultation with DCWW. He notes that it is intended to discharge reduced flows from the completed development to the public sewer by utilising attenuation.
Waste Management:
5.13 The Sustainable Planning Officer notes that the bin storage area shown on the original application is not large enough.
218 Pollution Control (Contaminated Land):
5.14 The Contaminated Land Officer notes the former use as an engineering works and its location approximately 30m from the former Glamorganshire Canal that has been infilled with material of an unknown nature. Activities associated with the former use of the site may have potentially caused contamination of the ground. Therefore, given the historical use of the site and the uncertainty of the nature of the ground and the risk to human health and the environment, standard ground gas protection, contaminated land measures, imported soil and imported aggregates conditions and an informative (Contamination and Unstable Land Advisory Notice) are advised.
Pollution Control (Noise & Air):
5.15 Requests a construction site noise recommendation.
6. EXTERNAL CONSULTEE RESPONSES
6.1 Glamorgan Gwent Archaeological Trust (GGAT): GGAT note that the chapel dates from 1912 when it functioned as a mission to serve the area of housing built following the works to embank the river. There are no recorded archaeological features shown on the Record and we do not have any objections to the granting of planning consent to the current planning application on archaeological grounds. Whilst the building has no statutory designation, it is our opinion, however, that it is of historic importance and are culturally significant within the street scene of the this area of Cardiff, and relating to its development and as the building is to be demolished, following the advice contained in Planning Policy Wales, 2011, Section 6, we therefore recommend that a qualified building historian should make a record of the structure both by the means of a drawn and photographic record, prior to any work commencing on site. A condition to this effect is advised.
6.2 DCWW: No objection subject to standard conditions on separation of foul and surface water, and discharge of surface and land drainage run-off to the public sewer.
6.3 Environment Agency: The EA note that the development site is at or above 8.0m AOD and have no objection.
6.4 South Wales Police: SWP note that the lack of parking provision at this site will increase the demand for on street parking which gives the potential for an increase in vehicle crime and possible conflict with other local residents/businesses. Therefore it is recommended parking provision be reconsidered. They also request access control gates to the entrance to the rear
219 courtyard and recommend the provision of some defensible space to the ground floor windows on Pomeroy Street and Clarence Road.
6.5 WPD have no objection and provide a plan of their apparatus in the vicinity which has been forwarded to the applicant.
7. REPRESENTATIONS
7.1 The application was advertised on site and in the press as a major application. Neighbours and local members were consulted on the original application. Letters of objection were received from a Local Member and from an Assembly Member and from 39 local residents. One letter of support was received. A valid petition of objection has been received. 25 additional signatories to the petition were received in the form of signed petition slips organised by the Local Member.
7.2 Neighbours and local members were reconsulted for a period of 14 days on the amended scheme. A further letter of objection was received from the Local Member. Seven individual letters of objection and a second petition of objection have been received. 17 additional signatories to the petition were received in the form of signed petition slips organised by the Local Member.
7.3 Original scheme a) A valid petition dated 8.8.11 and signed by 54 local residents objects on the following grounds: • Inadequate parking provision
b) Cllr. Delme Greening objects to the original scheme on the following grounds: • Increased level of traffic and congestion • Inadequate parking provision • School route safety • Building height • Historical significance of Bethel Baptist Church • Oversupply of apartments • Disruption during demolition and construction.
He also objects to the amended scheme on the same grounds
c) Assembly Member Eluned Parrott objects to the original application on the following grounds: • Increased level of traffic and congestion • Inadequate parking provision • Height of the building • Historical significance of Bethel Baptist Church
220 d) The objections from local residents are: • Inadequate parking provision • Increased level of traffic and congestion • Height of the building in relation to adjacent housing • Overlooking of Pomeroy Street houses and play area • Loss of historically significant Bethel Baptist Church • Oversupply of apartments in the Bay area
Amended scheme e) A second petition has been received signed by 130 local residents objecting to the amended scheme on the following grounds: • Concerns regarding parking – 7 spaces for 33 bedspaces is not adequate especially in an area which is already overparked • Increased amount of traffic representing a higher risk to children playing in the street • Demolition of the historic and attractive church • Noise pollution during demolition and rebuilding
f) An objection signed by 24 local residents has been received from the Association of Residents of Pomeroy Street, Cardiff Docks objecting to the amended scheme on the following grounds: • Inadequate parking provision • Location of the entrance to the parking courtyard endangering pedestrians using the lane which connects Pomeroy Street to Hunter Street • Overlooking of houses on the other side of Pomeroy Street • Demolition of Bethel Baptist Church
g) The seven further individual objections from local residents reiterated those raised in relation to the original scheme
h) In summary, the main grounds for objection relate to inadequate on-site parking provision and increased level of traffic and congestion, loss of the Bethel Baptist Church, overlooking and loss of privacy, building height in relation to neighbouring housing and Clarence House, oversupply of apartments and noise and disruption during the demolition/construction process.
8. ANALYSIS
8.1 The City of Cardiff Local Plan designates the site as Business, Industry and Warehousing Land. From a Land-Use perspective the principle for the re- development of the site for residential accommodation would be primarily considered in light of the following Local Plan (1996) policies 36, 37 and 39, the key policy being policy 36. The deposit UDP also identifies that the premises falls
221 within the Waterfront Business Area. The proposal would therefore also be assessed in line with the following Land-Use policies contained within the deposit Unitary Development Plan, notably policies 2.21, 2.31, 2.32 and 2.37. It is noted that the former Church site falls outside the control of these policies.
8.2 Policies E2 of the Structure Plan, policy 36 of the Local Plan and Policies 2.32 and 2.37 of the deposit UDP, seek to protect existing business, industrial and warehousing land through controlling applications for the alternative use of such land. The key policy criteria introduced by Policy 36(i) to assess such proposals are: Whether there is demand for business, industrial or warehousing use on the application site; and whether there is a need to retain the land for business, industrial or warehouse use.
8.3 The Council’s approved SPG for ‘Safeguarding Employment Land’ provides further guidance on the assessment of alternative development proposals on business, industrial and warehousing land and specifically expands on criteria contained in development plan policies which assess demand and need. It is for the applicant to provide sufficient information which demonstrates that their proposal is considered acceptable when assessed against the above criteria. The Councils Business Development Officer should also be consulted regarding the loss of employment land arising from the proposed development.
8.4 Considering the above policies, it is also noted that the property is predominantly vacant and in need of upgrading; therefore there is some policy justification to support the proposed change of use on qualitative grounds. Quantitative evidence in the form of a limited land-use review identifying other vacant premises has been submitted. The justification that the building is beyond economic repair has not been quantified to any degree, nor supported in the form of a building surveying report. However, given the large areas of vacant and under utilised business and warehouse land to the north of the site, the change of use from business and warehousing, to a residential land-use is generally supported. The site also falls within a predominantly residential area.
Strategic Planning (Regeneration) Considerations:
8.5 The interface between the premises and its environment is a key consideration in determining the acceptability of this proposal. At present the public realm surrounding the site is of a poor quality consisting of a mixture of block paving, tarmac, concrete and paving slabs. This is exacerbated by the varying ‘land’ levels in and around the vicinity of the site and from the vehicular cross over to the north of the site off Clarence Road.
8.6 Policy 2.55 of the deposit Unitary Development Plan together with the Council’s City Centre Strategy identify that there is a need for new developments to make appropriate provision for public realm improvements. In addition, Policy B2 of the
222 adopted South Glamorgan (Cardiff Area) Replacement Structure Plan favours measures to improve the environmental quality of the urban fabric.
8.7 The scale and nature of the proposed residential development would place increased pressure on an area of inadequate public realm which would need to be enhanced for the proposed development to be considered acceptable. To ensure that the quality of the public realm is commensurate with the additional requirements placed on the surrounding area from the development a public realm scheme shall be prepared in consultation with the Local Planning Authority. The scheme shall take into account the existing, mature trees in the vicinity of the site, which provide a high amenity value.
8.8 The extent and scope of the offsite public realm improvement works scheme which will form part of the legal agreement shall be as indicated on ‘Plan 1 - Public Realm Review and Enhancement’ dated 22.8.11 and dwg. no. PR01 entitled ‘Indicative Public Realm Enhancement’ dated 28.10.11 and accompanying email from Strategic Planning. The email on Clarence Road gives details of the repaving works and proposes the planting of additional trees to the front of Salvage buildings and the shortening of the existing turning head at the end of Pomeroy Street in order to increase space for pedestrians at the junction of Clarence Road.
8.9 The legal agreement will require details of the off-site public realm works to be submitted for the approval of the LPA prior to implementation, and for the works to be completed prior to beneficial occupation.
8.10 Should the developer not wish to enter into such an undertaking, a financial contribution towards designing and improving the public realm in the vicinity of the site will be required to mitigate against the additional impact on the public realm arising from the proposed development.
8.11 Whilst the site is outside the area defined in the Cardiff City Centre Public Realm Manual the public realm manual may provide a useful reference for the applicant/ agent when developing a suitable scheme.
Parking provision
8.12 The adopted Access, Circulation and Parking Standards SPG identifies a parking requirement of zero to one car space per residential unit (zero visitor) for the City Centre and Bay; which equates to zero to 19 for the level of development proposed in the outline application. The proposed provision of 7 car parking spaces within a parking courtyard is therefore considered to be policy compliant.
8.13 The proposed residential use would be less intensive than the existing use were it to be reinstated, particularly the place of worship which could generate a significant levels of both moving and parking traffic, and in the case of the
223 industrial unit heavier vehicles. It must also be noted that the site is close to a district centre and within easy reach of the city centre, with good links to public transport and is therefore considered to be in a sustainable location in transport terms.
8.14 The SWP comments are noted but in the context of the no objection from Transportation and the increase in the number of parking spaces from 5 to 7 it is considered that the level of parking provision is acceptable.
8.15 The number of cycle spaces proposed is 20 and this is considered acceptable given the location of the development and the requirement to maximise the number of off-street car parking spaces. A standard cycle parking condition is attached.
8.16 The amended scheme shows access control gates to the rear courtyard.
External amenity space
8.17 The development has no external amenity space but is within easy reach of Hamadryad Park and Canal Park. In common with a number of other similar developments in the City Centre and Cardiff Bay area where site constraints limit the provision of external amenity space it is considered that the benefits of redeveloping a derelict site within 5 minutes walk of two local parks in order to provide additional housing outweighs the lack of on-site amenity space.
8.18 A financial contribution towards improvements to public open space in the vicinity will be secured through a legal agreement.
Design
8.19 The four storey building is of a similar height to Clarence House and is not significantly larger then the industrial building and church that it replaces. The top floor is contained within a mansard roof set back behind a parapet that lines through with the underside of the eaves of Clarence House. The building reads as subservient to the prominent corner building. The scale of the building and its relationship to its neighbour and the street is acceptable.
8.20 Window openings are vertical in proportion, picking up on the fenestration of Clarence House, and materials are brickwork with a darker brick to the ground floor and zinc clad mansard roof. The composition of the principal facades and the choice of materials is restrained and designed to sit comfortably alongside the historic corner building.
8.21 The main entrance from Clarence Road is centrally located within a symmetrical façade and complements the entrance to Clarence House.
224 8.22 Materials samples and architectural detailing conditions are attached.
8.23 The design has a proper regard to the scale and character of the surrounding environment and is acceptable.
Loss of Church
8.24 The church dates from the early 19th century and is no longer in use. It is neither listed nor locally listed and is not sited in a conservation area and does not therefore have any protected status. The principle of its demolition has been established through an outline consent granted in 2001 for its demolition and subsequent redevelopment. GGAT have no objection subject to a condition requiring a photographic record to be made of the building. Its demolition is acceptable.
Overlooking
8.25 The separation distance between the Pomeroy Street façade windows and the windows of the houses on the opposite side of the street is approximately 14m. The distance between the opposing windows of the terraced houses further along the street is approximately 15.5m which is typical of the older established terraced housing in the area.
8.26 The Council’s SPG recommends minimum separation distance of 21m between opposing windows of habitable rooms. However the guidance recognises that in the case of infill schemes in established urban areas a reduction of this distance to respect existing street patterns and building lines is acceptable.
Representations
8.27 The Councillors’ and residents’ objections on the grounds of inadequate parking and traffic congestion, loss of church, overlooking and building height are addressed above.
Other matters
8.28 Objections on the grounds of oversupply of apartments are not a material consideration. The site falls within a predominantly residential area and the proposed residential use is therefore acceptable in planning terms. The proposed apartments are 1 bed and 2 bed of varying sizes and offer a range of accommodation.
8.29 In this context a financial contribution towards the provision of off-site affordable housing will be secured through a legal agreement.
225 8.30 Noise and disruption arising from demolition and construction is not an issue in this location and it would not therefore be reasonable to condition hours or method of operation. A recommendation on construction site noise is attached and excessive noise and disruption, or working during hours outside those specified, would be a matter for Pollution Control.
9. CONCLUSION
9.1 In conclusion the proposals redevelop a derelict plot and provide additional residential accommodation that has proper regard for the scale and character of its neighbours. Parking provision is policy compliant and is considered to have less of an impact on on-street parking and traffic movement than that of the existing uses on the site were they to be reinstated. A refusal on these grounds is not therefore considered to be sustainable at appeal.
9.2 The granting of outline planning permission is recommended subject to conditions being imposed and a legal agreement (Section 106) being signed to secure a financial contribution for affordable housing and for improvements to public open space and transportation in the vicinity, and for public realm improvements adjacent to the site.
226 227 228 229 230 COMMITTEE DATE: 11/01/2012
APPLICATION No. 11/1414/DCI APPLICATION DATE: 16/08/2011
ED: GABALFA
APP: TYPE: Full Planning Permission
APPLICANT: Cardiff University Estates Department LOCATION: LAND AT TALYBONT GATE, BEVAN PLACE, CARDIFF PROPOSAL: PROPOSED CONSTRUCTION OF NEW 179 BED, SEVEN STOREY STUDENT ACCOMMODATION ______
RECOMMENDATION 1: That subject to persons having relevant interest in the application site entering into a binding planning obligation in agreement with the Council under SECTION 106 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 encompassing the matters referred to in Section 9 of this report, planning permission be GRANTED subject to:
1. C01 Statutory Time Limit
2. This permission relates to the information supporting the application contained in the Transportation Assessment received on 27th October 2011. Reason: This document supports the application.
3. No development shall take place until comprehensive proposals showing how foul and surface water flows from the site will be dealt with, have been submitted to and approved by the Planning Authority. Reason: To ensure for a sustainable drainage solution.
4. C20 Architectural Detailing
5. The finishing of the elevations of the building, or any hard landscaped treatments shall not be undertaken until samples of the proposed materials have been submitted to/or made available on site for the inspection and subsequent written approval of the Local Planning Authority. The development shall thereafter be finished / landscaped in accordance with the approved details. Reason: To ensure that the finished appearance of the development is in keeping with the area.
6. The short term/operational parking spaces approved shall include for the provision of 1 no. disabled standard parking space and shall be
231 provided before the development is put to beneficial use and thereafter retained. Reason: To ensure adequate facilities are available for disabled persons.
7. No development shall take place until a finalised soft landscaping scheme has been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority, the landscaping scheme shall include final details of the proposed coppicing of woodland/formation of an Ecotone, and perimeter landscaping to the business park. Reason: The submitted landscaping scheme is acceptable in principle, but such details have yet to be agreed.
8. C4J Retain Trees
9. C4U Protective Fencing of Trees
10. Prior to the commencement of development, a detailed scheme for the eradication of the identified Himalayan Balsam shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the local planning authority and shall thereafter be implemented in accordance with an agreed timetable. Reason: To ensure the safe destruction and prevention of spread of Invasive Plants.
11. No removal of trees, shrubs, bushes or hedgerows within the application site shall take place between 1st February and 15th August without prior written approval from the Local Planning Authority. Reason: To avoid disturbance to nesting birds.
12. No part of the development hereby permitted shall be commenced until a scheme detailing the measures necessary for the purpose of monitoring gases generated on the site or land adjoining thereto and for any measures necessary to protect the development has been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. Any such scheme shall provide details of measures that are required to ensure the safe and inoffensive dispersal or management of gases and to prevent lateral migration of gases into or from land surrounding the application site. Gases includes landfill gases, vapours from contaminated land sites, and naturally occurring methane and carbon dioxide, but does not include radon gas. All measures specified in the above scheme shall (unless otherwise agreed in writing) be undertaken and completed prior to any development commencing or in accordance with a timetable as shall be previously agreed in writing with the Local Planning Authority and the measures shall be retained and maintained until such time as the Local Planning Authority agree in writing.
232 Reason: To ensure that the safety of future occupiers is not prejudiced.
13. No part of the development hereby permitted shall be commenced until a scheme detailing the measures necessary for the purposes of identifying chemical and other contaminants on the site and to ensure that the land is suitable for the proposed development has been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. Any such scheme shall include details of any measures necessary to protect future occupiers/users of the land from chemical and other contaminants. All measures in the approved scheme shall be undertaken in accordance with a timetable which shall be agreed in writing with the Local Planning Authority. Reason: To ensure that the safety of future occupiers is not prejudiced.
14. Any topsoil [natural or manufactured],or subsoil, to be imported shall be assessed for chemical or other potential contaminants in accordance with a scheme of investigation to be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority in advance of its importation. Only material approved by the Local Planning Authority shall be imported. All measures specified in the approved scheme shall be undertaken in accordance with the relevant Code of Practice and Guidance Notes.
Subject to approval of the above, verification sampling of the material received at the development site is required to verify that the imported soil is free from contamination and shall be undertaken in accordance with a scheme agreed with in writing by the LPA. Reason: To ensure that the safety of future occupiers is not prejudiced.
15. Any aggregate (other than virgin quarry stone) or recycled aggregate material to be imported shall be assessed for chemical or other potential contaminants in accordance with a scheme of investigation to be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority in advance of its importation. Only material approved by the Local Planning Authority shall be imported. All measures specified in the approved scheme shall be undertaken in accordance with the relevant Code of Practice and Guidance Notes.
Subject to approval of the above, verification sampling of the material received at the development site is required to verify that the imported aggregate is free from contamination and shall be undertaken in accordance with a scheme agreed with in writing by the LPA.
233 Reason: To ensure that the safety of future occupiers is not prejudiced.
16. Construction of the building hereby permitted shall not begin until an interim certificate has been submitted to the Local Planning Authority by an accredited assessor certifying that a minimum Building Research Establishment Environmental Assessment Method [BREEAM] (or subsequent equivalent quality assured scheme) overall standard of ‘Very Good’ and the mandatory credits for Excellent under the energy design category Ene 1 – Reduction of C02 Emissions will be achieved for the building in accordance with the requirements of the latest BREEAM standard under which it is registered. Reason: To ensure that the development is constructed in accordance with national planning sustainable building standards.
17. Prior to the occupation of the building hereby permitted a post construction ‘final certificate’ shall be submitted to the Local Planning Authority by an accredited assessor certifying that a minimum Building Research Establishment Environmental Assessment Method [BREEAM] (or subsequent equivalent quality assured scheme) overall standard of ‘Very Good’ and the mandatory credits for Excellent under the energy design category Ene 1 – Reduction of C02 Emissions has been achieved for the building in accordance with the requirements of the latest BREEAM standard under which it was registered. Reason: To ensure that the development is constructed in accordance with national planning sustainable building standards.
18. The proposed car parking and manoeuvring areas shall be laid out in accordance with the approved details or other such details as may be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority before the development is brought into beneficial use and thereafter be so maintained and retained at all times for those purposes in association with the development. Reason: To make provision for the parking of vehicles clear of the roads so as not to prejudice the safety, convenience and free flow of traffic.
19. No development shall take place until details showing the provision of 90 No cycle parking spaces have been submitted to and approved in writing by the local planning authority. The approved details shall be implemented prior to the development being put into beneficial use. Thereafter the cycle parking spaces shall be retained and shall not be used for any other purpose. Reason: To ensure that adequate provision is made for the sheltered and secure parking of cycles.
234 20. Prior to the beneficial occupation of the accommodation hereby approved, details of a proposed signage strategy shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. These details to identify walking and cycling routes to destinations from the site including but not limited to the University Buildings, Students Union, City Centre, Bute Park, The Welsh Institute of Sport, Maindy Pool and Cathays Railway Station and a timetable of implementation. The approved signage shall thereafter be implemented in accordance with the agreed details. Reason: To ensure that the use of the proposed development adequately caters for walking and cycling between the site and destination points.
21. No part of the development hereby permitted shall be occupied until a parking / traffic / resident / letting management plan similar to that adopted in connection with other student accommodation elsewhere in Cardiff has been adopted and implemented for the whole site. To include, but not limited to, the management of traffic at the start and end of term, the control of vehicular access to the site, the exclusion and control of student resident car parking within the site and surrounding area. Reason: In the interest of highway safety and to regulate the impact of the development on use of the adjacent highway.
22. Prior to commencement of development a scheme of construction management shall be submitted to and approved by the Local Planning Authority. This scheme shall include details of how the existing student accommodation will continue to operate whilst the construction is taking place, together with construction traffic routes, site hoardings, site access, parking of contractors vehicles and wheel washing facilities. The development construction shall be managed strictly in accordance with the scheme so approved. Reason: In the interests of highway safety, public amenity and to avoid any conflict situations with students and/or staff/visitors on this site.
23. Prior to the commencement of development a comprehensive construction phasing plan shall be submitted to and agreed with the LPA. The phasing plan shall identify phases of construction of development and shall ensure safe and convenient pedestrian, cycle and vehicular access around and through those areas not under construction or where construction is complete. The development shall be carried out in accordance with the provision of the approved phasing plan or any variation thereof agreed in writing with the LPA. Reason: To ensure an orderly form of development and safe access through and within the site.
235 RECOMMENDATION 2: The applicant should note that a commercial contract for the collection and storage of all waste and recycling will be required. The applicant is advised that waste management is best achieved further to undertaking a waste audit in order to predict the storage capacity and determine storage and collection requirements and is encouraged to undertake such an audit.
RECOMMENDATION 3: That the applicant be advised that the contamination assessments and the affects of unstable land are considered on the basis of the best information available to the Planning Authority and are not necessarily exhaustive. The Authority takes due diligence when assessing these impacts, however you are minded that the responsibility for
(i) determining the extent and effects of such constraints;
(ii) ensuring that any imported materials (including, topsoils, subsoils, aggregates and recycled or manufactured aggregates/ soils) are chemically suitable for the proposed end use. Under no circumstances should controlled waste be imported. It is an offence under Section 33 of the Environmental Protection Act 1990 to deposit controlled waste on a site which does not benefit from an appropriate waste management license. The following must not be imported to a development site;
• Unprocessed / unsorted demolition wastes. • Any materials originating from a site confirmed as being contaminated or potentially contaminated by chemical or radioactive substances. • Japanese Knotweed stems, leaves and rhizome infested soils. In addition to section 33 above, it is also an offence under the Wildlife and Countryside Act 1981 to spread this invasive weed; and
(iii) the safe development and secure occupancy of the site rests with the developer.
Proposals for areas of possible land instability should take due account of the physical and chemical constraints and may include action on land reclamation or other remedial action to enable beneficial use of unstable land.
The Local Planning Authority has determined the application on the basis of the information available to it, but this does not mean that the land can be considered free from contamination.
RECOMMENDATION 4: South Wales Police advise that the development should be able to be constructed to Secured by Design standards and would welcome an application for such an award.
236 RECOMMENDATION 5: If a connection is required to the public sewerage system, the developer is advised to contact Dwr Cymru Welsh Water's Network Development Consultants on Tel: 01443 331155.
1. DESCRIPTION OF PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT
1.1 This report was first presented to planning Committee on 16th November 2011; at that meeting Planning Committee resolved to defer determination of the application pending a site visit, which subsequently took place on 5th December 2011.
1.2 At the 14th December Planning Committee meeting, members of the Committee resolved to defer the application to draft a reason for refusal based on ‘overdevelopment’. A reason is drafted at Para 10.2 of this report.
1.3 This application proposes the development of some 0.25h of land for 179 units of student accommodation, in a seven storey building (six storeys of accommodation + service overrun) to the western boundary of Cardiff University’s Tal y Bont campus; the site is located southwest of the University Sports Pitch at Bevan Road and SE of the Brickyard Business centre.
1.4 The building would be ‘L’ shaped, of light coloured brick over dark coloured brick plinth (to GF cill height) with timber cladding in the area of the entrance. The 6th storey would be set back from the main elevations, in a mixture of light and dark metal cladding. The small plant overrun above would be similarly metal clad.
1.5 The development would involve the removal of an existing overspill car park and a number of low quality trees. The site is currently used at the beginning and end of each term as occasional overspill car parking if required. The site is not marked out for parking, and the number of car parking permits issued by the University for Talybont North residents do not allow for any parking on the land.
1.6 The application submission includes a Transport Assessment; Ecological Assessment; Pre-development Tree Survey; Tree Constraints Plan; Arboricultural Method Statement; Landscape Scheme; Flood Consequences Assessment; Drainage Strategy Statement and Statutory Design and Access Statement.
1.7 The application has been screened with regard to the need for an Environmental Statement in accordance with the EIA Regulations and planning guidance. It is the opinion of the Local Planning Authority that in isolation, the proposal is not a Schedule 2 development and does not require the submission of a formal Environmental Statement as the development is
237 not likely to be of more than local importance, the site is not in an environmentally sensitive area and the development is unlikely to have particularly complex and potentially hazardous environmental effects.
Cumulatively with other student accommodation in the immediate area (972+179 bedrooms), it could be argued that the development would exceed the 1000 dwelling threshold to be considered Schedule 2 development. However given the comprehensive nature of the supporting documentation and given context, it is concluded that a formal Environmental Statement would not assist the Local Planning authority in considering the environmental implications of the proposal any further than the details and data already provided. The Local Authority conclude therefore that a formal environmental statement is not necessary in this instance.
2. DESCRIPTION OF SITE
2.1 Views into the site are extremely limited particularly from outside the university Campus, the closest public realm is the Taff trail which runs along the edge of the Pontcanna Fields to the Southwest of the site.
2.2 The only built feature on the site is the Gate House adjacent to the Campus gates.
The site is a relatively flat, predominantly tarmacadam overspill car parking area, to which access is generally restricted. It is adjacent to a number of existing 4 storey University accommodation blocks to the east, the Talybont sports ground to the northeast, and the Excelsior Road campus entrance to the south. The Brickyard business park is located to the northwest (part of Cardiff’s Excelsior Industrial and Retail Estate).
2.3 The northern and eastern boundaries with the Brickyard business park are enclosed with 2m high GMS palisade fencing. This fencing also extends along the Southern boundary of the site with Excelsior Road up to the existing Campus Entrance gates.
2.4 The western boundary of the site which is within the University Campus is open. Part of the northern section of the site is populated with low value trees. (self seeded sycamore and ash). A Welsh Water pumping station is located to the North of these trees but this is outside of the application site.
238 3. SITE HISTORY
3.1 96/871/C Planning permission for the erection of industrial unit for storage plus access roads and 2 no. car parks to Tal-y-bont sports facilities Granted February 1998
Not implemented/completed
3.2 96/1751 Industrial Storage Unit Granted February 1997
Not implemented/completed
Related Site History
3.3 92/1798/C Planning permission for 2 blocks of student accommodation Granted January 1993. (These are the nearest blocks of student accommodation to the application site, constructed post development of the main body of accommodation paralleling North Road.
3.4 38943 Outline Planning Permission for Student Accommodation on old Powell Dyffryn Site (This did not include the application site) Granted 27th November 1973.
4. POLICY FRAMEWORK
4.1 Planning Policy Wales
4.2 Planning Policy Wales Technical Advice Notes TAN 11: Noise TAN 12: Design TAN 18: Transport TAN 21: Waste TAN 22: Planning for Sustainable Buildings
4.3 Adopted City of Cardiff Local Plan (January 1996): 10: Contaminated or unstable land 11: Design and aesthetic quality 12: Energy efficient design 17: Parking and servicing 18: Provision for cyclists 19: Provision for pedestrians 20: Provision for special needs groups
239 4.4 Deposit Cardiff Unitary Development Plan (October 2003): 2.20: Good Design 2.55: Public Realm Improvements 2.57: Access, circulation and parking requirements 2.74: Provision for waste management facilities in development
4.5 Supplementary Planning Guidance
Developer Contributions for Transport (Jan 2010) Waste Collection and Storage, March 2007 Trees and Development, March 2007 Open Space Section 106 Baseline Contribution Figures (May 2011) Tall Buildings Design Guide (April 2009) Access, Circulation and Parking Requirements, June 2010 ‘Safeguarding Land for Business and Industry’ (June 2006). Community Facilities and Residential Development (Mar 2007) Biodiversity (June 2011)
5. INTERNAL CONSULTEE RESPONSES
5.1 Transportation
(i) Transport Assessment - A Transport Assessment (TA) was submitted in support of the above application which demonstrates that in terms of vehicle trips there would be no significant impact during week days and term times especially during peak hours. The TA has been independently audited by Laurence Rae Associates which reaches a similar conclusion. However, the analysis of cycle and pedestrian access is limited and the TA does not put forward any mitigation measures in this respect. Council officers have identified areas where improvements should be directed in order that more sustainable modes of travel are preferred by all students on this site. In addition, it is considered that a signage strategy be developed for the whole Talybont site in order that walking and cycling routes to destinations are clearly identified;
(ii) Car Parking - it is noted that 7No car parking spaces are proposed for operational use which is compliant with the minimum requirements as set out in the Councils SPG - Access, Circulation & Parking Standards - Jan '10 . It is requested that further details be provided with regard to how these spaces will be used during term time;
(iii) Cycle Parking - it is noted that 90 No cycle spaces are proposed which are located close to the accommodation blocks and are to be sheltered and secure - this is welcomed;
240 (iv) Travel Plan - It is recommended that the submitted Travel Plan (TP) be progressed and include the attached comments. It is important that the Travel Plan be properly linked to and be consistent with those provisions set out by the University. In order to ensure the progression and implementation of the TP an obligation is included below.
On the basis of the above, I can therefore confirm that Transportation would have no objection to the principle of the above application, subject to the following conditions and S106 matters being included. Retention of parking; cycle parking; signage strategy; student traffic management plan, construction management plan; phasing plan; together with the submission of a Travel Plan and financial contribution of £36,920.00 for improvements to North Road / Colum Road / Parkfield Place junctions.
The request of local residents for additional ‘resident only parking’ in named streets can be assessed and could potentially be funded from the requested transportation contribution subject to meeting relevant assessment criteria.
Ultimately however, flexibility in respect of the allocation of the contribution and specification of works undertaken must be afforded to the Transportation Officer in order to best manage the highway impacts of the proposal.
5.2 Pollution Control
Noise Comments ; No comments
Air Pollution : No comments
Contaminated Land :
The site has been identified as a former wire rope works. Activities associated with this use may have caused the land to become contaminated. In addition, former landfill sites have been identified within 250m of the proposed development. Such sites are associated with the generation of landfill gases, within subsurface materials, which have the potential to migrate to other sites. These former associations may give rise to potential risks to human health and the environment for the proposed end use.
Therefore conditions appertaining to ground gas protection; contaminated land measures; and imported soils and aggregates are recommended; as is a contaminated land advisory notice.
241 Highways (Drainage).
The site of the proposed student block appears to be completely hard surfaced although I note that post development the impermeable area will be reduced.
I also note the applicants comment that ground contamination in the area rules out the use of soakaway drainage and his proposal to consider the use of rainwater harvesting and possibly underground attenuation tanks.
The existing site drains via an existing private drainage system to the nearby Main River (Taff) and the post development site will continue to do so.
The Environment Agency should be consulted regarding any flow restrictions (and the submitted FCA) that they may require as the receiving Main River lies within their jurisdiction.
Council records indicate that a Public Sewer crosses the site and the applicant is already aware of this.
In the light of the above and in order to ensure an orderly development I request that the following condition be added to any planning consent granted
'' No development shall take place until comprehensive proposals showing how foul and surface water flows from the site will be dealt with, have been submitted to and approved by the Planning Authority in consultation with Dwr Cymru Welsh Water and the Environment Agency. "
Details of this application should be forwarded to Dwr Cymru Welsh Water Network Development Consultants for comment and consideration of the applicant's proposal to discharge foul flows from the completed development , either directly or indirectly, to the local public sewer system.
Highways (Waste)
The bin storage area indicated within current site plans is acceptable; and refuse storage, once implemented, must be retained for future use.
However, it is recommended that for a development of this size and nature, an in depth waste strategy should be produced detailing anticipated volumes of waste and the segregation of materials for recycling.
Bulk containers must be provided by the developer/other appropriate agent, to the Councils’ specification (steel containers are required where capacity exceeds 240 litres) as determined by S46 of the Environment Protection Act 1990 and can be purchased directly from the Council. Please contact the
242 Waste Management’s commercial department for further information on 02920 717504.
The applicant is also advised that if the Council are to service the site, the Council’s Waste Management operatives will not carry keys or access codes for bin storage areas; so waste must either be presented at the entrance to the development for collection, or the access gates to the site must be left open; and that access paths to the kerbside for collection should be at least 1.5 metres wide, clear of obstruction, of a smooth surface with no steps. Dropped kerbs should also be provided to ensure safe handling of bulk bins to the collection vehicle.
Culture Leisure and Parks
The proposed development is subject to Policy 31 of the Local Plan (Provision of open space on new residential developments).
As no recreation space is being provided on-site the developers will be required to make a financial contribution towards the provision of open space off-site or the improvement (including design and maintenance) of existing open space in the locality.
Utilising the residential information forwarded to me I calculate the contribution to be in the sum of £94,835. This is based on 179 student bedrooms.
In the event that the Council’s minded to approve the application, I assume it will be necessary for the applicant and the Council to enter into a Section 106 Agreement to secure payment of the contribution.
The use of the contribution will be determined in accordance with the approved procedure which requires consultation with yourself (the LPA) and Members.
6. EXTERNAL CONSULTEE RESPONSES
6.1 South Wales Police
South Wales Police have no objections to this application and can confirm that pre-application discussions have taken place and police recommendations have been reflected in the Design and Access statement.
There is no reason why, if the development is built according to application that Secure By Design would not be achieved.
243 6.2 Environment Agency
The application site lies partially within Zone C1, as defined by the Development Advice Map (DAM) referred to under Technical Advice Note 15: Development and Flood Risk (TAN15) (July 2004). Our Flood Map information, which is updated on a quarterly basis, confirms the site to be within the 0.1% (1 in 1000 year) annual probability fluvial flood outlines of the River Taff, which is a designated main river. Our records show that the proposed site has also previously flooded from the River Taff.
The planning application proposes highly vulnerable development on previously developed land within a flood risk area. Section 6 of TAN15 requires your Authority to determine whether the development at this location is justified. We refer you to TAN15 for these considerations. I refer you in particular to the justification tests at section 6.2.
In our response to a pre-planning enquiry by RVW Consulting dated 27 April 2011 (our ref: SE/2011/113960/01-L01) we advised that the applicant needed to demonstrate, through submission of a Flood Consequences Assessment (FCA), that the consequences of flooding can be managed over the lifetime of the development. The purpose of the FCA is to ensure that all parties, including your Authority, are aware of the risks to and from the development, and ensure that if practicable, appropriate controls can be incorporated in a planning permission to manage the risks and consequences of flooding.
We note that an FCA produced by RVW Consulting, dated July 2011, was submitted in support of the above application, which states that:
• The site is flood free for the 1% (1 in 100 year) annual probability fluvial flood event with an allowance for climate change. • The site is affected by the 1% (1 in 1000 year) annual probability fluvial flood event but only to a depth of 10mm. This is within the allowable depth of 600 mm as stated in section A1.15 of Tan 15 for such a development.
Based on the conclusions of the FCA above, we do not have any adverse comments to make regarding this application, however as it is for your Authority to determine whether the risks and consequences of flooding can be managed in accordance with TAN15, we recommend that you consider consulting other professional advisors on the acceptability of the developer’s proposals, on matters that we cannot advise you on such as emergency plans, procedures and measures to address structural damage that may result from flooding. We refer you to the above information and the FCA to aid these considerations.
Please note, we do not normally comment on or approve the adequacy of flood emergency response and procedures accompanying development
244 proposals, as we do not carry out these roles during a flood. Our involvement during a flood emergency would be limited to delivering flood warnings to occupants/users.
6.3 Glamorgan and Gwent Archaeological Trust
The information held in the Historic Environment Record that is curated by this Division of this Trust indicates there are no recorded archaeological features within the application area. The Glamorganshire canal is thought to have run to the south of the site, however it is considered unlikely that archaeological features associated with this would be disturbed by the proposed development. The area is situated opposite Pontcanna and Llandaff Fields which are included in the Register of Parks and Gardens of Special Historic Interest in Wales, Glamorgan volume where they are graded level II*. Pontcanna and Llandaff Fields are earliest public parks to be built in Wales and together Sophia Gardens, form a vast open space in the centre of Cardiff. However considerable alterations have been made to the original design of the parks. It is nevertheless necessary to consider the impact of the proposed developments on these aspects of the historic park. The proposed student accommodation will have a minimal overall visual impact due to the proposed developments relative size in comparison to nearby buildings and the presence of existing mature landscaping surrounding the development area allowing only fragmented views into the site. As such it is our opinion that the proposed building is acceptable.
We hold no archaeological objections to the positive determination of this planning application. Thank you for the opportunity to comment. Should you require further information, please contact us.
7. REPRESENTATIONS
7.1 Local members and neighbours have been notified. The application has been advertised on site and in the press.
7.2 Cllr. Bridges and Gareth Holden have submitted an objection on behalf of the Gabalfa Liberal Democrat Focus Team. The Focus Team object to the application, indicating that they have spoken extensively with local residents, and it is very clear that the local community strongly object to the proposed development of 179 student flats on the site. The objections raised with us can be summarised as follows:
1) Over-development of site. The suggestion of a seven-storey block on the Talybont Gate site strikes us wholly inappropriate. None of the surrounding buildings are taller than three storeys, and the proposed building would tower over everything else in the area. Not only do we
245 have concern over the privacy of existing neighbours (see point 3 below), we also consider this to be an overly-intensive use of the site and a clear example of over-development. We would also question whether the proposed building would contravene elements of Cardiff Council’s Supplementary Planning Guidance on tall buildings. The unit would clearly fulfil the criteria of a tall building, as it is more than double the height of the surrounding units. As such, we would question whether the development of a tall building at this location is appropriate, given:
a) It would not be within easy walking distance of a public transport hub. b) It would not constitute a positive feature in the city skyline, and nor would it mark or draw attention to locations of civic or visual importance. We would argue that these points alone warrant refusal of planning consent.
2) Parking. The applicant has not suggested the inclusion of any additional on-site parking spaces as an appropriate level of parking provision. We have severe reservations about this proposal. There are countless examples of parking congestion locally caused by new student halls having insufficient on-site parking; for example, at halls on Maindy Road in Cathays and Clodien Avenue in Gabalfa – as well as the streets around Talybont itself (eg, Cross Place and Herbert Street). Indeed, Cardiff Council know that current measures used to mitigate the parking impact of student halls are seriously flawed. In 2008, Cardiff Council sought legal opinion of the viability of the “3km parking rule” from Emyr Gweirydd Jones, Barrister with the Park Place Chambers in Cardiff1. In his advice, he made the following statements:
• “…the Council cannot take any direct action against any of the students who are guilty of parking in nearby streets” (paragraph 4)
• “It seems to me that it is almost inconceivable that a court would grant an outright possession order as a result of breaches of a parking prohibition” (paragraph 11)
• “There is no doubt that… the literal terms of the tenancy cannot be enforced” (paragraph 11)
Our question is a simple one – if the Council know that student halls cause parking congestion on local streets, and that there are no measures available to mitigate against the problem, is it sensible to allow further halls to be built without the provision of spaces for those tenants? We believe the answer is ‘no’, and that the Planning Committee will be guilty of a dereliction of duty if they allow a
246 development of this nature to proceed without insisting on a greater provision of on-site parking.
3) Inadequate consultation. It is striking that Cardiff University chose to lodge the application at a time when the adjacent residential units (Houses S and T of Talybont North) are vacant. The closing date for the submission of comments during the statutory consultation period is 22nd September – meaning that no tenant of the Talybont site has a realistic chance of being able to engage with the process. We would argue that this has disenfranchised the tenants of the Talybont site, and that there should be a further period of consultation prior to any decision in this matter.
4) Invasion of privacy. We believe that the seven-storey block will overlook adjacent dwellings and businesses to an unacceptable degree, and that the height of the new halls are inappropriate for this reason. Again, to refer to the SPG on tall buildings, we would suggest that the seven-storey block would “overshadow or overlook adjacent properties to the significant detriment of the amenity of neighbouring occupiers”, and that this is a strong reason for the refusal of planning permission.
7.3 Julie Morgan AM has written as follows:
1. The application, which relates to land on the Talybont campus which is apparently designated as an overspill car park, should not be considered in isolation. There is already substantial provision for students at the Llys Talybont site and planning consent is currently being sought to erect 6 Blocks of Student Accommodation comprising 249 bedrooms & a 3 bedroom Warden dwelling house on land at the Rear of Mynachdy Road, Mynachdy, Cardiff, CF14 3HN, which is also in the Gabalfa ward.
There is on any analysis an over-concentration of student accommodation in this ward and to allow this high raise development to go ahead will in the view of my constituents permit overdevelopment of the Talybont site and heap more than the ward's fair share of student accommodation on Gabalfa. I share this view.
2. I am also concerned that this development will significantly add to parking pressures in an area already seriously suffering from parking abuse. Whilst the Member of Parliament for Cardiff North and now as the Assembly Member I have received a stream of complaints from residents in the streets off the eastern access to the Talybont site such as Cross Place and Herbert Street about inconvenience caused by student parking.
247
3. I am afraid I attach no credence to claims by the university to enforce breaches of car ownership/parking terms in the individual tenancy/licence agreements between university and student. Student car ownership bans do not work because they cannot be effectively policed and ultimately there is an inherent conflict of interest between landlord as enforcer of tenancy conditions and landlord needing to encourage students to rent the accommodation. I have no doubt that if the development goes ahead it will result in increased parking nuisance to residents, many getting on in years.
4. It also seems strange to me that a student accommodation site which is already generating parking problems for neighbours living in an established community which ought to be nurtured, it is proposed to reduce the land available for car parking whilst generating potential for increased demand. This seems to be moving in the wrong direction.
ln all the circumstances it seems to me that the Local Planning Authority should refuse this application.
7.4 Prior to the presentation of this report to the December Planning Committee, Mr Gareth Holden, Via Cllr Bridges submitted a petition of 21 signatures from residents of [Cross Pl; Parkfield Pl; Herbert St; Quintin St; and Pen y Bryn Rd] which requests the rejection of the application and calls for additional resident only parking in Cross Pl, Parkfield Pl and Herbert St in recognition of parking congestion in the area.
8. ANALYSIS
8.1 Land use
The site is identified as Business, Industry and Warehousing on the Local Plan Proposals Map, to which Local Plan policies 36, 37 and 39 apply.
The land has no specific policy provision on the Unitary Development Plan Proposals Map.
As the application site falls within an existing area of business, industrial and warehousing land, as defined by the City of Cardiff Local Plan, student accommodation, as an alternative use of such land, should be assessed against:
• Policy E3 of the South Glamorgan (Cardiff Area) Replacement Structure Plan 1991-2011; • Policy 36 of the Local Plan;
248 • Supplementary planning guidance on ‘Safeguarding Land for Business and Industry’ (June 2006).
Policy 36 requires proposals for alternative uses to be assessed against the demand for, and need to preserve, a range, choice and quality of sites for employment uses.
The site currently accommodates an overflow car park within the University Talybont Campus, adjacent to, but fenced off from, the Brickyard Business Park to the north. The use of the site as a surface level car park means that, as the site is not currently in business or industrial use, it would be unreasonable to sustain an argument that there was a need to retain the site for business use.
The use of this site for another student hall of residence would be an incremental additional to overall student accommodation numbers at the Talybont Campus which would help somewhat in relieving pressure on student demand for traditional terraced housing in nearby popular student areas (Gabalfa/ Roath/ Cathays). Because the site is isolated from existing housing there is unlikely to be any adverse impact on existing residents.
Taking these factors into account, the application raises no significant land use policy concerns.
8.2 Design
Layout
The proposed layout with an L shaped building positioned to the right angled corner of the northern part of the site allows for the provision of some landscaped setting to the building, cycle parking, car parking, a legible central entrance, the retention of some trees and avoids a sewer and related easement. In summary it provides a development which utilises the opportunities of the site to their best advantage as well as minimising the impact of the site constraints.
Externals
The use of a light coloured brick over dark coloured brick plinth is considered a robust and practical finish to the building which will require little future maintenance and which will be sympathetic to existing student accommodation nearby. There is no intent to make the building obvious in its context, rather to blend in with its surroundings. Architectural interest is achieved by the use of timber cladding relief detailing, and metal cladding to the upper storeys to finish the development. Such architectural interest is also
249 afforded by the design concept of realising various planes to the building elevations as described below.
Internals
Internally each floor is accessed by a lift and central stair core. The student accommodation is based on varying numbers of en-suite bedroom units (5,6, or 7) and a communal kitchen/lounge area served off a small corridor, called cluster units. There are five such units per floor on the first 5 floors of the building. The sixth floor accommodates two cluster units of 9 and 10 beds respectively and are afforded proportionately large shared spaces.
Scale and massing
8.3 Although the building will realise more floor levels than adjacent accommodation, this 6 / 7 storey building will be no higher in terms of relative height due to local topography / lower ground levels in the immediate area.
The perception of overall massing is also lessened by means of the façade treatments and relief detailing which allow the building to be appreciated in distinct planes and breaks.
The sixth floor is also set back sufficiently / finished differently to make it distinct from lower levels and the small service overrun completes the development against the skyline.
This is well considered in design terms.
Further to questions posed at the last committee meeting regarding the potential impact of the proposed building when viewed from the park, the applicant has produced images which clearly show that because of levels differences, that the top of the service overrun (the highest point of the building) would equate to approximately only half of the height of available tree screening in the park. i.e. it would not be possible to view the building from the park at all.
8.4 Overshadowing
The building would overshadow immediately adjacent units located in the Brickworks business park to the north and west but these units are both secure units with few/no window openings or glazed frontages facing the site. Given their commercial nature, this is considered acceptable.
The nearest residentially occupied building would be one of the existing student accommodation blocks located approximately 33m to the east. It is
250 unlikely that this building would be affected by any shadow fall from the building.
8.5 Tall Buildings SPG
Buildings are generally considered tall buildings if they are 8 stories or over, or significantly higher than surrounding buildings. This is not considered to be the case in this particular circumstance.
This is addressed further below (8.19).
8.6 Energy Efficiency/Sustainability
The BREEAM pre-assessment documentation suggests that the building has the potential to achieve a rating of “Excellent”, i.e. above the statutory requirement of “Very good” and this is welcomed.
8.7 Public Realm.
The land is in effect part of a private residential estate, and the immediate ‘public’ realm will be improved by means of incorporated landscaping and surface finishes. These are not however intended to be used as public highway, only by residents of the dwellings and their visitors.
As indicated in the submitted Transport Assessment, there is at present is a discontinuity in footway provision along the site’s frontage which will be addressed the development. This is considered appropriate.
8.8 Community Facilities
Supplementary Planning Guidance (SPG) on Community Facilities and Residential Development states that ‘the Council will seek a financial contribution for improvements to existing community facilities or the provision of additional community facilities on all significant developments where the increased population will result in increased demand for local facilities.
If no onsite provision is proposed, a financial contribution is sought on residential developments containing 25 or more new dwellings including student accommodation.
It is accepted that the University do provide recreational and amenity facilities as part of their offer, but as there are no new onsite facilities provided in the proposed student accommodation, there will likely be a demand on existing Local Authority facilities also, Most Likely, Maindy Pool and Leisure centre. As this is the case an off site contribution is requested.
251 Based on the information given and contribution of £410 per person the Local Authority would request a contribution of £73,390.
This is calculated on the following basis:
179 one bedroom student accommodations: (£410pp) 410 x 179 = £73,390
The applicant has been advised of this and also that the request is considered to meet statutory tests appertaining to contributions (Longstanding but now commonly referred to as CIL tests). Any response will be reported at committee.
8.9 Open Space
The proposed development is subject to Policy 31 of the Local Plan (Provision of open space on new residential developments).
As no recreation space is being provided on-site the Culture, Leisure and Parks Officer’s request for a contribution in lieu of public open space provision is considered reasonable and justifiable for the improvement (including design and maintenance) of existing open space in the locality.
Utilising the residential information forwarded the contribution of £94,835 is concurred with.
The applicant has been advised of this request and appropriateness under the CIL Tests, any response will be reported at Committee.
The use of the contribution will be determined in accordance with the approved procedure which requires consultation between the requesting officer/ LPA and Members.
8.10 Access, circulation and parking requirements
The site is located in the geographical centre of the city with excellent pedestrian, cycle, and public transport links. It is adjacent to the Taff Trail and a short distance from North Road (A primary bus route).
However because of the number of additional students located at the new hall, the Transportation Officer’s observations are concurred with in that some compensatory mitigating measures will be required for the maintenance and improvement of such services/facilities which will be impacted upon by the increased student populous.
252 8.11 Access
The existing Talybont North campus is accessed by vehicles from two points namely: i) Excelsior Drive which leads onto the wider highway network at the traffic signalised junction of A48 Western Avenue, and Excelsior Road,
and
ii) Parkfield Place which leads onto the wider highway network at the traffic signalised junction of the A470 North Road and Parkfield Place.
Students at the beginning and end of term and throughout their residency are directed to the Excelsior Road access. Due to the one way working of the internal highway network at Talybont North, the main car park is most readily accessed via Excelsior Road. Staff access the site also via Excelsior Road particularly at the beginning and end of a day. There is some access and egress allowed for staff via Parkfield Place but this is controlled with an electronically operated gate.
Pedestrian and cycle access is gained to the north towards Excelsior Road for shopping and leisure opportunities, to the east via Parkfield Place to North Road for shopping, and leisure opportunities, and for access to public transport services both towards the City Centre, and away from the City Centre, and to the south to North Road to the south of Talybont Court routing through Talybont South, and Talybont Court.
The site is within an easy walk of the main University campus at Park Place being within an approximate 30 minute walk.
8.12 Parking / Vehicle Storage
It should be noted that, although the application site is described as an overflow car park, planning records indicate that it has never been associated or allocated as part of a residential university development. In this respect, it should be noted that planning permission has been granted for industrial units on the site, but never implemented (see para 3.1).
The site is not marked out as a car park, nor does it form part of the allocated parking provision / permit allocation for any university development.
Currently, there are a total of 972 students resident at Talybont North. There are a total of 209 spaces for student car parking with permits, and for sports facilities use during the day. In addition, there are 19 spaces for staff use only, and a further 19 spaces for sports officials and players. As such the parking provision equates to 21.5% of student numbers.
253
It should be noted that only Talybont North residents are permitted to apply for a parking permit at Talybont North, and it is anticipated that this policy would extend to the proposed Talybont Gate as well.
Parking permits are issued to those with disabilities, and to all others on a first come first served basis. There is no intention co change any of the above arrangements.
In itself, the development provides for 90 Cycle parking spaces (this is actually double the adopted standard), and 7 short term/operational Car parking spaces. The limited Car parking provision accords with the Council’s sustainable transport agenda in encouraging alternative more sustainable modes over that of the Car; and with the Councils adopted operational space ratio of 1 space per 25 bedrooms. (179 ÷ 25 = 7).
8.13 Special needs access
No designated disabled space is indicated on the submitted layout. (I.e. for disabled relatives who may be visiting able bodied students in the halls who would wish to park close to the building; but this can be required by planning condition.
The bed spaces are not in themselves designed to accommodate disabled users, as the University provides such specialist accommodation elsewhere on its campus. As the halls are not a public building there is no requirement for them to offer such accommodation and the measures which are detailed in the application for supporting those with more special access needs are considered acceptable. As a new build, the building would be an accessible building with level access, and the provision of an accessible toilet facility on ground floor level is noted and welcomed.
8.14 Transportation Officer’s Comments
The Transportation Officer’s request for conditions relating to the finalisation of details / implementation of transportation related works are accepted; as are the officer’s requirements for a Travel Plan to promote sustainable journeys and a commuted payment of £36,920 (inc. 4%) RPI for improvements to North Road / Colum Road and Parkfield Place junctions.
The request of local residents for additional ‘resident only parking’ in the named streets can be assessed and could potentially be funded from the requested transportation contribution subject to meeting relevant assessment criteria. This would however need to be considered alongside the necessary junction improvements indicated above, and also in respect of any necessary improvements to the northern access to the site, at and above those
254 undertaken by the developer as part of the scheme, in order to ensure appropriate footway and lighting levels for pedestrians.
Ultimately any drafted S106 agreement must allow the Transportation Officer flexibility in allocation of the requested contribution/specification of the works which he deems necessary to allow the development to be approved and to allow highway impacts to be effectively managed..
8.15 Trees
The submitted arboricultural reports confirm that the site contains 4 individual trees, (ash, alder, sycamore) one small group, and an area of woodland. All individual tress were categorised as category C (fair to poor condition and of low value) as was the group. None of the trees were considered arboriculturally important.
The woodland area was found to be young woodland in poor condition with Ivy and Bramble ground flora, but may offer some bio-diversity value in respect of deadwood if coppiced to promote regeneration.
The proposal is therefore to remove the poor quality trees and replace them with managed mitigatory planting of new (six specimens to be agreed) and to to manage the woodland in the area of the site by coppicing or establishment of an ‘ecotone’ – ( herbaceous plants grading into shrubs and woodland trees) as favoured by the local authority trees officer.
A final landscape scheme can be achieved by means of planning condition.
8.16 Ecology
In summary the ecology report submitted with the application recorded no evidence of bats, some potential evidence of foxes, no bird nesting activity or amphibians. The site contained vegetation typical of unmanaged land and did contain some Himalayan Balsam which will need to be eradicated as an alien invasive species.
The Council’s ecologist recommends that trees are felled or managed outside the bird nesting season; and requests a planning condition to achieve this. None of the trees on the site are protected by a TPO and the site is not within a conservation area.
8.17 Contaminated or unstable land
The comments of the Pollution Control officer are noted as is the former use of the land. There would not appear to be any reason that, subject to
255 mitigation, the site is not capable of being developed for the intended purpose.
8.18 Provision for waste management facilities in development
The comments of the Waste Management are noted and the applicant is encouraged to undertake a waste management audit. The details of the waste storage area are considered acceptable and the collection of waste by a registered carrier will be the applicant’s responsibility.
8.19 Flooding
The comments of the Environment Agency are noted.
The application site lies partially within Zone C1, as defined by the Development Advice Map (DAM) referred to under Technical Advice Note 15: Development and Flood Risk (TAN15)
As such it is the responsibility of the local planning authority to consider whether the development is justifiable when tested against the criteria presented in TAN 15. (In effect a consideration of the likely implications of the proposal on human health and in respect of the potential for damage to property as might result from an extreme flooding event.
The applicant has commissioned and submitted a flood consequences assessment which suggests that site is flood free for the 1% (1 in 100 year) annual probability of a fluvial flood event, including allowance for climate change; and also that the site would only be affected to a depth of 10mm in the circumstance of a (1 in 1000 year) annual probability fluvial flood which is well within the ‘allowable’ depth of 600 mm as stated in section A1.15 of Tan 15 for such a development.
On this basis the Applicant is aware of the potential risk to property and the risk to human health considered negligible and neither sufficient to warrant resisting the approval of planning permission.
8.20 Representations
Objections to the proposal are noted and responded to here.
Over-development of site.
The accommodation proposal equates to a ratio of 516 bed spaces per hectare. In comparison recent schemes have achieved:
• Fire Station - 934 beds per hectare
256 • Pellett Street - 2296 beds per hectare • Pendyris Street - 982 beds per hectare • Severn Point - 758 beds per hectare • Maindy Road - 698 beds per hectare
and the proposed density is not considered excessive or an overdevelopment in comparison.
It is suggested that a seven storey building would tower over everything else in the area. This is factually incorrect as the relative height of the building is no taller than the four storey student blocks adjacent due to differences in ground level.
The proposed halls would be 15m to 5 storey level, 17.3m to 6th storey, and 20.2m to the top of the rooftop service overrun, all measured from a ground level of 13.2m A.O.D.
In comparison, the adjacent building has a ridge height of some 13m, when measured from a ground level of 16.4m A.O.D.
Thus, the proposed building is relatively, (as indicated in the submitted site section) only 1.1m different in height to the nearest student block. The same height as the next student block along, and lower than the 3rd student block to the south.
Overly-intensive use of the site.
The site is an overspill parking area at present which is controlled by the university. The Transport assessment indicates that on mid week survey, that the site was unused, and is generally only used for overspill parking purposes at the start and end of term. Its former allocated use for business use indicates the suitability of the site for development and it would appear from the submitted supporting documentation and technical responses that the site is capable of accommodating the proposed development without adverse environmental or amenity implications.
Tall Buildings Policy
The Council’s statement on tall buildings clarifies that buildings are generally considered to be tall buildings where they are over 8 storeys in height or significantly larger than adjacent premises. This is not the case, as indicated above. The building would therefore not have a significant impact on the city skyline as it would be obscured by buildings of similar height to the east, by the taller woodland landscaping of Llandaff/Pontcanna fields to the west and be some 400m away from residential properties to the north, across the busy
257 Western Avenue / 200m away from the rear boundaries of properties in Mynachdy Road which are also separated from it by a railway line.
Parking.
During term time, students will likely be travelling to the City Centre from this accommodation.
In this respect, the most convenient form of movement would be to utilise the public bus service running along North Road; to cycle, or walk, and the applicant’s proposal to provide only a limited amount of operational/short term on site parking would both encourage this and accord with both local and national agendas to reduce dependency on the car by reducing its ease of use, and promoting more sustainable alternatives.
Inadequate consultation.
Neighbouring properties and local members have been written to, and the application reported in the local press. .All representations received before the 4th November 2011 have been reported and considered within this report. Additional representations made in the period up until the consideration of the report by planning committee will be reported as late representations (either written where it is reasonably practical to do so or verbally). This is considered more than adequate.
Invasion of privacy.
We believe that the seven-storey block will overlook adjacent dwellings and businesses to an unacceptable degree,
The building would be some 25m minimum distance from the nearest adjacent block of student accommodation at Talybont north, and at an oblique angle that block. Additionally there are no habitable (bedroom) windows overlooking that development as the internal layout presents the communal kitchen areas/end of corridor windows to that elevation. Windows facing NW would overlook the central parking area of the Brick Yard Business Park at a distance of some 45m to the face of the opposite units. This is considered more than adequate.
In respect of amenity, as the sites are secure from one another, and accessed separately, it is not considered likely that the operations of the business park/student accommodation would unduly impact on each other.
It is accepted that there are no restrictions of hours of operation at the business park, however the new student accommodation would be provided with a minimum of double glazed windows and would have modern thermal
258 and acoustic insulation. The perimeter boundary of the site would also be landscaped which would offer some additional acoustic/visual buffering to ground floor residential units. This is considered acceptable in respect of the nature of accommodation proposed which would have transient occupancy for the duration of an academic year only.
9. SECTION 106 CONTRIBUTIONS
In summary the following S106 contributions are considered reasonable and necessary and proportionate in respect of achieving a positive recommendation to Grant Planning Permission for the development proposed:
Payment in lieu of open space provision : £ 94,835. 00 Community facilities £ 73,390. 00 Transportation Improvements: £/Works £ 36,920. 00
together with the binding undertaking of the applicant that the accommodation shall only be used for the purposes described in the application (i.e. restricting occupancy of the residences to students) and the submission/approval of a Travel Plan which shall set out proposals and targets, together with a timetable to limit or reduce the number of single occupancy car journeys to the site, and to promote travel by sustainable modes. The Travel Plan shall be implemented in accordance with the timetable set out in the plan, unless otherwise agreed in writing with the LPA. Reports demonstrating progress in promoting the sustainable transport measures detailed in the Travel Plan shall be submitted annually to the LPA, commencing from the first anniversary of beneficial occupation of the development. Reason: To accord with the Council's Access, Circulation and Parking Standards SPG.
10. RECOMMENDATION
10.1 That, subject to the applicant entering into a binding agreement with the Council under S106 of the Planning Act, to secure the contributions/works indicated in Section 9 of this report, planning permission be granted subject to conditions.
10.2 The proposal is considered acceptable in terms of Council policies and government advice, subject to conditions being imposed and a legal agreement (Section 106) being signed as recommended. However, if members are minded to refuse the application contrary to officer recommendation, the following reason for refusal of planning permission is offered.
259 The proposal by reason of its siting, scale, massing and design represents an overdevelopment of the site , which is of poor design and not well related to adjoining buildings and which would be detrimental to the visual amenity of the area and contrary to policy 11 of the Local Plan and policy 2.20 of the UDP and the Tall Buildings SPG
260 261 Notes Original Size This drawing is to be read in conjunction with all relevant architects, engineers and specialists drawings and specifications Do not scale this drawing. All dimensions in millimetres unless noted otherwise. All levels in metres unless noted otherwise. All dimensions must be checked/ verified on site. In case of doubt or discrepancies please refer to rio architects for instructions.
No. Description Date
Drawing Status
architects
Y Stiwdio, 21a Allensbank Road, Cardiff, CF14 3PN Tel. 44 (0) 2920 250066 Web. www.rioarchitects.com Email. [email protected]
Client:
.
Project Name: Talybont Gate Student Accommodation
Drawing Title: . Isometric Visualisations
Scale: Drawn By: CW Checked By: AB Drawn Date: 19/05/2011 Checked Date:.
Rio Job No: 0204 Drawing No: AV 01 Rev: 02/08/2011 10:52:26 262 263 COMMITTEE DATE: 11/01/2012
APPLICATION No. 11/01692/DCI APPLICATION DATE: 10/10/2011
ED: CATHAYS
APP: TYPE: Full Planning Permission
APPLICANT: Roines Estates Ltd LOCATION: 22-23 ST MARY STREET, CITY CENTRE, CARDIFF, CF10 1AA PROPOSAL: Change of use and conversion of 1st, 2nd & 3rd floors at Nos. 22 & 23 St Mary Street from commercial offices to 10 No. self contained flats for students. Commercial retail uses to be retained to ground floor units. ______
RECOMMENDATION 1: That subject to persons having relevant interest in the application site entering into a binding planning obligation in agreement with the Council under SECTION 106 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 encompassing the matters referred to in Section 9 of this report, planning permission be GRANTED subject to:
1. C01 Statutory Time Limit
2. No modification of the fenestration arrangement or finishes to the highway (W) elevation of No. 22 St. Mary Street shall be undertaken prior to the approval of a scheme of detail by the local planning authority and the modifications shall thereafter accord with the approved details. Reason: To ensure for the appropriateness of any modification of the façade within the context of the St. Mary Street Conservation Area, and in relation to adjacent properties.
3. The consent hereby granted shall only be used for the purposes specified in the application. Reason: The form of accommodation is considered only acceptable for the use specified.
4. Prior to the beneficial occupation of the residential units hereby permitted, details of facilities for the storage of refuse containers shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority and the facilities approved shall be provided in accordance with the approved details before the development is brought into beneficial use and thereafter retained. Reason: To secure an orderly form of development and to protect the amenities of the area.
5. Prior to the beneficial use of the property as residential accommodation, all party walls and floors in the premises shall be
264 insulated to mitigate against sound transmission in full accordance with a scheme of detail which shall first have been submitted to and approved in writing by the local planning authority Reason: To ensure for acceptable noise levels within the property in the interests of the amenity of future residents.
6. Prior to the beneficial use of the property as student residential accommodation, all window frames / surrounds fronting onto lightwells within residential units shall be provided with a means of privacy protection in accordance with details to be agreed with the Local Planning Authority. Reason: Because of the listed status of the building, and the necessity to preserve its character, this is considered the most suitable method of achieving appropriate privacy levels between prospective neighbouring tenants.
7. Unless otherwise agreed with The Local Planning Authority in writing, the existing tiles to St. Mary Street elevation of no. 22, shall be removed and replaced with an alternative finish, in accordance with a scheme to be agreed with the Local Planning Authority. Reason: In the interests of visual amenity and to enhance the appearance of the building in the Conservation Area.
RECOMMENDATION 2: That the applicant be advised that no works should commence until such time as Listed Building Consent has been obtained for the alterations.
RECOMMENDATION 3: That the applicant be asked to liaise directly with the waste management officer to ascertain a mutually agreeable refuse collection arrangement, prior to the submission of details in discharge of condition 4 above.
1. DESCRIPTION OF DEVELOPMENT
1.1 The proposal is for the conversion of the upper floors of 22 and 23 St. Mary Street to student accommodation.
1.2 The proposal essentially realises a rationalisation of circulation through the buildings using existing light wells to provide for a new staircase arrangement; and to provide 10 units of residential accommodation as follows;
22 1st Fl - 1 x 3 bed Flat @ 79sq m; 1 x 3 bed flat @ 86 sq m 2nd Fl - 1 x 3 bed flat @ 90 sq m 3rd Fl - 1 x 3 bed flat @ 90 sq m
23 1st Fl - 1 x 2 bed flat @ 54 sq m; 1 x 3 bed flat @ 92 sq m 2nd Fl - 1 x 2 bed flat @ 65 sq m; 1 x 3 bed flat @ 92 sq m 3rd Fl - 1 x 2 bed flat @ 63 sq m; 1 x 2 bed flat @ 58 sq m
265 2. DESCRIPTION OF SITE
2.1 23 St. Mary Street is a Grade II Listed, Mid Terraced, 4 Storey building, with modern retail ground floor frontage and historic rusticated Portland Stone elevation and projecting bay windows to first and second floors, together with a plain additional storey (possibly a later addition) above. Internally the building has been altered by the insertion of new stud walls and rooms, compartmentalised staircases and replacement joinery. Most windows appear to be sympathetic replacements, but not original to the building. The rear of the building is dominated by a black painted metal fire escape, which looks over the rear of properties in Bakers Row (NE) and gives access to a plethora of rear flat roofed extensions to buildings located in St. Mary Street.
2.2 22 St. Mary Street, the adjoining building in the terrace, is not listed and has a modernised (1060s?) frontage in horizontal bands of glazing and tile. It similarly has a (an albeit vacant) retail frontage, with three floors over, but is of lesser height than No. 23; and substantially lower than No. 21 (The Sandringham Hotel at 5 storeys)
2.3 In Plan form, both buildings share light wells with adjacent neighbours.
2.4 Both Buildings are located within the St. Mary Street Conservation Area, Principal Shopping Area, and Central Business Area.
2.5 No. 22 is vacant at ground floor but was formerly Crouch the Jewellers who have moved to SD2; No. 23 is occupied as ‘Spirited Wine’ at ground floor level. Both properties have vacant upper floors which were previously offices.
3. SITE HISTORY
3.1 Spirited Wine (No. 23 St.Mary St.) new shop front Granted Planning Permission for a 11/3/1991
4. POLICY FRAMEWORK
4.1 Cardiff Unitary Development Plan Deposit Written Statement Oct 2003
4.2 Policy 2.20: Good Design Policy 2.21: Change of Use or Redevelopment to Residential Use Policy 2.26: Provision for Open Space, Recreation and Leisure Policy 2.31: Central and Waterfront Business Areas Policy 2.32: Change of Use of Offices in the Central and Waterfront Business Areas Policy 2.35: Development in the Central Shopping Area Policy 2.51: Statutory Listed Buildings Policy 2.53: Conservation Areas Policy 2.55: Public Realm Improvements Policy 2.57: Access, Circulation and Parking Requirements Policy 2.64: Air, Noise and Light Pollution Policy 2.74: Provision for Waste Management Facilities in Development
266
5. INTERNAL CONSULTEE RESPONSES
5.1 Transportation Officer No Objection
5.2 Parks Officer Advise that as the accommodation will not benefit from any private amenity space, that a contribution in lieu of such provision, to be used for the purposes of laying out new, or maintaining existing public open space, will be required.
Further to calculation based on the Council’s SPG, a figure of £15,971 has been calculated and justified.
5.3 Waste Management Comments that bulk bins would be required for 10 units, that commercial and domestic refuse should not be mixed and that refuse cannot be stored on the highway.
5.4 Housing Officer Would require any approval of planning permission to be limited to student accommodation by means of legal agreement as any generic permission would entertain an affordable housing allocation/financial contribution.
6. EXTERNAL CONSULTEE RESPONSES
61. None
7. REPRESENTATIONS
7.1 Neighbours have been consulted. No representations have been received.
8. ANALYSIS
Land Use
8.1 Local Plan Policy 27 favours the conversion of space above commercial premises to residential use within the Principal Shopping Area, providing that adequate servicing and security can be maintained to the existing commercial use, appropriate provision can be made for pedestrian access, amenity space and refuse disposal.
8.2 In addition, the Deposit UDP, the City Centre Strategy and National Planning guidance seek the redevelopment of vacant sites and the use of Brownfield sites within urban areas for housing to help meet city-wide housing needs and to promote urban regeneration.
8.3 The change of use would have no impact on retail floorspace, or retail offer to the highway frontage. This central location of this site is well suited to residential use as it is well served by excellent transport links and is close to
267 local amenities and facilities. The retail units are serviced from the front of the building and are independently accessed, there is therefore no conflict with the criteria set out in Policy 27 of the Local Plan.
8.4 The change of use of office space in the Central Business District is accepted in this particular case, given the nature of the accommodation offered and its period of vacancy.
8.5 The change of use is considered acceptable from a land use policy perspective.
Design
8.6 The built envelope is given, and the creation of the units requires only removal/reintroduction of partition walls around the new cores. There is some modification of window openings within the rear annexe wings but the buildings stay essentially as existing.
8.7 The use of the existing light well between 21 and 22 St. Mary Street as a new circulation core is accepted and not considered to compromise lighting in adjacent buildings as many of the windows to the light well have been previously blocked or are only to service areas. The agent has discussed this with the adjacent building owner who has not objected to the planning application.
8.8 The removal of the external fire escape is welcomed as this provides an improved aesthetic to surrounding buildings and a safer more convenient means of internalised escape.
8.9 All flat units have front or rear windows to living areas with acceptable levels of daylight, bedrooms either benefit from rear facing or lightwell facing windows, and although not all bedroom windows have views, these are considered acceptable in terms of daylight receipt as windows are generally of large Victorian proportion (and which for many years have provided more than adequate illumination for office workers).
8.10 The proposed layout allows for the retained light well between 23 and its adjacent neighbour (also within the same ownership) to be repainted/enhanced, and this can be a requirement of any permission as may be granted.
Provision for Open Space, Recreation and Leisure
8.11 The development does not and cannot provide any private amenity space, open space or recreational area. The Parks Officer’s requirement for a financial contribution to offset this situation is therefore acknowledged, has been considered against statutory tests, and is considered appropriate.
The applicant has been advised of this requirement.
268 Historic Environment.
8.12 The applicant is uncertain as to whether available budget will allow for remodelling of the fenestration and finishes to the now somewhat dated, unlisted frontage of No. 22 St. Mary St. but budget permitting, would be accepting of a planning condition to allow the Local Planning Authority control over the detailing of any forthcoming works. Condition 7 allows for the upgrading of the existing frontage to no. 22.
8.13 No change is proposed to the frontage of the Listed Building at No. 23 St. Mary Street.
Public Realm Improvements
8.14 This scheme is not considered to generate any need for enhancements to the public realm which has recently been upgraded.
Access, Circulation and Parking Requirements
8.15 The scheme provides no off street parking and because of its upper level location is impractical to require to provide secure cycle storage. The City Centre location is however very sustainable in respect of access to bus, train and taxi services and, in theory, there is no reason for occupants of the accommodation to require a car.
Air, Noise and Light Pollution
8.16 City centre living is appealing to a proportion of society who accept and are attracted to living in a busy commercial environment, with often higher than average instances of noise, light, fumes, litter and servicing; and it is anticipated that there is a market for such accommodation. Buyers or tenants will be fully aware of the environment before contracting to occupy the flats, and as this is the case the change of use is considered acceptable in respect of the juxtaposition of residential and commercial enterprises, subject to mitigating measures against sound transmission between flats and adjacent properties being secured by means of planning condition.
Provision for Waste Management Facilities in Development
8.18 The site can only be accessed from the front, and is located at upper floor levels. There is therefore no potential for external communal domestic bin storage. As this is the case, then it must be accepted that residents will need to store refuse within the accommodation until it is able to be presented to the highway for collection. This is not considered insurmountable, and in an area of the city where collections are frequent, it is considered appropriate that any approval of planning permission recommend that a liaison is entered into between the owner of the property and the Waste manager to resolve a satisfactory refuse collection arrangement.
269 8.19 The lack of any available space to store bulk refuse containers is not considered sufficient reason to resist the approval of planning permission and regenerate vacant and useable accommodation in St. Mary Street, in this instance.
9. SECTION 106 OBLIGATIONS
9.1 In summary, the applicant is asked to enter into a binding legal agreement with the Council, under S106 of the Town & Country Planning Act 1990, to ensure for:
• Occupation of the residential accommodation by students only;
• A Payment of £15, 971 in lieu of amenity space provision.
• The submission, approval and undertaking of a scheme of enhancement to the light wells of the building and adjacent building where they will be overlooked from the new flat units.
10. CONCLUSION
10.1 That Planning Permission be Granted subject to Conditions
270 271 272 273 COMMITTEE DATE: 11/01/2012
APPLICATION No. 11/01893/DCI APPLICATION DATE: 21/11/2011
ED: CATHAYS
APP: TYPE: Listed Building Consent
APPLICANT: Roines Estates Ltd LOCATION: 22-23 ST MARY STREET, CITY CENTRE, CARDIFF, CF10 1AA PROPOSAL: PROPOSED INTERNAL AND EXTERNAL ALTERATIONS TO FACILITATE CONVERSION OF 1ST 2ND AND 3RD FLOORS TO SELF CONTAINED FLATS ______
RECOMMENDATION 1: That subject to Cadw not wishing to call in the application for determination, Listed Building Consent be GRANTED subject to:
1. C02 Statutory Time Limit - Listed Building
2. Prior to the commencement of any works to windows in the property, a detailed schedule of intent in respect of replacement, refurbishment, modification, renewal or provision of supplementary double glazing, for each window shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the local planning authority, and the works shall thereafter accord with the approved details Reason: The windows are numerous and various in respect of age, historic merit and condition and such intent has not yet been resolved.
3. Unless otherwise agreed with the local planning authority, the external metal fire escape shall be removed in entirety prior to the beneficial use of the property as residential accommodation, and no ferrous components shall remain embedded within the masonry of the building, the fabric of which shall be made good post removal of the fire escape. Reason: To ensure for the removal of the feature in a timely manner and to protect the building from future damage as may be caused by ferrous expansion.
4. The modifications to the fenestration arrangement in the rear annexe of the building shall not be as shown on submitted plans but shall accord with a scheme of detail which shall first have been submitted to and approved in writing by the local planning authority prior to the beneficial use of the building for residential purposes. Reason: To ensure for a greater retention of existing building fabric and of a more sympathetic arrangement to that proposed.
274 1. DESCRIPTION OF WORKS REQUIRING LBC
1.1 The proposal is for the conversion of the upper floors of 23 St. Mary Street to residential flats for purposes of student accommodation as follows
23 1st Fl - 1 x 2 bed flat @ 54 sq m; 1 x 3 bed flat @ 92 sq m 2nd Fl - 1 x 2 bed flat @ 65 sq m; 1 x 3 bed flat @ 92 sq m 3rd Fl - 1 x 2 bed flat @ 63 sq m; 1 x 2 bed flat @ 58 sq m
In essence, the works comprise the removal and erection of internal walls at upper levels to realise a new layout of accommodation; works to or replacement of windows (other than those in the front elevation); and the rationalisation of some window openings in the rear annexe of the building; together with the removal of the buildings external rear fire escape.
2. DESCRIPTION OF SITE
2.1 23 St. Mary Street is a Grade II Listed, Mid Terraced, 4 Storey building, with modern retail ground floor frontage and historic rusticated Portland Stone upper elevation with recessed / projecting oriel bay window through first and second floors, and with a plain additional storey (possibly a later addition) above.
2.2 The building was Listed in 1999 for its group value with others along the commercial frontage of St. Mary Street. No inspection of the interior was recorded at that time.
2.3 Internally the building has been altered by the insertion of new stud walls, some forming new rooms, or enclosures such as compartmentalised staircases (previous fire regulations compliance works?), and replacement joinery and fenestration.
2.4 Most windows appear to be sympathetic replacements, i.e. corded sash, but not original to the building…some being more sensitive replications than others.
2.5 The rear of the building is dominated by a black painted metal fire escape, which looks over the rear of properties in Bakers Row (NE) and gives access to a plethora of rear flat roofed extensions to buildings located in St. Mary Street.
2.6 The building is located in the St. Mary St. Conservation Area.
2.7 No. 23 is occupied as ‘Spririted Wine’ at ground floor level, but upper floor are now vacant (from observation, previously used as offices for marketing / promotions and sound recording studio purposes).
275 3. SITE HISTORY
3.1 Spirited Wine (No. 23 St.Mary St.) new shop front Granted Planning Permission for a 11/3/1991
3.2 Listed 1999
4. POLICY FRAMEWORK
4.1 Circular 61:96 Planning and the historic environment
5. INTERNAL CONSULTEE RESPONSES
5.1 None
6. EXTERNAL CONSULTEE RESPONSES
6.1 None
7. REPRESENTATIONS
7.1 The application has been advertised in accordance with Statutory Requirements (Press and Site). No representations have been received.
8. ANALYSIS
8.1 Although now vacant, the upper levels of the building have a relatively recent (perhaps 1980s?) history of subdivision into compartmentalised offices, There is little of historic merit remaining internally. Some walls are lath, and some have been over studded, others are more modern plasterboard additions, or traditional single brick partitions. Most windows in the building have been replaced at some time.
8.2 It is a fair summary to say that the historic interest of the building in contained primarily in its frontage to St. Mary St, and in respect of its central light well shared with No.24 St. Mary St which is characteristic of a late 1800’s building on an elongated plot,
8.3 The proposals relate to:
The removal and erection of new internal walling to realise a new layout.
8.4 This is not objected to, as on ground, first and second floor levels the proposed arrangement is not significantly different to that existing at present. A somewhat convoluted arrangement of accessing the third floor from second
276 via a staircase at the rear of the building would be replaced with a new stair in the centre of the building between those to floors. This in part allows for the removal of the external escape stair and this is welcomed.
Works to windows.
8.5 If successful in obtaining planning permission for the change of use, the applicant would seek to address the upgrading of windows. The windows to the front elevation would simply be serviced/renovated and then the window surrounds fitted with a reversible system of secondary glazing as they have reasonably deep cills capable of accommodating such a system. These windows, although unlikely to be original, are relatively early, and have been reasonably well maintained and so such proposals are considered appropriate.
8.6 Windows to the mid section of the building are mostly replacements. Most are timber, and corded sashes, but are softwood and have degraded to varying degrees. Others are of more heavy construction and have alternative glazing bars to the one likely original frame with lambs tongue glazing bars on the first floor. It is likely that the applicant will attempt to procure a slimline double glazed unit to use throughout the development, but as yet has not undertaken a conditions survey of the fenestration, pending planning permission.
8.7 The submitted drawings indicate some modification to the window aperture sizes of windows in the rear annexe of the property. The applicant, at the request of the planning officer has been asked to re-consider this arrangement to allow for a greater retention of existing openings which although in a later addition to the building are arranged with a particular intent and pattern. The agent has agreed to this. This detail can be controlled by condition.
9. CONCLUSION
9.1 That the proposal will bring the building back into beneficial use, and that the works will benefit the longer term maintenance of the building fabric whilst retaining the arguably most architecturally/historically interesting features of the building being its frontage and light wells.
9.2 The granting of listed building consent is recommended.
277 COMMITTEE DATE: 11/01/2012
APPLICATION No. 11/01850/DCI APPLICATION DATE: 27/10/2011
ED: PLASNEWYDD
APP: TYPE: Full Planning Permission
APPLICANT: Mr MA Awan LOCATION: 32 CITY ROAD, ROATH, CARDIFF, CF24 3DL PROPOSAL: CHANGE OF USE TO A3 ______
RECOMMENDATION: That planning permission be REFUSED for the following reason:
1. The proposed change of use of the ground floor of the premises to A3 with 7.30am to 9.30pm opening hours would add to the existing concentration of food and drink units in City Road which would be likely to exacerbate problems of actual and perceived late-night anti-social behaviour, and crime and disorder, having a detrimental impact on public safety. The proposal therefore fails to accord with Welsh Office Circular 16/94 (Planning Out Crime) and paragraph 4.10.12 of Planning Policy Wales (Edition 4, February 2010).
1. DESCRIPTION OF PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT
1.1 The application seeks planning permission to change the use of the ground floor of 32 City Road, which was last used in November 2009 as an employment and training centre and is currently vacant, to A3 (Food and Drink). The application does not state a specific proposed use within use class A3; the supporting information submitted with the application clarifies that the intention of the application is to gain permission for A3 use in order to improve the chances of lettering the property. The proposed opening hours of the premises are 07.30 to 21.30 Monday to Saturday and 10.00-17.00 on Sunday and Bank Holidays.
1.2 Pedestrian access is gained to the premises from City Road. A garage that provides 1 no. parking space is located at the rear of the site with access from the Castle Lane. The building includes a separate access from City Road to the first floor premises (32A City Road), which, from council tax records, appears to be in use as 3 flats.
278 2. DESCRIPTION OF SITE
2.1 The application site is a vacant ground floor commercial unit in City Road located within a frontage of 14 units, of which 7 are currently in A3 use.
2.2 Council tax records confirm that there is residential accommodation on the upper floors of the application site (3 flats) and residential accommodation on the upper floors of nos. 30 and 34 City Road. The ground floors of Nos. 30 and 34 are in A1 use.
3. SITE HISTORY
3.1 99/01241/W: Change of use to training and advice office and replacement of roller shutter door to shopfront – planning permission granted 03/09/99
4. POLICY FRAMEWORK
4.1 The site is located within the ‘City Road Area’ as defined by the City of Cardiff Local Plan. The following polices are of particular relevance:
4.2 Policies 17 (Parking and Servicing Facilities), 18 (Provision for Cyclists), 19 (Provision for Pedestrians), 20 (Provision for Special Needs Groups) and 40 (Development in City Road) of the City of Cardiff Local Plan (January 1996)
4.3 Policies 2.24 (Residential Amenity), 2.36 (District and Local Centres), 2.64 (Air, Noise and Light Pollution), 2.57 (Access, Circulation and Parking Requirements) and 2.74 (Provision for Waste Management Facilities in Development) of the Deposit Cardiff Unitary Development Plan (October 2003).
4.3 Supplementary Planning Guidance: - Restaurants, Takeaways and other Food and Drink Uses (June 1996) - Waste Collection and Storage Facilities (March 2007) - Access, Circulation and Parking Standards (January 2010),
4.4 Planning Policy Wales (Edition 4, February 2010) and Welsh Office Circular 16/94 (Planning out Crime)
5. INTERNAL CONSULTEE RESPONSES
5.1 The Operational Manager, Transportation: No objection subject to conditions preventing takeaway sales and retention of the existing parking space.
279 5.2 The Strategic Planning Manager, Land Use Policy: The application site falls within the City Road area, as defined by the Local Plan. The application should be assessed against policy 40 of the Local Plan which states that business, housing, shops and professional services will be favoured, and that food and drink uses will only be permitted where there would be no unacceptable adverse effect upon residential amenity, taking into account existing concentrations of such uses. Supplementary planning guidance on ‘Restaurants, Takeaways and other Food and Drink Uses’ (June 1996) states that in view of the existing numbers of food and drink outlets, especially takeaways, along this road, the opportunities to set up more or to extend the operations of existing premises are likely to be extremely limited.
The applicant indicates that the site is currently vacant, the previous use of the building as an employment and training centre having ceased in November 2009. The unit has been marketed in an attempt to find an A1 or A2 occupier. Given the length of time the unit has remained vacant it could not be said to be contributing anything to the City Road area at present in terms of business, service or shopping opportunities.
The site is located within a frontage of 14 units, of which 7 were in A3 use when last surveyed. This high proportion of existing A3 uses would ordinarily justify a refusal of planning permission for a further A3 use. However, it is not considered that a change of use to A3 would significantly alter the existing concentration of uses within the frontage, or the centre as a whole, such that planning permission could reasonably be refused solely on these grounds.
The application form indicates that opening hours would be 07.30 to 21.30 Monday to Saturday and 10.00 to 17:00 on Sundays. The supporting information states that ‘there are a range of A3 uses that do not require late opening hours or takeaway activity, such as a coffee shop/tea room’, however, the application proposes ‘change of use to A3’ without specifying the nature of the A3 use intended. If the applicant is willing for the use to be restricted by condition to limit the opening hours to these times and to prevent takeaway sales this would lessen the impact of an additional A3 use in the frontage.
The application raises no significant land use policy concerns. If planning permission is to be granted, it is recommended that the opening hours are restricted to the hours indicated in the application form and a condition imposed preventing takeaway sales.
5.3 The Operational Manager, Waste Management: Plans detailing refuse storage are acceptable. The developer should be reminded that a commercial contract is required for the collection and disposal of all commercial waste.
280 5.4 Pollution Control: No objection to the proposal subject to conditions requiring installation of sound insulation between the ground and first floor use, installation of suitable kitchen extraction equipment, restriction on the opening hours of the premises to between 08.00 and 21.30 on any day, restriction on deliveries to between 08.00 and 20.00 on any day, restriction on plant noise and no take-away sales from the premises.
6. EXTERNAL CONSULTEE RESPONSES
6.1 South Wales Police Crime Prevention Design Advisor: City Road has a high concentration of late night refreshment houses and takeaways. Recent analysis has shown that overall crime in the City Road area of Cardiff continues to be a major problem and on going concern for South Wales Police. Analysis shows that between 1/07/10 - 30/6/11 there were a total of 964 occurrences reported to the police compared with 649 in the same period of the previous year, with increases in the levels of crime, violent crime and anti-social behaviour.
Taking this information into consideration, South Wales Police wish to object to any further A3 use as this would in effect increase the capacity of the late night economy and could further exacerbate the situation with regard to crime and disorder.
The reasons for objection are based on evidence previously submitted to Cardiff City Council within the Cardiff Council Licensing 2003 Statement of Licensing Policy 31st January 2008 (as amended 24th July, 2009) and the following:
• There is already an over concentration of late night refreshment/takeaway premises in the City Road area. • There is a strong correlation between the levels of crime and late night refreshment/takeaway premises. • Saturation of similar types of night time economy establishments which lead to the potential for increased crime and social disorder. • Four recent Appeal decisions by the Welsh Assembly Government support the view that crime levels are a material consideration. APP/Z6815/A/09/2111692 (102-106 City Road, Cardiff) APP/Z6815/A/09/2114299 (177 City Road, Cardiff) APP/Z6815/A/09/2119583/ (116-118 City Road, Cardiff) APP/Z6815/A/10/2127316 (220 City Road, Cardiff)
If the proposed A3 use would be restricted to opening hours of 0800-1800 and not include any take-away facilities then the Police would withdraw the objection.
281 7. REPRESENTATIONS
7.1 Adjoining properties and Local Members have been consulted and the application has been advertised on site and in the press. No representations have been received.
8. ANALYSIS
8.1 The site is located within a frontage that includes a high proportion of existing A3 uses and the proposal for a further A3 use therefore raises land use policy concerns. However, the Strategic Planning Manager Land Use Policy considers that, on balance, a restricted A3 use could be acceptable at the site (see paragraph 5.2) and there is therefore no objection to the proposal on land use policy grounds.
8.2 The application site falls within the City Road area as defined by the City of Cardiff Local Plan. As such, local plan policy 40 (Development in City Road) applies, and specifically states:
“Food and Drink Uses (Class A3) will only be permitted where there would be no unacceptable adverse effect upon residential amenity, taking into account existing concentrations of such uses, and subject also to considerations of scale, location, design and transportation.”
8.3 It is noted that there are residential properties above the premises and at first floor in the adjoining premises. However, having due regard to the sites’ location in close proximity to other commercial and late-night uses on City Road, and subject to the use of appropriate conditions as recommended by Pollution Control (see paragraph 5.4), it is considered that the proposal would not have an unacceptable impact on residential amenity in terms of noise/smells.
8.4 In terms of crime and disorder, the South Wales Police Crime Prevention Design Advisor advises that the level of crime in the City Road area continues to be a major problem and on going concern for South Wales Police, and the Police object to the proposed change of use on the basis that it could exacerbate existing problems, to the detriment of public safety. The officer notes that in recent appeal decisions relating to A3 uses on City Road the Planning Inspectors have upheld decisions to refuse planning permission on crime prevention grounds and accepted Police evidence, which demonstrates a positive correlation between the number of late night food and drink premises and levels of crime and disorder.
8.5 The proposed A3 use with opening hours of 7.30am to 9.30pm would add to the existing high concentration of food and drink units in City Road and, based on the evidence from South Wales Police, would be likely to exacerbate problems of actual and perceived late-night anti-social behaviour, which would have a
282 detrimental impact on public safety. For this reason, it is considered that the proposal fails to accord with Welsh Office Circular 16/94 (Planning Out Crime) and paragraph 4.10.12 of Planning Policy Wales (Edition 4, February 2010).
8.6 In conclusion, it is recommended that the application be refused.
283 284 285 COMMITTEE DATE: 11/01/2012
APPLICATION No. 11/01897/DCI APPLICATION DATE: 03/11/2011
ED: PLASNEWYDD
APP: TYPE: Full Planning Permission
APPLICANT: Mr Michael Isaac - The Isaac Trust LOCATION: 29 ALBANY ROAD, ROATH, CARDIFF, CF24 3LH PROPOSAL: CHANGE OF USE OF GROUND FLOOR TO A REAL ALE BAR AND FIRST FLOOR TO ANCILLARY MEETING ROOM ______
RECOMMENDATION: That planning permission be GRANTED subject to the following conditions:
1. C01 Statutory Time Limit
2. The ground and first floor of the premises shall be used only for the purposes specified in the application unless otherwise agreed in writing by the local planning authority. Reason: For the avoidance of doubt and to ensure that the use of the premises does not prejudice the amenities of the area.
3. No member of the public shall be admitted to or allowed to remain on the premises between the hours of 23:00 and 09:00 on any day. Reason: To ensure for the amenities of occupiers of properties nearby.
4. Notwithstanding the provisions of the Town and Country Planning (Use Classes) Order 1987 (or any Order amending or revoking and re- enacting that Order) no sale of hot food for consumption off the premises shall take place from the premises. Reason: For the avoidance of doubt, to ensure that the use of the premises does not prejudice the amenities of the area and in the interests of highway safety.
5. The rating level of the noise emitted from fixed plant and equipment on the site shall not exceed 5dBA at any residential property when measured and corrected in accordance with BS 4142 : 1997. Reason: To ensure that the amenities of occupiers of other premises in the vicinity are protected.
6. Prior to amplified music being played in any room it shall be insulated for sound in accordance with a scheme to be submitted to and
286 approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority and thereafter retained. Reason: To ensure that the amenities of occupiers of other premises in the vicinity are protected.
7. G7Q Future Kitchen Extraction
8. Prior to beneficial use of the development hereby permitted, a DDA compliant unisex W.C shall be provided on the ground floor and thereafter retained. Reason: In the interests of inclusive access.
RECOMMENDATION 2: The applicant should note that the South Wales Crime Prevention Design Advisor recommends that windows and doors should be installed to British Standards and CCTV should be installed to cover the main entrances.
1. DESCRIPTION OF PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT
1.1 A full application for the change of use of the ground floor of no. 29 Albany Road from retail (A1) use to a real ale bar (A3) use. The application also involves use of the upper floor of the property as a meeting room, ancillary to the main pub use.
1.2 The application is supported by a Design and Access Statement (DAS), which states that the intention is that the premises would be operated by the Rhymney Brewery and would be set out in the same manner as existing premises in Aberdare, Pontpridd and Merthyr. The applicant intends to sell predominantly Rhymney Brewery ale on the ground floor with no food. The agent explains that the intention is that the “first floor would be laid out as a meeting place and “visitor centre” where photographs and displays would explain the brewing process and the specific characteristics of the Rhymney Brewery beer and where groups, e.g. CAMRA, could meet”. Access to the first floor area would be via appointment, request or specific booking.
1.3 The agent notes that whilst the proposed hours of opening are 10:00 – 23:00 hours, each day, the peak trade is anticipated to be during the day time and late afternoon and the aim is to provide a venue for real ale drinkers.
1.4 The agent states that the premises has been vacant for 4 years and has been marketed during that period but there has been no realistic interest from prospective A1 (shop) occupiers with the only interest shown by “coffee shop” chains.
287 1.5 In terms of access, the DAS confirms that the existing entrance on Albany Road provides wide and level access. The existing side entrance on Arabella Street would provide servicing access. The agent states that ground floor DDA compliant toilets and staff facilities will be provided. No on-site parking would be provided.
2. DESCRIPTION OF SITE
2.1 The application site relates to a 2 storey end of terrace property on the junction of Albany Road and Arabella Street. The agent notes that the property has been vacant for approximately 4 years and formerly accommodated “Choices” video store.
2.2 The site is adjoined by Iceland (A1 use), which occupies numbers 23 to 27 Albany Road. An existing rear lane on Arabella Street separates the rear boundary of Iceland from residential property on Arabella Street.
2.3 The application site is located within the Albany Road/Wellfield Road district shopping centre. The application site frontage (nos. 11 to 29 Albany Road) contains 5no. ground floor commercial premises, 4no. of which are currently occupied by shops (A1 use) with the application site itself a former shop (A1) premises (“Choices Video”).
2.4 The “Albany Fish Bar” is located at no. 18 Albany Road, on the opposite side of Albany Road. The chip shop’s advertised operating hours are 11:00 to 02:00 hours on Mondays to Saturdays, and 17:00 to midnight on Sundays. “Benny’s Chicken”, a hot food takeaway operates along from the “Albany Fish Bar” at from no. 10 Albany Road.
2.5 There is no residential accommodation above the application site or above the adjoining Iceland store at nos. 23- 27 Albany Road. There appears to be a flat above the ground floor commercial premises (occupied by “The Money Shop”) at number 31 Albany Road, on the opposite side of Arabella Street.
3. SITE HISTORY
09/2158/C Change of use from A1 (retail) to A2 (financial and professional). Withdrawn
288 4. POLICY FRAMEWORK
4.1 National Planning Guidance Planning Policy Wales Planning Policy Wales TAN 18: Transport Planning Policy Wales TAN 21: Waste
4.2 Adopted City of Cardiff Local Plan (January 1996): Policy 17: Parking and Servicing Facilities Policy 19: Provision for Pedestrians Policy 20: Provision for Special Needs Groups Policy 49: District and Local Centres
4.3 Deposit Cardiff Unitary Development Plan (October 2003): Policy 2.36: District and Local Centres Policy 2.57: Access, Circulation and Parking Requirements Policy 2.74: Provision for Waste Management Facilities in Development
4.4 Supplementary Planning Guidance Restaurants, Takeaways and Other Food and Drink Uses (June 1996) Albany Road/Wellfield Road District Shopping Centre (June 1998) Access, Circulation and Parking Requirements (June 2006) Waste Collection and Storage Facilities (March 2007)
5. INTERNAL CONSULTEE RESPONSES
5.1 Pollution Control No objection. Conditions are recommended in respect of opening hours (restricted to 10:00 – 23:00 hours, each day), delivery times, and plant noise. Conditions are also requested in order to secure a scheme of sound insulation in the event that amplified music is played in the room and to secure kitchen extraction facilities if hot food is prepared on the site in the future.
5.2 Waste Management A location for the storage of waste and recycling should be shown on the site plans.
5.3 Licensing There is no premises licence in place for the property and a Licence would need to be granted before the premises could be used as a bar.
5.4 Transport No objection subject to a condition to prevent hot food takeaway sales from the premises.
289
6. EXTERNAL CONSULTEE RESPONSES
6.1 South Wales Police
Analysis of crime data shows that overall crime is high in the Plasnewydd area of Cardiff. However most of the crime incidents occur in the City Road/Crwys Road area. Given this context, there is no objection to the application. A number of recommendations are made: opening hours (11pm should be specified as the closing time), type of use (no sale of food on site or to takeaway), doors and windows to be installed to Secured by Design standards, CCTV should be installed and any access to any rear yard should be protected by a boundary fence.
7. REPRESENTATIONS
7.1 Neighbours and local members have been notified. The application has been advertised on site and in the press.
7.2 7no. objections have been received (6no. from local residents and 1no. from AG Meek Shoe Shop, 97/99 Albany Road). 3no. e-mails of support have been received from local residents. The content of correspondence is detailed below.
7.3 An e-mail has been received from the owner of a “..property directly opposite 29 Albany Road”. Concern is expressed as the upper floor of her property is residential and currently rented to students. The second concern relates to the increase in traffic and problems with parking in the area.
7.4 An e-mail of objection has been received from the occupier of no. 88 Arabella Street who notes that he is pleased that the premises are being brought back into use but is ambivalent about the need for another bar in the area and is particularly concerned about the lack of outdoor space for smokers and fears smokers will use the footpath outside the premises making it a no-go area for non-smokers and adding to the litter problem.
7.5 An e-mail has been received from David Meek of AG Meek, a shoe shop operating from 97/99 Albany Road, which expresses concern about the dramatic increase in non-retail units in the street – “it is getting to the point where the retail offer in Albany Road and Wellfield Road is becoming too small to attract people as a shopping destination in the way that it has in the past…. the proposed use would be another step in this direction and dead space during the day”.
290 7.6 A letter has been received from a resident of no. 35 Arabella Street, which expresses concern about the application for a number of reasons: additional noise and disturbance, increased crime, lack of need for an additional drinking premises and exacerbating existing problems in respect of vehicle movements relating to deliveries. The resident notes that the ground floor of the property is narrow and once a bar and equipment is installed, there will not be much space for customers and therefore the first floor will accommodate most of the customers - the application should be assessed as a drinking venue spread over 2no. floors.
7.7 The occupier of number 13 Inverness Place considers that there are already sufficient drinking establishments in the area and has concerns about noise and anti-social behaviour. An objection from an occupier of number 11 Inverness Place raises similar concerns.
7.8 Concerns about noise, traffic and litter are also raised by the occupier of no. 12 Arabella Street. The resident also notes that the character of Arabella Street is deteriorating due to the later opening of shops in Albany Road, the proliferation of fast food restaurants and the growth of rented accommodation.
7.9 The occupiers of number 51 Arabella Street and their “friends and family” have written in support of the application - Albany Road is in need of upgrading, many shops and restaurants already open late in the evening so the use of the premises as a pub is unlikely to make any significant difference in terms of noise and people. Planning committee should note that the existing “Albany” pub is also located in a residential area (105 Donald Street, which runs parallel to Arabella Street) and does not create any problems for local residents. The authors note that they live within about 50m of the building and are therefore likely to be most affected by the proposal and hope that Planning Committee approve the application. 2no. further e-mails of support have been received (1no. from a resident of Diana Street, the other with no address supplied), noting that the site has been vacant for some time and is in need of refurbishment.
8. ANALYSIS
8.1 The application raises the following issues.
Land Use Policy
8.2 The Strategic Planning (Policy) Officer notes that the application site is located within the Albany Road/Wellfield Road district centre, as defined by the Local Plan. The application is therefore subject to Policy 49 of the Local Plan, which seeks to maintain and enhance the viability and vitality of centres. The unit also falls within the ‘primary shopping frontage’ of the centre, as
291 defined by the Albany Road/Wellfield Road District Shopping Centre SPG. Paragraph 4.8 of the SPG provides criteria against which non-shopping proposals should be assessed, including a statement that changes of use which raise the number of non-shopping uses to over 20% within the primary shopping frontage are unlikely to be permitted.
8.3 The Officer notes that the shop was formerly used as a video rental shop but has been vacant for approximately four years, unable to attract an A1 user. Normally, the proposal would raise policy concerns if the proposed change of use would raise the number of non-shopping uses in the primary shopping frontage to over 20%. However, in this instance the unit which occupies a prominent corner plot is vacant, and not contributing to the shopping role of the centre. The unit is also in a state of disrepair and attracting a considerable amount of anti-social behaviour (fly posting and begging). It would therefore be difficult to sustain an argument that a change of use to A3 would harm the vitality, viability or predominant shopping role of the centre. The application therefore raises no strategic policy concerns.
8.4 The advice of the Strategic Planning (Policy) Officer is important in the determination of this application and the full text of paragraph 4.8 of the Council’s adopted “Albany Road/Wellfield Road District Shopping Centre” SPG should be noted:
“Within the primary shopping frontage, change of use of ground floor shop premises to non-shopping uses will only be permitted where it can be shown that the proposed use would not undermine the predominant shopping nature of the primary shopping frontage. In assessing the effect of a proposal, each of the following factors will be taken into account:
(i) the floorspace and frontage of the premises (ii) the number, distribution and proximity of other ground floor premises in or with planning permission for non-shopping uses (iii) the nature and character of the proposed use, including the level of activity associated with it (iv) whether the proposed use would create amenity problems.”
8.5 It should also be noted that Paragraph 3.1 of the Council’s adopted “Restaurants, Takeaways and Other Food and Drink Uses” SPG states that, subject to detailed considerations, food and drink uses are most appropriately located in the city-centre and Bay area, and district and local shopping centres.
8.6 In terms of Criterion (i) of paragraph 4.8 of the SPG, the gross retail floorspace of the existing premises is given as 240sqm, and the length of the frontage on the Albany Road elevation is approximately 5m – neither figure
292 suggests that the application site is particularly large. Reference has already been made in this report to the fact that all other units within the application site’s frontage are occupied and in shop (A1) use, representing a relatively strong shopping frontage.
8.7 Criterion (ii) of paragraph 4.8 of the adopted “Albany Road/Wellfield Road District Shopping Centre SPG” requires consideration to be given to the distribution and proximity of existing non-shopping uses and states that, in order to prevent concentrations of non-shopping uses occurring, no more than two adjacent or consecutive non-shopping uses will be permitted. In terms of this application, no such concentration would occur as the application site frontage does not currently accommodate any non-shop (non- A1) uses.
8.8 Based on figures supplied by the Strategic Planning (Policy) Officer, the proportion of shop:non-shop premises in the Primary Shopping Frontage of the Albany Road/Wellfield Road district centre is currently 78%:22%. If this application was granted planning permission and subsequently implemented, the proportion – based on the current figures – would change to 77% shop and 23% non-shop. Whilst the adopted “Albany Road/Wellfield Road District Shopping Centre SPG”, in relation to Criterion (ii) of paragraph 4.8, does state that “Changes of use which raise the number of non-shopping uses to over 20% within the primary shopping frontage are unlikely to be permitted”, this is only one of the factors to be taken into account when determining proposals for the loss of shopping (A1) floorspace within the primary shopping frontage. Given the small-scale of the premises, the narrow frontage, a use that would operate during shopping hours (with the applicant anticipating peak trade during day-time and late afternoon), the significant length of vacancy, the lack of concentration of non-shopping uses, the lack of investment interest from retailers despite marketing efforts, and the negative impact of a long-term vacant premises in the primary shopping frontage of the Albany Road/Wellfield Road centre, it would be difficult to sustain an objection to the proposal on the grounds that the proposal would harm the predominant shopping role of the centre or undermine the vitality and viability of the frontage.
8.9 In terms of Criterion (iii) of paragraph 4.8 of the “Albany Road/Wellfield Road District Shopping Centre” SPG it should be recognised that the site has been vacant for a significant period of time and currently contributes nothing to the vitality or viability of the centre. In fact, as the Strategic Planning (Policy) officer notes, the site is in disrepair and reuse of the building would be welcome. The proposed use would evidently generate greater footfall to the centre than a vacant premises.
8.10 Planning committee should be aware of 2no. recent appeal decisions in the Albany Road/Wellfield Road centre, both of which were allowed by the
293 Planning Inspectorate. The first appeal relates to the proposed change of use of number 43 Wellfield Road from retail (A1) to use as a coffee shop (application ref: 08/00598/C). The application was refused by Planning Committee on the basis that the proposed coffee shop was considered to undermine the shopping nature of Albany Road/Wellfield Road. However the Inspector noted that, in terms of the criteria approach detailed in paragraph 4.8 of the Council’s adopted “Albany Road/Wellfield Road District Shopping Centre” SPG, the proposal does not relate to a large A1 unit, it would not lead to a concentration of non-shopping uses within the frontage, and the proposed use would attract passing trade during shopping hours. The Inspector noted that the proposal, “…would breach the 20% threshold of non- shopping uses stipulated in the SPG but it would do so only marginally, and in a way which would not fundamentally undermine the objectives of the Council’s policies to safeguard the shopping role and character of the area.”
8.11 The second appeal of note relates to no. 17 Wellfield Road (application ref: 09/1208/C), which concerned the change of use of the ground and first floor of the premises to accommodate a café use. The application was refused by Planning Committee on the grounds that the proposed change of use would harm the shopping role and character of the centre but again, the scheme was allowed by the Inspectorate on appeal.
8.12 The Inspector’s decision letter in respect of no. 17 Wellfield Road emphasises that all the factors listed in paragraph 4.8 of the Council’s adopted “Albany Road/Wellfield Road District Shopping Centre” SPG need to be taken into account and not just the 20% threshold. In terms of other considerations, the Inspector notes that the appeal property has a relatively narrow frontage, there would not be a concentration of non-shop units and the creation of possible ‘dead’ frontages in the shopping street would be avoided. Also as the proposed use would operate during during shopping hours, the Inspector considered that the proposal would complement the over-arching shopping function of the district centre. He accepted that the Council’s chosen 20% threshold would be exceeded but given the scale of the frontage affected, the distribution of non-shopping uses and the suitability of the use on the site, considered that neither the specialist shopping nature of Wellfield Road, nor its contribution to the role of the district centre generally would be prejudiced.
8.13 Whilst both appeals relate to the proposed change of use of premises in the Albany Road/Wellfield Road centre from retail to cafe use, the appeal decisions are significant and serve to highlight the fact that any refusal of the application on the grounds of harm to the shopping role and character of the centre or frontage would be difficult to sustain.
8.14 However the policy framework also requires an assessment of whether the proposal would have any adverse impact on residential amenity.
294 Amenity
8.15 Detailed guidance on amenity considerations is provided in the Council’s adopted “Restaurants, Takeaways and Other Food and Drink Uses” SPG. The Council’s Pollution Officer has assessed the application against this guidance and considers that the application is acceptable subject to conditions, which would secure measures to mitigate against any potential noise or smell nuisance.
Crime and Disorder
8.16 Paragraph 4.10.12 of Planning Policy Wales (February 2011) notes that:
“Local authorities are under a legal obligation to consider the need to prevent and reduce crime and disorder in all decisions that they take. Crime prevention and the fear of crime are social considerations to which regard must be given by local planning authorities in the preparation of development plans, should be reflected in supplementary planning guidance, and may be material considerations in the determination of planning applications. The aim should be to produce safe environments through good design”.
8.17 Welsh Office Circular 16/94 “Planning Out Crime” is also relevant and, in paragraph 3 states, “Crime prevention is capable of being a material consideration when planning applications are considered”. The Circular advises that local planning authorities should consult Police Architectural Liaison Officers when determining planning applications.
8.18 In terms of this application, the Crime Prevention Design Officer has been consulted and advises that there is no objection to the proposal.
Access
8.19 The property currently benefits from level access from the main entrance on Albany Road. The supporting DAS states that ground floor DDA compliant toilets will be provided – a condition has been recommended in order to secure this facility.
Representations
8.20 It is considered that most of the issues raised by representors have been addressed in the above analysis. The other objections and concerns raised are considered in the following paragraph.
8.21 In terms of the need for an additional food and drink venue, it should be noted that the planning system is not designed to interfere with or inhibit competition and development can only be regulated for land use planning reasons. Whilst
295 it is recognised that the existing policy framework aims to maintain the shopping role and character of defined shopping centres, it does acknowledge that shopping centres are appropriate locations for food and drink uses providing detailed issues are addressed. Given the context of this site, as already explained, the proposed use of the premises as a bar is considered acceptable. The application describes the first floor of the premises as an ancillary meeting room – the supporting documentation notes that the applicant intends to operate the first floor as a meeting place and “visitor centre” where displays would explain the brewing process and where groups, such as CAMRA, could meet, these uses would operate in conjunction with the ground floor bar use with access via appointment, request or specific booking. A condition has been recommended in order to ensure the proposed use would be undertaken as described in the application. It is noted that some smokers may smoke on the public pavement but this situation already occurs outside existing premises – in both food and drink and retail businesses – and there is also a covered alcove in the main entrance to the unit, which any smokers are likely to use, and in any event planning has no control over members of the public smoking on the public footway. In terms of parking issues, the Transport Officer has no objection providing a condition is appended to any permission in order to prevent the sale of hot food to takeaway.
Conclusion
8.22 Based on the above analysis, it is recommended that permission be granted.
296 297 COMMITTEE DATE: 11/01/2012
APPLICATION No. 11/01946/DCI APPLICATION DATE: 17/11/2011
ED: CATHAYS
APP: TYPE: Full Planning Permission
APPLICANT: Sapphire Holding QAC SENC LOCATION: WORKING STREET ENTRANCE QUEENS ARCADE, CITY CENTRE PROPOSAL: EXTENSION AND EXTERNAL ALTERATIONS TO WORKING STREET FACADE OF QUEENS ARCADE ______
RECOMMENDATION 1: That, subject to persons having relevant interest in the application site entering into a binding planning obligation in agreement with the Council under SECTION 106 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 encompassing the matters referred to in paragraphs 8.5 of the Chief Strategic Planning and Environment Officer’s report, planning permission be GRANTED subject to the following conditions:
1. C01 Statutory Time Limit
2. The consent relates to the application as amended by the revised plans numbered 3763 AL(0)110RevH, 3763 AL(0)101RevM, 3763 AL(0)102RevS, 3763 AL(0)103RevQ, attached to and forming part of this planning application. Reason: The plans amend and form part of the application.
3. The external walls and roofs of the development hereby approved shall be constructed and finished in accordance with a schedule of materials and finishes which shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority prior to the commencement of development. The submitted details shall include samples of the proposed elevational materials. Reason: To ensure that the finished appearance of the development is in keeping with the existing buildings in the area.
4. No development shall take place until a scheme showing the architectural detailing of the building has been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority and the development shall not be brought into use until the approved scheme is implemented. The scheme shall include, but not be limited to, details of the main entrance doors to the arcade and projecting ‘box’. Reason: To ensure a satisfactory finished appearance to the development.
5. C2N Drainage details
298 6. Prior to the commencement of development, a scheme of construction management shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority and shall include details of construction traffic routes, hours of construction, access to the site, site hoardings and wheel washing facilities. The construction management shall accord strictly with the scheme as approved. Reason: In the interests of highway safety and to protect the amenities of the area.
7. The hoardings erected during the construction of the development hereby approved shall include anti-vandal measures and be decorated with public art. Reason: In the interests of the visual amenity of the area.
8. Notwithstanding the provisions of the Town and Country Planning General Development Order 1995 (or any Order amending, revoking or re-enacting that Order) the ground floor and first floor windows of the premises shall allow an open and unrestricted view of window displays or the trading areas within the premises and the windows shall not be painted, covered over, or otherwise obscured without the prior written consent of the Local Planning Authority. Reason: In the interests of visual amenity.
9. C8G No shutter in front of window
10. C8H Illumination of window displays
11. No development shall take place until details of facilities for the storage of refuse containers within the premises have been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. Those details shall be implemented prior to beneficial use and shall be retained thereafter. Reason: To secure an orderly form of development and to protect the amenities of the area.
12. No development shall take place until a directional signage scheme has been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. Those details shall be implemented prior to beneficial use and shall be retained thereafter, unless otherwise agreed in writing by the Local Planning Authority. Reason: To secure an orderly form of development and to protect the amenities of the area.
13. No development shall take place until full details of the new staircase, identified on drawing nos. AL(0)101RevM and AL(0)102RevS, have been submitted to and agreed by the Local Planning Authority in writing and, thereafter, implemented and retained in accordance with the approved details prior to beneficial use and occupation of the new retail floorspace. Reason: To ensure that the permeability, accessibility and legibility of the Queens Arcade is not unduly compromised.
299
RECOMMENDATION 2: That the developer be advised that, by law (Environmental Protection Act, 1990, section 47), all commercial premises have a duty of care to ensure that their waste is transferred to and disposed of by a registered waste carrier. Owners or developers of commercial developments/properties who require Cardiff County Council to collect and dispose of their waste can contact to commercial services department on 029 20717500.
1. DESCRIPTION OF PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT
1.1 This is a full planning application, as amended, for the extension of and external alterations to the Working Street frontage of the Queens Arcade shopping centre, including: • the creation of 749 sq m of additional retail floorspace, which together with internal works, would allow for the creation of a 17,000sq ft anchor unit on the upper floor (level 2) and 2 no. smaller retail units at ground floor (level 1), either side of the entrance • the infilling of the Working Street ‘horseshoe’ area and the removal of the two external curved staircase to level 2 • re-cladding of the existing frontage, in part.
1.2 Associated internal works include the removal of an escalator accessing the upper floor (level 2) near the Working Street entrance and – as a result of negotiations and amended plans - the creation of a new staircase beneath the light well at the junction of the Working Street and Queen Street malls, and the retention of the existing customer lift near the Working Street entrance.
1.3 The replacement frontage would be extended forward to reflect the established building line along Working Street and would be contemporary in appearance, with simple lines and a strong vertical emphasis. It would have a projecting glass ‘box’ located above the entrance, with a solid pitched roof, and a contrasting plinth. A neutral palette of high quality materials is proposed, including Bathstone and terracotta.
1.4 Amended plans have been submitted, which include the following changes: • the introduction of a staircase below the lightwell, as noted above • the retention of the existing customer lift close to the Working Street entrance, in place of the replacement lift originally proposed and which opened up within the proposed new anchor store on the upper floor • the introduction of a dedicated goods lift within the new anchor unit • external alterations, including the introduction of sliding entrance doors and the increase in height of the stone façade to enclose the plant rooms.
1.5 The DAS justifies the scheme on the following grounds: • Queens Arcade is struggling to attract and retain permanent clients, as a result of both the current economic climate and completion of St David’s 2
300 (‘SD2’) shopping centre. A number of tenants have relocated to SD2 and to the St David’s shopping centre, and six gone into administration. • Significant reductions in footfall have been experienced between the final full calendar year before the opening of SD2 and the first full calendar year of SD2 trading (2010) – 21.53%, equating to 2.5 million customers a year. • Vacancy levels have increased significantly. In 2009 prior to the opening of SD2, 2.5% of the total floor area was vacant, with temporary retailers occupying just 2% of the total floor area, compared to 17% of the floor area being vacant and a quarter of the floor area being occupied by temporary retailers by July 2011. • Alterations to New Look have had a further detrimental impact on the free flow of footfall through the lower ground floor level. • Consequently, there is an urgent need to address the current decline of the Queen Arcade shopping centre to ensure that the vitality and vibrancy of this historic part of the city centre’s retail core is not irreparably damaged. • The primary objective of the proposals is to provide an enhanced retailing offer for two national retailers. The national homewares retailer, Wilkinson, would like to be represented as an anchor tenant, but has a requirement for approx 20,000 sq ft of retail space (gross). The second retailer, Argos, is oversized and would like to reduce its trading representation. Their accommodation requires internal alterations – amalgamating a number of smaller units and removing escalators to provide a continuous floor plate across level 2, which are noted to be permitted development. • The DAS emphasises that the necessary floor plate could be provided without undertaking any external alterations, but that the owners are keen to seize the opportunity to refresh the dated Working Street façade before the tenants commit to long leases. • The proposal would focus footfall into the Arcade from the Working Street entrance at ground floor level, which would draw customers along the level 1 units which have suffered significantly since the opening of SD2. • Footfall counts demonstrate that the existing level 2 entrance on Working Street accounts for just 6% of all customers who pass through the Arcade, with the DAS noting that there is no evidence to suggest that the removal of the external staircase would impact significantly on the permeability of the arcade. • It is considered that the arrival of the new anchor tenant, together with the new frontage, could significantly address the current decline. • The proposal would create 80-90 new jobs within the Wilkinson store and safeguard significantly more if the decline in Queens Arcade can be stemmed.
1.6 The application is supported by a Planning, Design and Access Statement.
1.7 The application has been the subject of pre-application discussions, where concerns were initially raised over the loss of permeability and accessibility to and through the site; the loss of the landmark frontage onto Working Street; the loss of important views from and to the Working St frontage; loss of
301 activity and vibrancy onto the Working St scene, and the loss of natural light through the arcade.
2. DESCRIPTION OF SITE
2.1 The application site relates to the Working Street entrance of Queens Arcade. Queens Arcade is a covered shopping mall with frontages and pedestrian access onto both Queen Street and Working Street. Internally, Queens Arcade is linked to St David’s Shopping Centre to the south. The arcade has five levels; only levels 1 and 2 are accessible to customers, with the basement and levels 3 and 4 providing ancillary storage areas and stock rooms. There is a potentially confusing change in levels within the arcade, in that the street level entrance off Queen Street is at level 2, whilst the street level entrance off Working Street is at level 1. The effect of this is that someone entering the Arcade from Queen Street would need to go down the curved staircase at level 2 to exit onto Working Street.
2.2 The existing design of Queens Arcade incorporates staircases and escalators at both of its entrances, and at the centre of the arcade at the junction with the St David’s Centre. The Queen Street entrance of Queens Arcade was substantially remodelled in 2009, including the removal of the split level/stair entrance.
2.3 The western entrance of the Queens Arcade onto Working Street forms an integral part of the network of pedestrian arcades and linkages across the city centre and is of particular significance in providing a direct link to and from the Queen Street entrance of the centre. The Working Street entrance is split level and semi-circular in configuration, formed by two external curved staircases that link level 2 of the Arcade with Working Street, with a level access to the Arcade below. The area between the two staircases is utilised for outdoor seating by Café Rendezvous, one of the tenants of the Arcade, adding both vibrancy and vitality in the street scene.
2.4 The entrance forms a well recognised and legible gateway feature, adjacent to an area of green space within the historic core of the area. The upper level provides significant and unique views over the churchyard and several listed buildings, namely St John’s Church (Grade II), Cardiff Market, James Howells and the former Old Library Building.
2.5 The Working Street frontage lies within the city centre’s Principal Shopping Area of the adopted City of Cardiff Local Plan, within the Central Core Area of the approved City centre strategy 2007-2010. It lies immediately adjacent to the St Mary Street Conservation Area and is identified in the approved Conservation Area appraisal as a ‘landmark’ frontage.
3. SITE HISTORY
3.1 Relevant site history is as follows: 86/1994 – Erection of covered shopping centre - approved
302 87/1280 – Erect covered shopping centre with two trading levels with integral food court – scheme to link with existing St Davids Centre, 24 -32 Queen St, 5 – 15 Working St, 2-8 and 14-19 Queen St Arcade and Plymouth St – approved 8/1087.
91/1218 – Erection of covered shopping centre with two trading levels, the scheme to link with the existing St David’s centre. (Consolidation of various amendments to Planning permission ref. 87/1280 dated 8.10.87)’ – approved 25/09/91. It is noted that the permission does not include any restriction on the net sales area or prevent the amalgamation or subdivision of units within the centre. The only restriction is a condition limiting the use of all units to shop use (Class A1).
03/2584c – ‘Alterations to increase retail space and A3 use’ – approved 10/12/2004, subject to a s106 contribution towards public realm improvements and conditions requiring details of materials and finishes, architectural detailing, fume extraction, drainage, refuse storage facilities, a grease trap, siting of any plant and equipment, a scheme of construction management, conditions controlling noise from fixed plant, the provision of relocated toilet facilities, the proposed public art and the design of hoardings, and conditions restricting A3 uses and opening hours, requiring unrestricted views of and illuminated shop window displays, and preventing the use of shutters in front of windows.
4. POLICY FRAMEWORK
4.1 Relevant legislation and National Planning Guidance:
Planning Policy Wales (Edition 4 February 2011) Para 3.4.3 ‘When a new building is proposed, an existing building is being extended or altered, or a change of use is proposed, developers should consider the need to make it accessible for all those who might use the building. The appropriate design and layout of spaces in, between and around buildings, including parking provision and movement routes, is particularly important in ensuring good accessibility.’
4.10.11 ‘Local planning authorities and developers should consider the issue of accessibility for all, including the needs of people with sensory impairments, people with learning difficulties and people with mobility impairments, such as wheelchair users, elderly people and people with young children, at an early stage in the design process’.
Figure 4.2 ‘Objectives of Good Design’ include: ‘Ensuring ease of access for all’, ‘Promoting legible development’, ‘Promoting successful relationship between public and private space’, ‘Promoting quality, choice and variety’, ‘Promoting innovative design’, ‘Ensuring attractive, safe public spaces’, ‘Security through natural surveillance’.
TAN 12: Design
303 Para 2.6 ‘Design which is inappropriate in its context, or which fails to grasp opportunities to enhance the character, quality and function of an area, should not be accepted, as these have detrimental effects on existing communities.’
DDA and Equalities Impact Legislation
4.2 Relevant City of Cardiff Local Plan policies:
3: Development in Conservation Areas 11: Design and Aesthetic Quality 17: Parking and Servicing Facilities 18: Provision for Cyclists 19: Provision for Pedestrians 20: Provision for Special Needs Groups
4.3 Relevant Deposit Cardiff Unitary Development Plan (2003) policies:
2.20: Good Design 2.53: Conservation Areas 2.57: Access, Circulation and Parking Requirements 2.64: Air, Noise and Light Pollution 2.74: Provision for Waste Management Facilities in Development
4.4 Relevant Supplementary Planning Guidance and other guidance: ‘Waste Collection and Storage Facilities’ (adopted March 2007) ‘Access, Circulation and Parking Standards’ (adopted January 2010) ‘Shop Fronts & Signage Guide’ (October 2011) City Centre Design Guide 1994 City Centre Strategy (2007-2010) St Mary Street Conservation Area Appraisal (2006)
5. INTERNAL CONSULTEE RESPONSES
5.1 Pollution Control (Contaminated Land) has no comments to make.
5.2 No comments have been received from Pollution Control (Noise and Air) to date. Any comments received will be reported as a late representation.
5.3 Waste Management note that the proposal will lead to an increase in waste, that plans make no reference to the store and collection of waste and recycling, and that a commercial contract is required for the collection and disposal of all commercial waste.
5.4 Strategic Planning (Regeneration) advised that, whilst the proposal as originally submitted is acceptable in landuse policy terms, it failed to provide appropriate access arrangements from Working Street, contrary to paragraph 3.4.3 of PPW and policy 11 of the City of Cardiff Local Plan. They advise that the amended proposal is acceptable, on grounds that a new staircase is proposed in the lightwell at the centre of the arcade. Whilst it is situated away from Working Street, its prominent location at the junction of the two malls will
304 help to improve the legibility of the route between the two floors and improve pedestrian permeability through the arcade when compared to the original application.
5.5 No formal comments have been received from the Access Officer or the Cardiff and Vale Coalition of Disabled People at the time of writing this report. Any comments received will be reported as a late representation. The Access Officer provided detailed comments at the pre-application stage, including the following concerns: • The barrier resulting from the loss of the established lift near the Working St entrance, particularly where ‘way finding’ has been learnt over time • The barrier resulting from the loss of the escalators, noting that partially sighted people (cane users and those with limited sight) would possibly use escalators • The barrier resulting from the loss of the external stairs, noting that guide dog users generally use stairs and that the dogs would not use the escalators • Concern that the route resulting from the loss of the stairs/escalators would be counter-intuitive and would result in extra distances to travel and a ‘dead end’ at first floor on Working St • Barriers for those with cognitive disabilities, arising from changes to their environment, requiring re-training and engagement with way finding and use of materials • Problems with echoes/ acoustics resonance, particularly for the deaf community • The need to ensure effective fire evacuation, as the proposal aims to channel people through fewer exists/entrances and would create a ‘funnel’. Also concern about the loss of the escalators, further limiting escape opportunities. • Personal safety issues, particularly for the elderly, women and mobility impaired • Restricted access to the accessible toilets at lower ground floor near the Queen St entrance.
5.6 Transportation has no comments to make in terms of impact on the adjacent highway and related transportation matters.
5.7 Drainage Services recommend a condition requiring a drainage scheme.
5.8 Building Control has been consulted but no comments received to date. Any comments received will be reported as a late representation.
6. EXTERNAL CONSULTEE RESPONSES
6.1 South Wales Police have no objections, noting that the proposed frontage, if well it, would reduce opportunities for anti-social behaviour, and provide advice in terms of glazing.
305 6.2 No formal comments have been received from the Central Area Conservation Group. Comments were provided at the pre-application stage and the proposal noted to be acceptable subject to the following comments: ‘Opinion was divided in so much as visually the changes do not seem to impinge negatively on either St Johns Church or the Old Library, but the loss of the horseshoe public open space was to be regretted. Materials seem appropriate, but the open glass box could be longer. Reassurances are sought to ensure that the buildings either side of the refurbishment are suitably cleaned so there is no disjoint between old and new.’
6.3 The Glamorgan Gwent Archaeological Trust has no objection to the application.
6.4 The Design Commission for Wales was consulted and raised the following comments on the proposal, as originally submitted: • The proposed infilling of the ‘horseshoe’ and the reinstatement of the building lie along Working Street is welcomed • The removal of the existing direct upper level access between Queen Street and Working Street will be removed, reducing overall permeability and further thought should be given to how this could be maintained. • The new upper floor retail unit would be visible only from Working Street, yet would have to be accessed via the escalators at the Queen Street end of the arcade. Although the attempts to improve viability of the lower level retail units on Working Street are appreciated, the proposal and access to the first floor seems both convoluted and awkward. A staircase close to the Working St entrance, linking the lower and upper levels, would greatly improve this situation. It would enable a more direct access to the anchor store from Working St, while offering a more robust and future-proof layout. • The architectural articulation and scale of the façade should respond more sensitively to the urban grain and context. • The main entrance should be recessed slightly and doors should be of the appropriate size and quality for an arcade. The entrance should read as the entrance to an arcade and not to a single shop unit. • The transparency of the glazed façade at first floor should be ensured by planning conditions.
7. REPRESENTATIONS
7.1 21 neighbouring occupiers have been consulted and the application advertised by means of a press and site notice. 2 letters of objection have been received from the occupier of 30 Kensington Avenue and 1 of unknown address, who object to the application, as originally submitted, on the following grounds: i. Appalled at proposals to replace an interesting and attractive entrance with ‘another cheap and nasty design of lego like appearance with a boring glass fronted centrepiece, reminding one of an out of town retail park. This is a dreadful miserable mediocre development which will only downgrade the appearance of the area adjacent of St Johns church and
306 also degrade the feel of the city centre in general, as have so many developments which have appeared in the centre in recent years’. ii. The light and spacious feel to the city centre has become overbearing and claustrophobic, which will be made worse by the proposal to build high rise offices on Central Square and call it ‘an enterprise zone’. ‘Better for it to be named the White Elephant zone because that is what it will become.’ Cardiff deserves quality better designed buildings, not second rate developments. iii. The proposal would obliterate the large glazed are that lets light into the western part of the arcade. iv. Wilkinson should not be allowed such a prime position as they are the type of store who will not provide an attractive frontage with pleasing window displays, being more likely to cover any windows with stick on plastic signage. v. Concern over the removal of the external staircases and more restricted egress from the upper floor of Queens Arcade in the event of a fire or terrorist attack. vi. The Working Street frontage provides one of the most pleasant outlooks in the city centre, with views of St John’s Church and the Old Library. With its sunny aspect, the units facing Working Street on both floors should be prioritised for restaurants/cafes to provide a ‘living façade’. vii. 9 detailed modifications are suggests to Queens Arcade to enhance and attract footfall.
7.2 2 letters of objection have been received from the occupier of 30 Kensington Avenue and 1 of unknown address, who object to the amended application on the following grounds: i. General criticism of re-developments in the city centre, in relation to layout, style, quality, and materials, and which do not match up to other towns and cities, and the loss of the feeling of ‘openness’ due to the closeness and high density of development, which will be made worse with the proposals for Central Square. Criticism also of ‘trendy’ street art that nobody can relate to. ii. The amended design is ‘slightly better’, although the previous objection still stands. iii. Loss of the existing views and miss use of prime space with a street frontage. One of the best views in the city centre would be blanked off by retailers that would not make best use of such external views. Existing Queens Arcade cafes could have made use of the views and Wilkinsons would be better placed on the lower floor eastside within the arcade. Marks and Spencer and John Lewis have an internal café overlooking the street at floor one to make best use of prime space. iv. The frontage would be bland and lifeless, and could be improved by opening up the windows and including a balcony v. The existing limestone coloured façade is more in harmony with the conservation area than the new design. vi. Loss of the external café seating area and light entering the western mall. vii. Concern over the potential use of the new small units at street level, with concern at they could only be used as a newsagents which would not denote an upscale shopping arcade.
307
8. ANALYSIS
8.1 Four key issues arise from the proposal, which are inextricably linked:
(i) Principle of the increase in retail floorspace
8.2 Local Plan policy 47 notes that new and improved shopping facilities will be favoured within the Principal Shopping Area, whilst the written justification notes that ‘the city centre must continually improve its facilities and offer a choice and full range of shopping opportunities in order to retain its attraction and viability and fulfil its role as a major regional shopping centre’ (para 9.2.1). The additional floorspace and new units will contribute towards a key retailing aim of the City Centre Strategy and strategic objective for the Central Core Area. The retail (Class A1) development will, by the nature of its location, scale and form, maintain a compact shopping area and help to enhance the vitality and viability of the City Centre’s existing retail offer.
(ii) Impact of the loss of the semi-circular ‘landmark frontage’ and the replacement frontage on the street scene, sense of place, the character and appearance of the Conservation Area and the setting of the listed buildings.
8.3 Setting aside its contribution to the accessibility and permeability of the city centre, the loss of the landmark frontage and its replacement frontage would be acceptable, and would not harm street scene, its sense of place, the character and appearance of the Conservation Area or the setting of statutory listed buildings, subject to a planning obligation and recommended conditions, for reasons set out below.
8.4 Whilst recognising both its value as a landmark frontage and an important urban design feature, and its contribution to the legibility, sense of place and vitality of the street scene, the existing façade appears tired and dated architecturally, in contrast to the surrounding area and the Queen Street entrance of the Arcade.
8.5 The replacement frontage recognises the importance of those design qualities; it has been purposely designed to contribute positively to the legibility, sense of place and vibrancy of the street scene, with a design that is more in keeping with the architectural language of Cardiff’s historic arcades. The introduction of the projecting glazed ‘box’ with its gabled roof would create a new landmark feature, highlight the Arcade entrance within the street scene, and – depending on the careful control of its use and fit out – would provide views both into and from level 2 of the Arcade to Working Street and an active frontage onto the street scene, thus, enhancing vitality. A proposal for a projecting glass box containing an in-store food and drink use resulted from pre-application discussions and was clearly shown as a food and drink use on pre-application sketches of the street scene. Whilst the projecting glass box has been retained in the full planning application, the proposal for a café is not explicitly shown on the floor plans, but it is noted that it would be
308 an ancillary use to the main shop use in any event. Contrary to pre- application discussions, it is lately understood that the future occupier is not willing to accommodate an in-store café. This is to be regretted, given the evolution of the design and the loss of the vista into the churchyard area. Whilst noting this, a legal agreement is recommended to control the ‘glass box area’, and specifically to control the ‘fit out’ and the use of signage, film, images or changes to the external glazing within a specified area, and to prevent the use of shelving, storage or any other structures in the limited area that projects forward of the building line.
8.6 The proposed gabled roof continues the form of the existing Arcade roof and mirrors the strong gable forms seen on the previous redeveloped Queen Street entrance and those of significant buildings in the vicinity, notably Cardiff Market. The reinstatement of the Arcade entrance in line with the established building line along Working Street is also acceptable and is noted to be a traditional feature of Cardiff’s arcades. The sliding entrance doors, which would slide from view to reveal an unrestricted opening, would be more in keeping with Cardiff’s historic arcades and are a welcome amendment. The detailed design of the frontage, with its simple lines and strong vertical emphasis, has been significantly improved since the original scheme and is acceptable, subject to matters of architectural detailing. The proposed use of a neutral and high quality palette of materials is welcomed and in keeping with the traditional materials used in Cardiff’s arcades and the Queen Street entrance to the Arcade, and include bathstone, terracotta rainscreen, natural stone cladding and glazing. Conditions are recommended to ensure the architectural details (including the sliding doors) and materials are of a quality appropriate to this sensitive historic location. Conditions are also recommended to ensure that the new frontage not become a ‘dead’ or unsightly.
(iii) Impact on permeability and legibility to and through the Queens Arcade shopping centre, especially for pedestrian movement to and from Queen Street through to Working Street and the extent to which this satisfies the requirements outlined in TAN 12
8.7 The proposal– as originally submitted - to remove the two external staircases and internal escalator from the Working Street entrance would reduce the existing level of public access to/from the upper floor of the arcade and would directly impact on pedestrian accessibility, legibility and permeability to and from the surrounding area to an unacceptable degree, contrary to both national and local policies. Whilst the proposal, as originally submitted, included a new lift near the Working Street entrance to cater for ‘disabled customers and those with prams and pushchairs’, this arrangement was far from ideal, as it would serve the new unit only at level 2, with no information submitted to clarify access arrangements when the store was closed or vacant.
8.8 However, it is considered that the amended proposals for the introduction of a staircase beneath the internal light well on key desire lines at the junction of the Queen Street and Working Street mall, together with the retention of the
309 existing public lift close to the Working Street entrance would, on balance, overcome such concerns. Whilst those wishing to visit the new anchor unit on level 2 from Working St would still have a less direct route to travel, the distance would be reduced. Moreover, it is considered that the new staircase - located at the junction of the two malls, along the key desire lines and highly visible from both entrances - would improve the legibility of the Arcade overall. Additionally, the existing public lift close to the Working Street entrance would still be available for disabled customers, those with prams and pushchairs and others. Without such amendments the scheme would be unacceptable, and a Grampian condition is, therefore, recommended to ensure the creation of the new stairs beneath the lightwell and the retention of the existing lift near Working St.
(iv) Impact on disabled users and the extent to which the proposal raises issues of abnormal differential implications for various user groups
8.9 The public access arrangements, as amended, would comprise: • the removal of the upper level entrance that currently allows direct access from Working Street to level 2 via the external curved steps • a replacement ground floor entrance from Working Street, brought forward to respect the established building line • the removal of the existing escalator immediately inside the Working Street entrance • the introduction of a new staircase into the lightwell at the junction of the Queen Street and Working Street mall • the retention of the existing customer lift close to the Working St entrance The existing staircases, lift and escalators at both the Queen Street entrance and the link to St David’s shopping centre would be unaffected by the proposal.
8.10 Whilst general access between the floors from Working Street would be less direct as a result of the loss of the external staircase and escalator, the proposed new stairs case and retention of the existing lift would improve the accessibility, permeability and wider legibility of the arcade to an acceptable level, and will ensure that access is maintained for disabled customers and those with prams and pushchairs when the new anchor store is closed or vacant. However, it is noted that those blind, partially sighted persons and others who would normally use the existing escalators or staircase would have to adapt to the new environment. A condition requiring a directional signage scheme to be submitted is recommended to promote the new access arrangements for all. The proposed replacement frontage and hoped for increase in pedestrian flows on the lower Working St mall would help increase natural surveillance and reduce opportunities for anti-social behaviour, helping to make more vulnerable members of society feel safer. Taking the above into consideration and in terms of Equalities Impact Assessment, it is considered that there would be minimum abnormal differential impact on relevant equality strands. Moreover, it is considered that such differential impact does not warrant refusal of the application, in this instance, taking into consideration all material considerations noted above. Any comments from
310 the Access Officer and the Cardiff and Vale Coalition of Disabled People will be reported at Planning Committee.
(v) impact on highway safety
8.11 There will not be any adverse impact on highway safety or transportation. The impact on pedestrian accessibility is considered above.
(vi) natural light through the arcade.
8.12 Whilst the proposal will result in the loss of some natural light through the arcade, the impact on energy efficiency or the user environment would not be so unacceptable as to warrant refusal of the application in this instance.
8.13 In response to the representations received in relation to the plans, as originally submitted, I would comment as follows: i. The design is acceptable, for reasons set out in the analysis above. ii. The design is acceptable, for reasons set out in the analysis above. iii. Natural light levels would be reduced in the lower Working St mall, but the impact would not be so unacceptable as to warrant refusal of the application. iv. Conditions and a s106 are required to ensure visibility into and from the projecting box and other windows on the Working St frontage. v. The impact on accessibility is considered to be acceptable, as noted above. Egress from the upper floor of Queens Arcade in the event of a fire is covered by Building Regulations. vi. The outlook from the Working Street frontage would be maintained by the projecting glass box –albeit from within the new anchor unit - and secured by recommended conditions and s106. The glazed façade and projecting glass box will help secure an active frontage. vii. Whilst the suggested modifications are noted, the application must be determined on its own individual merits.
8.14 I would comment as follows on the representations received in relation to the amended plans: i. The application must be determined on its own individual merits. ii. Noted. The design is acceptable, for reasons set out in the analysis above. iii. The views from the ‘box’ will be maintained by s106 and condition. iv. The design is acceptable, for reasons set out in the analysis above. v. The materials are acceptable, as noted in the analysis above. vi. This issue is addressed above. vii. A condition to control the type of A1 use would not be reasonable.
Conclusion 8.15 Having regard to the adopted planning policy, the material matters raised, the representations received, the amended details and the analysis above, it is recommended that planning permission be granted, subject to the completion of a legal agreement and recommended conditions.
311 312 313 314 315