CITY and COUNTY of SWANSEA 2.00P.M. Please Note Venue For

CITY AND COUNTY OF SWANSEA

NOTICE OF MEETING

You are invited to attend a Meeting of the

AREA 1 DEVELOPMENT CONTROL COMMITTEE

At: Council Chamber, Civic Centre, SWANSEA

On: Tuesday 16th February 2010

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

Please Note Venue for meeting AGENDA

1. Apologies for Absence.

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

3. Minutes of the meeting of the Area 1 Development Control Committee held on 26th January 2010 and Site Visits held on 9th February 2010.

FOR DECISION

4. Alleged Public Right of Way from Goppa Road to Graig Merthyr Colliery, Communities of Pontarddulais and Mawr.

5. Alleged Public Right of Way between Cefn Hengoed Road and Cefn Road, Bonymaen.

6. Alleged Public Footpath, Mynydd Terrace to Plough Road, Community of Landore.

7. Town and Country Planning - Planning Applications. (a) Items for deferral/withdrawal. (b) Requests for Site Visits. (c) Determination of Planning Applications.

David M Daycock Head of Legal & Democratic Services 10th February 2010 Contact: Democratic Services 01792 636291

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

Item No. 2

Disclosures of Personal Interest from Members

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

CITY AND COUNTY OF SWANSEA

MINUTES OF THE AREA 1 DEVELOPMENT CONTROL COMMITTEE

HELD ON TUESDAY 26TH JANUARY 2010 AT THE CIVIC CENTRE, SWANSEA AT 2.00 P.M.

PRESENT: Councillor A R A Clement (Chairman) presided

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

V N Abbott D T Howells H M Morris J E Burtonshaw D H James B G Owen A R A Clement M H Jones D Phillips C R Doyle R D Lewis G Phillips J Evans A Lloyd R L Smith R Francis-Davies P M Matthews R C Stewart M E Gibbs J T Miles L G Thomas C A Holley J Newbury

Non-voting Members:

Councillor(s): Councillor(s):

R J Lloyd P B Smith

81. APOLOGIES

Apologies for absence were received from Councillors P M Black, W J F Davies, J B Hague, M R Jones, E T Kirchner, I M Richard, P A Robinson, D G Sullivan, C Thomas and J M Thomas.

82. DECLARATIONS OF INTEREST

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

83. MINUTES

RESOLVED that the Minutes of the Area 1 Development Control Committees held on 1st December and the minutes of the Site Visits be agreed as a correct record. NOTED that the meeting arranged for the 5th January 2010 had been cancelled due to adverse weather conditions. Three members had attended for that meeting and were informed that the meeting could not go ahead.

Minutes of the Area 1 Development Control Committee (26.01.10) Cont’d

84. ALLEGED PUBLIC BYWAY OPEN TO ALL TRAFFIC OFF HARRY STREET, COMMUNITY OF MORRISTON

The Head of Legal and Democratic Services outlined the request to consider whether the claimed byway open to all traffic should be recorded on the Definitive Map.

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

RESOLVED that:

(a) Cabinet be recommended to reject the application on the grounds it does not comply with Schedule 14 to the Wildlife and Countryside Act 1981;

(b) Cabinet be recommended that the evidence submitted would not justify making a Modification Order under the provisions of Section 57(3)(c)(i) to the Wildlife and Countryside Act 1981.

85. ITEMS FOR DEFERRAL

None.

86. ITEMS DEFERRED FOR SITE VISITS

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

(Item 3) Planning Application No. 2009/1636

Installation of shop front at 24-27 St. Helen’s Road, Swansea.

(NOTE:- The reason given for the site visit was to consider parking issues).

(Item 4) Planning Application No. 2009/1642

One internally illuminated fascia sign and two internally illuminated projecting signs at 24-27 St. Helen’s Road, Swansea.

(NOTE:- The reason given for the site visit was to consider parking issues).

Minutes of the Area 1 Development Control Committee (26.01.10) Cont’d

(Item 6) Planning Application No. 2009/1300

Supported residential housing accommodation with associated parking (Class C3) at land at Portmead Avenue, Blaenymaes, Swansea.

(NOTE:- The reason given for the site visit was to consider the impact upon the footpath running through the site.

(Item 7) Planning Application No. 2009/1474

One pair of semi-detached dwellings at land between 60 Martin Street and Old Police Station, Morriston, Swansea.

(NOTE:- The reason given for the site visit was to assess the context of the area,(the report did not show the up to date position).

(Item 8) Planning Application No. 2009/1488

Detached dwelling and garage (renewal of planning permission 2007/1182 granted on 8th August 2007) at land between 47 and 53 Pen-y-Graig Road, Mount Pleasant, Swansea.

(NOTE:- The reason for site visit was to consider the impact upon highway safety).

(Item 9) Application No. 2009/1614

Variation of condition 4 of planning permission 2005/2179 granted 31st January 2006 to allow for the occupation of the dwellings without the footway on Pen-y-Graig Road at land at junction of Pen-y-Graig Road and Fairfield Terrace, Swansea.

(NOTE:- The reason for the site visit was to consider the impact upon highway safety).

(Item 10) Application No. 2009/1728

Retention of first floor rear balcony at 23 Highbury Close, Cwmbwrla, Swansea.

(NOTE:- The reason for the site visit was to consider the impact of the balcony. Minutes of the Area 1 Development Control Committee (26.01.10) Cont’d

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

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

RESOLVED that:

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

# (Item 1) Application No. 2009/0946

Detached dwelling house at 57 Smiths Road, Birchgrove, Swansea.

(NOTE:- Approved contrary to Officer recommendation for the following reason and subject to the following conditions).

Reason

It is not considered that the proposal would have an unacceptable impact upon the residential amenities of neighbours nor would it have an unacceptable impact on highway safety.

Conditions

01. The development shall be commenced not later than the expiration of five years from the date of this planning permission and shall be completed in accordance with the said application plans and conditions prior to any part thereof being brought into beneficial use, unless otherwise agreed in writing by the Local Planning Authority.

Reason

To comply with the provisions of Section 91 of the Town and Country Planning Act, 1990 and to ensure that the development is completed in accordance with the plans approved by the City and County of Swansea, and so avoid any detriment to amenity or public safety by works remaining uncompleted.

Minutes of the Area 1 Development Control Committee (26.01.10) Cont’d

Condition

02. Notwithstanding the provisions of the Town and County Planning (General Permitted Development) Order 1995, (or any Order revoking or amending that Order), Part 1 Class A, B and C, of Schedule 2 shall not apply.

Reason

The development hereby approved is such that the Council wish to retain control over any future development being permitted in order to ensure that a satisfactory form of development is achieved at all times.

Condition

03. Before the development hereby approved is occupied the means of enclosing the boundaries of the site shall be completed in accordance with details to be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority.

Reason

To ensure that the site is satisfactorily landscaped having regard to its location and the nature of the proposed development, and to accord with Section 197 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990.

Condition

04. Samples of all external finishes shall be submitted and approved by the Local Planning Authority in writing before the development is commenced. The scheme shall be implemented in accordance with the approved details.

Reason

In the interests of visual amenity.

Minutes of the Area 1 Development Control Committee (26.01.10) Cont’d

Condition

05. No part of the development hereby approved shall be occupied until the car parking and garage space(s) have been laid out in accordance with the approved plans. Thereafter the car parking and garage space(s) shall be maintained in accordance with the approved plans.

Reason

In the interests of highway safety.

The report was updated as follows:

Comments from the applicant regarding the content of the Officers’ report were reported.

(Item 2) Application No. 2009/1475

Retention and completion of three detached bungalows with detached garages (amendment to planning permission 2007/1647 granted 18th January 2008) at land adjacent to Caereithin Farm, Caereithin, Swansea.

# (Item 5) Application No. 2009/1241

Demolition of existing church hall and metal clad shed, construction of two storey building comprising six self contained flats for the over 55’s with associated landscaping and car parking area at land at rear of Church of St. Michael and All Angels, Bohun Street, Manselton, Swansea.

Additional Conditions/Informatives

Condition

09. Each unit of the development hereby permitted shall be occupied only by:

(i) persons over 55 years of age;

(ii) persons living as part of a single household with such a person or persons;

Minutes of the Area 1 Development Control Committee (26.01.10) Cont’d

(iii) persons who are living as part of a single household with such a person or persons who have since died.

Reason

In the interests of highway safety.

Condition

10. The proposed bin enclosure shall be completed in accordance with the approved plans and shall thereafter be maintained as such unless otherwise agreed in writing by the Local Planning Authority.

Reason

In the interests of visual and residential amenity.

Informative

15. It should be advised that no occupier of the development hereby approved shall be entitled to a parking permit within any controlled parking zone which may be in force in the area at any time.

(Item 11) Application No. 2009/1889

Retention of two internally illuminated advertisement panels integrated into bus shelter at land outside 190 Neath Road, Landore, Swansea.

88. EXCLUSION OF THE PUBLIC

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

The Public Interest Test, the Proper Officer (the Monitoring Officer) has determined in preparing this report that paragraphs 17 and 18 should apply.

His view on the Public Interest Test is in relation to paragraphs 17 and 18 that the Authority’s statutory powers could be rendered ineffective

Minutes of the Area 1 Development Control Committee (26.01.10) Cont’d

or less effective where there is to be advance knowledge of its intention/the exercise of the Council’s statutory power could prejudice by public discussion or speculation on the matter to the detriment of the Authority and the inhabitation of its area. On the basis that he felt that the public interest in maintaining the exemption outweighed the public interest in disclosing the information. Members were asked to consider these factors when determining the Public Interest Test, which they must decide when considering excluding the public from this part of the meeting.

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

The Committee having considered paragraphs 17 and 18 and the public interests are applied by the Proper Officer (Monitoring Officer) resolved that the public interest in maintaining the exemption outweighs the public interest in disclosing the information and RESOLVED to exclude the public.

(CLOSED SESSION)

89. ERECTION OF A DWELLING HOUSE

The Head of Planning Services reported and outlined the details and history relating to the planning approval given and the subsequent erection of a dwelling house in Treboeth which has not been constructed in accordance with the approved plans.

RESOLVED that enforcement action be authorised to secure the demolition of the property and if necessary, legal action be instigated to secure compliance with the enforcement notice.

90. UNAUTHORISED CHANGE OF USE FROM OFFICES TO FLATS

The Head of Planning Services reported and outlined the details and background relating to the unauthorised change of use from offices to flats including raising the roof to provide first floor accommodation, a two storey side extension with provision of entrance doors, fenestration alterations and car parking at a property in Morriston.

The background history relating to the planning applications and approvals at the premises were outlined.

Minutes of the Area 1 Development Control Committee (26.01.10) Cont’d

RESOLVED that Enforcement Action be authorised to secure the cessation of the residential use of the premises and the removal of the roof extension, and if necessary legal action be instigated to secure compliance with the Enforcement Notice.

91. ENFORCEMENT PROGRESS REPORT

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

RESOLVED that:-

(1) the report be noted;

(2) a further report be brought back to Committee offering the options for highlighting/publicising the work of the Enforcement Team to the general public.

The meeting ended at 3.20 p.m.

CHAIRMAN

S: Area 1 Development Control Committee - 26 January 2010 (GB/HCR) 26th January 2010

CITY AND COUNTY OF SWANSEA

MINUTES OF THE AREA 1 DEVELOPMENT CONTROL COMMITTEE SITE VISITS

HELD AT THE CIVIC CENTRE, SWANSEA ON TUESDAY 9TH FEBRUARY 2010 AT 2.00 PM

PRESENT: Councillor A R A Clement (Chairman) presided

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

J E Burtonshaw (g only) D H James (a only) D G Sullivan (a, b only) J Evans R D Lewis (omitted e) J M Thomas (a, b, c, d only) J B Hague (a, b, c, d A Lloyd (a, b, c, d only) only) M J Hedges (g only) R J Lloyd (g only)

1. APOLOGIES

Apologies for absence were received from Councillors V N Abbott, P M Black, R Francis-Davis, C A Holley, D T Howells, D H James, E T Kirchner, P N May, H M Morris, J Newbury, H M Morris, B G Owen, D Phillips, S J Rice, I M Richard, D A Robinson, P B Smith, R L Smith and L G Thomas.

2. TOWN AND COUNTRY PLANNING SITE VISIT

Following deferment for a site visit at the meeting of the Area 1 Development Control Committee held on 26th January 2010, Members visited the undermentioned sites prior to their determination at the Committee scheduled for Tuesday 16th February 2010.

a) Planning Application No. 2009/1636 Installation of shop front at 24-27 St Helens Road, Swansea.

b) Planning Application No. 2009/1642 One internally illuminated fascia sign and two internally illuminated projecting signs at 24-27 St Helens Road, Swansea.

c) Planning Application No. 2009/1488 Detached dwelling and garage (renewal of planning permission 2007/1182 granted on 8th August 2007) at Land between 47 & 53, Penygraig Road, Mount Pleasant, Swansea.

d) Planning Application No. 2009/1614 Variation of condition 4 of planning permission 2005/2179 granted 31st January 2006 to allow for the occupation of the dwellings without the footway on Pen-Y- Graig Road at Land at junction of Pen-Y-Graig Road and Fairfield Terrace, Swansea. e) Planning Application No. 2009/1728 Retention of first floor rear balcony at 23 Highbury Close, Cwmbwrla, Swansea.

f) Planning Application No. 2009/1300 Supported residential housing accommodation with associated parking (Class C3) at Land at Portmead Avenue, Blaenymaes, Swansea. g) Planning Application No. 2009/1474 One pair of semi-detached dwellings at Land between 60 Martin Street and Old Police Station, Morriston, Swansea.

The meeting ended at 4.05pm.

CHAIRMAN

Item No.4

Report of the Head of Legal and Democratic Services

Area 1 Development Control Committee 16th February 2010

ALLEGED PUBLIC RIGHT OF WAY FROM GOPPA ROAD TO GRAIG MERTHYR COLLIERY

IN THE COMMUNITIES OF PONTARDDULAIS AND MAWR

Summary

Purpose: To consider whether a public right of way exists via the route shown on the plan attached to the report.

Policy Framework: Countryside Access Plan No. 4

Reason for Decision: The evidence of use submitted is not considered sufficient to warrant the making of a modification order.

Consultations: The Byways and Bridleways Trust, The Ramblers Association, The British Horse Society, The Commons Openspaces and Footpaths Preservation Society, The Countryside Council for Wales, The Green Openspaces and Heritage Alliance, Mr G Bligh (former County Access and Bridleways Officer), Mrs L Lock (Local representative of the Ramblers Association), Mrs, Helen Sawyer (Current County Access and Bridleways Officer), Councillor Dai Howells, Councillor John Miles, Councillor Ioan Richard, Pontarddulais Community Council, Mawr Community Council, Knight Frank on behalf of The Somerset Trust, West Glamorgan Commoners Association.

Recommendation(s): That the Committee makes a recommendation to Cabinet to refuse the application to add the route from Goppa Road to Graig Merthyr Colliery to the Definitive Map and Statement as a public Bridleway.

Introduction

1.1 Evidence forms were initially submitted in August 2003 in support of a claim which alleges a public bridleway exists via the route shown on the attached plan A-F. The route is described in more detail in Appendix IV.

1.2 The track which forms the route concerned was formerly a mineral railway line serving the former Graig Merthyr Colliery, which was situated near point F.

1.3 Sixteen evidence forms were submitted in support of the application alleging an average of 14.6 years use. However due to five claimants not responding to letters requiring confirmation of support, and one further claimant moving away from the area, there are now ten claimants in support, who claim an average use of 15.3 years. Nine of these ten claimants have been interviewed.

1.4 Details on the processes involved in determining such claims can be found in Appendix I and this Council’s obligation to keep the definitive map and statement under continuous review is set out in Appendix III.

Landowners

2.1 Between points B1 and F, the path passes over common land and between B and F the land is owned by the Somerset Trust.

2.2 Site notices were erected on the 24th October 2008 in order to try to ascertain land ownership of the section A-B but no persons have come forward, so the ownership of the section is unknown.

Informal consultations

3.1 All the usual organisations and consultees have been contacted including the Local Members and the Community Councils. Councillor Howells has offered his support for the claim and Councillor Miles has been interviewed and has provided information of his knowledge of the claimed route.

3.2 Objections were received from the Pontarddulais Town Council in June 2008 and from Knight Frank acting as agents for the Somerset Trust in April 2009.

3.3 At a meeting with the Chairman of the West Glamorgan Commoners Association in February 2009, it was also confirmed that the Commoners object to the claim.

3.4 Details of the three objections received can be found in Appendix VI.

Evidence

4.1 In order to decide whether a public right of way exists, it is necessary to identify a minimum period of twenty years’ use which will satisfy the provisions of Section 31 of the Highways Act 1980 (Appendix II). This period is calculated by counting retrospectively from the first occasion the public’s alleged right to use the way was brought into question. This usually occurs when the path is blocked or that use is challenged by someone.

4.2 Full details of the evidence submitted by the claimants and the information received from the Local Members is set out in Appendix V. However, it is not clear from the information provided when each of these obstructions were erected and there has been no information available from those who may have been responsible for the installation of the gates. Therefore, it has not been possible to determine a date for the calling into question of the public’s right to use the path as a public bridleway.

4.3 The Natural Environment and Rural Communities Act 2006 established that in the absence of a calling into question, the date of the application can be considered as a date when the public’s right to use the path was brought into question and can be used to determine the relevant twenty year period for consideration. However, no formal application was ever submitted for this claim.

4.4 The other means by which a path may be presumed to have been dedicated is under common law (as explained in Appendix I). However, in this case there is no evidence that the landowner has encouraged or facilitated public use and it has not been possible to identify the landowner between points A and B. Therefore there can be no inference of common law dedication.

4.5 The claimed bridleway passes over common land which is subject to an Order Limitations of 1974 which prohibits horse riding without lawful authority. This could itself be considered as a calling into question and would make the relevant period 1954 to 1974. The claimants cannot show sufficient uninterrupted use over this period to warrant the making of a Modification Order.

4.6 In addition, The Commons Act 1908 states that no person shall cause or suffer any entire horse or pony if over 9 months old to be on the Common unless and until it has been inspected and approved in such manner as the Committee direct. The regulations under this Act were brought into force by the Commoners in November 1992 which is further evidence that horse riding is not permitted on the Common and therefore, the Commoners and the owners did not concede equestrian rights existed.

4.7 However, the case of Bakewell Management Ltd – v – Brandwood and Others [2004] (See Appendix VII) established that a prescriptive right can be obtained by long term use even though use throughout the period was illegal in the sense of it being a civil wrong. Therefore, neither prohibition described above will necessarily have prevented dedication taking place although they do reflect the view of those in ownership of the land that they wished to prevent equestrian access.

4.8 Evidence of use of the route on foot has also been received and is currently being investigated. A further report will be submitted to Committee in the near future to determine whether the route should be registered as a public footpath.

Points of Termination

5.1 For a right of way to have been established along a route, the claimed path would normally provide a link between two adopted highways. The path begins at Goppa Road which is an adopted road. At point F, the claimed route meets Bryn Bach Road which is not an adopted road and does not appear to have highway status.

5.2 Although the claimed route is shown as ending at Bryn Bach Road, five of those interviewed suggested that after reaching Bryn Bach Road they travel northwards and cross bridleway 28 at point X. One claimant has specifically stated that at this point she continues along the bridleway. However, it is questionable whether five claimants is a sufficient number to warrant making a modification order.

Conclusions

6.1 It is difficult to establish any relevant period due to the contradictory evidence received.

6.2 There is insufficient information from the landowner, the commoners, and claimants as to when the gates, barrier and cattle grid were installed.

6.3 Of the remaining claimants, only five have indicated that they use the claimed path as a link between two highways. It is questionable whether this is sufficient a number to warrant making a modification order.

6.4 An Order of Limitations was made in 1974 which prohibited horse riding on Common Land and the later 1992 Regulations made under the Commons Act 1908 reflect the view of those in ownership of the land that they wished to prevent equestrian access.

Financial Implications

7.1 There are no financial implications arising from this report.

Recommendation

8.1 That this Committee makes a recommendation to Cabinet to refuse the application to add the route from Goppa road to Graig Merthyr Colliery to the Definitive Map and Statement as a public Bridleway.

Background Papers

1. Documents contained within file ROW-79

Contact Officer: Kieran O’Carroll 01792 637233 File reference: ROW-79/KAO

APPENDIX I LEGAL PRINCIPLES

Under the provisions of the Wildlife and Countryside Act 1981 Section 53(2), this Council is obliged to keep the Council’s record of public rights of way, known as the Definitive Map and Statement under continuous review. Claims for additions to the Map and Statement are called “Schedule 14 applications” as they are made under this provision to the 1981 Act. They often are based on the public being able to demonstrate their long-term use of the path whether by showing:

(a) the minimum period of twenty years, as is required by Section 31 of the Highways Act;

(b) a greater or lesser period than twenty years but under common law;

The Council is also obliged to make amendments to the Map and Statement where it discovers other evidence that shows a public path exists.

The manner by which the Definitive Map and Statement can be changed is by making a Modification Order, to modify the Map and Statement. That Order may be subject to objections and representations and can only be confirmed by this Council if it is unopposed. If it is opposed the Order has to be referred to the National Assembly for Wales for determination.

In terms of applications to add routes, under the provisions of Section 31 to the Highways Act 1980 (Appendix II) a public right of way will be deemed to have been dedicated to the public if a minimum period of twenty years uninterrupted use can be shown to have been enjoyed by the public. The provisions of Section 53(b) to the Wildlife and Countryside Act 1981 therefore apply (Appendix III).

This twenty year period is calculated by counting retrospectively from the first occasion the public’s alleged right to use the way was brought into question. This usually happens when the path is blocked by something like a locked gate or fence. When the twenty year period has been identified it is usually termed the “relevant period”. If there is no physical barring of the way then the relevant period is counted retrospectively from the date a Schedule 14 application is made.

Another means by which a path may be presumed to have been dedicated is under common law. In these circumstances the landowner would have to show that he or she had not just acquiesced to public use but in some way facilitated or encouraged that use. The owner of all the land containing the claimed public path would therefore have to be identified but the period of use need not necessarily be twenty years and could be for a lesser period.

In addition, the Council may discover other evidence which suggests a public path exists. Under the provision in Section 53(3)(c)(i) to the Wildlife and Countryside Act 1981, a Council is obliged to make a Modification even if it is only reasonable to allege such a way exists (Appendix III). Such evidence could include user evidence and/or documentary evidence.

APPENDIX II

HIGHWAYS ACT, 1980

Section 31. Dedication of way as a highway presumed after public use for 20 years.

Where a public way over land, other than a way of such a character that use of it by the public could not give rise at common law to any presumption of dedication, has actually been enjoyed by the public as of right and without interruption of a full period of 20 years, the way is deemed to have been dedicated as a highway unless there is sufficient evidence that there was no intention during this period to dedicate it.

For Section 31(1) Highways Act, 1981 to operate and give rise to a presumption of dedication the following criteria must be satisfied:

- the physical nature of the path must be such as is capable of being a public right of way - the use must be ‘brought into question’, i.e. challenged or disputed in some way - use must have taken place without interruption over the period of twenty years before the date on which the right is brought into question - use must be as of right i.e. without force, without stealth or without permission and in the belief that the route was public - there must be insufficient evidence that the landowner did not intend to dedicate a right of type being claimed - use must be by the public at large

APPENDIX III

WILDLIFE AND COUNTRYSIDE ACT, 1981

Section 53 Duty to keep the Definitive Map and Statement under continuous review.

(2) As regards every definitive map and statement, the surveying authority shall keep the map and statement under continuous review and as soon as possible after the occurrence of any of [events specified in sub section (3)] by order make such modifications to the map and statement as appear to them to be requisite in consequence of the occurrence of that event.

(3) The events referred to in sub section (2) are as follows:-

(b) the expiration, in relation to anyway in the area to which the map relates of any period such that the enjoyment by the public is sufficient to raise a presumption of dedication (see S.31 Highways Act 1980 (Appendix 1)).

(c) the discovery by the Authority of evidence which (when considered with all other relevant evidence available to them) shows:

(i) that a right of way which is not shown on the map and statement subsists or is reasonably alleged to submit over land in the area to which the map relates, being a right of way to which the part applies.

APPENDIX IV THE CLAIMED ROUTE

The claimed route begins at point A on Goppa Road as a stone based track approximately 3 metres wide and continues for 145 metres in a general easterly direction until it reaches a cattle grid at point B. The track continues unmodified in a general east south easterly direction to point C before heading in a north easterly direction to reach a padlocked gate at point D adjacent to Cwmdulais Cottages. The track then continues in a general north easterly direction for approximately 1400 metres as a stone/gravel track being on average 4 metres in width before crossing the definitive line of bridleway 28 at point E. It then continues through a vehicular barrier to reach point F where the claimed route joins Bryn Bach Road.

APPENDIX V CONSIDERATION OF USER EVIDENCE

Three gates/barriers have been reported along the route, which prevent access for horse-riders although much contradictory evidence has been received as to when each of the obstructions was erected.

th The railway line closed on the 10 October 1978 but it was not until the early 1980s that the track was removed. It is believed that the cattle grid at point B on the plan was constructed upon the removal of the railway track. However, this does not appear to have called the route into question as the vast majority of the claimants have stated that it was always possible to pass the cattle grid via a gate alongside and later the cattle grid became filled and so horses could be taken across it.

The first obstruction occurs at point B, where the old cattle grid referred to above was renewed and a kissing gate erected alongside for pedestrian access. Horses cannot pass this point. A further padlocked vehicular barrier and boulders have been erected at point D although pedestrians can pass between the boulders. Another barrier is also present at point E although the Countryside Section says that this is rarely padlocked.

Nine claimants have been interviewed along with Councillor Miles and the previous and current owners of Cwmdulais Cottages. Much contradictory evidence was given for when the gates were erected. However, one claimant stated her friend’s horse died exactly one week after the new cattle grid was installed at point B which she said was the last week in August 2005. Her friend’s account confirms this.

One claimant has stated that she has used the track for horse riding since 1975 although the railway line was operational until 1978 when it was a mineral line servicing the Graig Merthyr Colliery. It is difficult to accept a railway line could in any way be regarded as a bridleway.

Councillor Howells offered his support for the claim and stated the path has been used for over 50 years for walking, although it was not used for this entire period by horses as the railway line had been operational for part of that period.

Councillor Miles was interviewed in July 2008 and stated he believes there is a public right of way alongside the old railway line and that the path has been in use for 70 years. He stated that even when the railway line was in operation, people could walk out of the way of slow moving, oncoming locomotives which only ran twice per day and once during the night. He does not see the operation of the railway line as an impediment to walkers but was unsure whether horses would be able to use the track in the same way. However, he could not offer any personal evidence of horse riding along the route.

Councillor Miles also stated that in recent years, the farmers/commoners have installed a cattle grid at point B to prevent sheep wandering off the Common, although this has also served to keep motorbikes and quad bikes away from the path. Councillor Miles is not in favour of opening the way as a bridleway as it would in his view undermine the work done to protect the route for walkers.

APPENDIX VI OBJECTIONS

One objection was received from Knight Frank on the 8th April 2009 who act as agents for the Somerset Trust stating that there has never been any intention by the Trust that the route should become a public right of way at any time.

A further objection was received in February 2009 from the West Glamorgan Commoners Association who confirmed they had erected the gate at point E to prevent animals straying from the Common, although could not say when this occurred. They do not know who erected the barriers at points B and D although they said one has been locked for a period of time. Therefore, they dispute the fact that the alleged right of way could have been used continuously for a period of 20 years.

An objection was also received from the Pontarddulais Town Council in June 2008. The objection states that over the last few years there have been problems with unauthorised motorcycling around this area. They said they were not responsible for placing the gates along the route but said if these were opened to horses then the problems would reappear.

APPENDIX VII

BAKEWELL MANAGEMENT LTD – V – BRANDWOOD AND OTHERS (2004)

The previous owner to the Common had declared Section 193 of the Law of Property Act 1925 should apply to Newbury Common, which would make it an offence to drive vehicles over that Common without lawful authority.

The decision in the House of Lords concluded it is open to the owner of the land to grant authority which is needed for use so as not to constitute an offence (so too does Section 34 of the Road Traffic Act 1988).

Therefore the right to use the land without committing an offence is within the owner’s power to grant, his liberty to grant authority is therefore not fettered by statute.

This principle is based on the fact that a prescription of easement is possible if it can be ascribed to a lawful origin.

There are however, examples where the acquisition of such rights could not be obtained because the owners would have no power to authorise Acts which not only affect their own private interests but would affect the wider public interests. Two examples quoted were Rochdale Canal Properties -v- Radcliffe and Neavesrson -v- Peterborough Rural District Council. In the present case, no public interest was involved therefore the offence could be waived by the landowner.

Therefore a prescriptive right can be obtained by a long term use even though that use throughout was illegal in the sense of it being tortious because that is how a prescriptive right is obtained. Therefore if no lawful authority arises it is only criminal because it is tortuous.

It should also be noted apart from the above, that the acquisition of a right cannot be obtained if such use constitutes a public nuisance, therefore a landowner could not dedicate a vehicular way over an existing public footpath or bridleway if to do so would cause a public nuisance.

CITY AND COUNTY OF SWANSEA Alleged Public Right of Way from Goppa Road to Graig Merthyr Colliery in the Community of Pontarddulais 4 X E F

Bryn Bach Road

A Goppa Road

Bridleway 28 D B B1 C

Claimed Path: - Reproduced from the Ordnance Survey Map with A F the permission of the controller of HMSO Existing Paths: - Crown Copyright SCALE 1:7750 City and County of Swansea licence no. 100023509 Item No.5

Report of the Head of Legal and Democratic Services

Area 1 Development Control Committee 16th February 2010

ALLEGED PUBLIC RIGHT OF WAY BETWEEN CEFN HENGOED ROAD AND CEFN ROAD, BONYMAEN

Summary

Purpose: To consider whether a public right of way exists via the route shown on the plans attached to the report.

Policy Framework: Countryside Access Plan No. 4

Reason for Decision: That use of the path is almost exclusively by people who live in the immediate vicinity and not by the public at large. This would not conform to the provisions of the Highways Act 1980.

Consultations: The Byways and Bridleways Trust, The Ramblers Association, The British Horse Society, The Commons Openspaces and Footpaths Preservation Society, The Countryside Council for Wales, The Green Openspaces and Heritage Alliance, Mrs L Lock (local representative of the Ramblers Association), Mr G Bligh (former local representative of the British Horse Society), Mrs Helen Sawyer (current local representative of the British Horse Society), Councillor John Hague, Councillor Mair Gibbs and Mrs Pearson of 187 Cefn Road, Bonymaen.

Recommendation(s): That a recommendation be made to Cabinet to refuse the application to make a Modification Order to add the route to the Definitive Map and Statement.

Introduction 1.1 The application is for a Modification Order to add a footpath to the Definitive Map and Statement from Cefn Hengoed Road to Cefn Road as shown on Plan 1 attached to this report. The route being claimed is shown A-B-C.

1.2 The application was made on the 20th November 2002 by a Mr and Mrs Ballard of 197 Cefn Road, Bonymaen, Swansea, and was originally supported by 16 people who submitted evidence forms. Two of these claimants have now withdrawn their evidence, three claimants have moved away from the area and it has been assumed that a further two are no longer in support due to no response being received to letters sent to them asking them to confirm whether they are in support.

1.3 Therefore, there are now nine claimants supporting the application who claim an average of 33.4 years use of the path.

1.4 The report was submitted to the Area 1 Development and Control Committee meeting on the 16th June 2009 where it was decided the matter should be deferred in order to visit the site. The site visit was carried out on the 30th June 2009 and following this meeting the recommendation as set out in this report remains unchanged.

The Claimed Route 2.1 The claimed path begins at point A off Cefn Hengoed Road as a vehicular track roughly 2 metres wide before heading South-East across an open space for approximately 80 metres to reach point B. The path then heads in a South-Westerly direction for approximately 20 metres before bending to the South-East for a further 20 metres to pass over some steps, which some claimants allege were previously constructed by the Council, at point C where the path joins Cefn Road. The path A-B-C is completely overgrown across the majority of its length.

Legal Principles

3.1 Under the provisions of the Wildlife and Countryside Act 1981 Section 53(2), this Council is obliged to keep the Council’s record of public rights of way, known as the Definitive Map and Statement under continuous review. Claims for additions to the Map and Statement are called “Schedule 14 applications” as they are made under this provision to the 1981 Act. They often are based on the public being able to demonstrate their long-term use of the path whether by showing:

(a) the minimum period of twenty years, as is required by Section 31 of the Highways Act; (b) a greater or lesser period than twenty years but under common law;

The Council is also obliged to make amendments to the Map and Statement where it discovers other evidence that shows a public path exists.

3.2 The manner by which the Definitive Map and Statement can be changed is by making a Modification Order, which modifies that Map and Statement. That Order will be open to objections and representations but can only be confirmed by this Council if it is unopposed. If it is opposed the Order has to be referred to the National Assembly for Wales for determination.

3.3 Under the provisions of Section 31 to the Highways Act 1980 (Appendix I) a public right of way will be deemed to have been dedicated to the public if a minimum period of twenty years uninterrupted use can be shown to have been enjoyed by the public, provisions of Section 53(b) to the Wildlife and Countryside Act 1981 therefore apply (Appendix II).

3.4 This twenty year period is calculated by counting retrospectively from the first occasion the public’s alleged right to use the way was brought into question. This usually happens when the path is blocked by something like a locked gate or fence. When the twenty year period has been identified it is usually termed the “relevant period”. If there is no physical barring of the way then the relevant period is counted retrospectively from the date a Schedule 14 application is made.

3.5 Another means by which a path may be presumed to have been dedicated is under common law (Appendix III). In these circumstances the landowner would have to show that he or she had not just acquiesced to public use but in some way facilitated or encouraged that use. The owner of all the land containing the claimed public path would therefore have to be identified but the period of use need not necessarily be twenty years and could be for a lesser period.

3.6 In addition, the Council may discover other evidence which suggests a public path exists. Under the provision in Section 53(3)(c)(i) to the Wildlife and Countryside Act 1981, a Council is obliged to make a Modification even if it is only reasonable to allege such a way exists (Appendix II). Such evidence could include user evidence and/or documentary evidence.

Informal Consultations

4.1 All the usual organisations and consultees have been informed of this application including the two Local Members and the Community Council. Councillor Gibbs has registered her support for the claim.

Land Ownership 5.1 All the land over which the claimed path crosses is owned by Mrs Pearson of 187 Cefn Road. Mrs Pearson was originally willing to dedicate a route similar but not identical to the claimed route. However she withdrew from this agreement in 2006 due to a dispute between Bonymaen Rugby Club and herself over their boundary. She submitted a letter of objection to the claim in January 2009.

The Evidence

6.1 In order to decide whether a public right of way exists, it is necessary to identify a minimum period of twenty years’ use which will satisfy the provisions of Section 31 of the Highways Act 1980 (Appendix I). This period is calculated by counting retrospectively from the first occasion the public’s alleged right to use the way was brought into question. This usually occurs when the path is blocked or that use is challenged by someone. This has not occurred and therefore the date of the application will count as the date from which the twenty years is calculated. This has been established by the provisions of the Natural Environment and rural Communities Act 2006 which allows the date of the application to enable the period to be calculated in the absence of a calling into question. Therefore the relevant period is approximately 1982 – 2002.

6.2 Eight of the nine claimants supporting the application claim to have used the path uninterrupted for the full twenty year period. The ninth claimant alleges fourteen years use within this period. The evidence seems to suggest long term use of the path with one of the claimants alleging 50 years and another claiming 38 years use. One claimant claims to have used the path since he was a child and was 63 years of age at the time of completing the evidence form.

6.3 A number of uses of the path have been identified by the claimants. Five of the claimants have stated they use the path to access shops in Colwyn Avenue (please see Plan 2 for location), four say they use the path to visit the Rugby Club, three use the path to access Cefn Hengoed Road, two use it to catch buses at Colwyn Avenue and other uses include visiting the chemist, post office and doctors surgery (all at Colwyn Avenue), accessing Cefn Hengoed School (see plan 2), dog walking and for leisure.

Probable Special User Group

7.1 Apart from one person, all the original claimants who submitted evidence forms lived in the immediate vicinity of the claimed path. This raises the question as to whether those who use the claim represent a specific user group. This is defined in more detail in Appendix IV but it means a group of persons who live within close proximity to the path and being the only persons for whom the path would provide a useful means of access. The remaining claimant did not live in close proximity to the path but when interviewed it was discovered that he had lived at an address in Cefn Road between September 1949 and February 2001. Whilst providing a useful link to Cefn Hengoed Road for the residents of Cefn Road, the path may have little utility for the public at large and no evidence has been put forward from claimants living further afield. In this instance the claimants would appear to form a specific user group.

Common Law Dedication

8.1 Mrs Pearson has not maintained the path nor encouraged its use and so there has been no inference of dedication under Common Law. (Appendix III). Nonetheless, as the use is by a limited class of users then such dedication under Common Law, would still have been prevented because it is not possible to dedicate a public right of way to a limited number of people.

8.2 The Highways Department of this Authority have been contacted and are unaware of any work being carried out on this path. Some claimants believe the steps near point C to have been erected by the Council although this Council holds no records to confirm this. Mr Ballard has stated that he believes the Council erected a hand rail for the steps following an accident whereby a local resident sustained an injury and continued to keep the steps in a safe condition for a number of years after. Even if the steps were installed by the Council there are no records of further maintenance being carried out and they are now overgrown. In any event, even if they were regularly cleared, they only comprise a percentage of the total length of the path.

8.3 There is a street lighting column on Cefn Road near point C on the plan. The Environment Department of this Council has been contacted and they have stated that this street light’s purpose is purely to illuminate Cefn Road and any connection to the alleged footpath is purely coincidental.

8.4 Therefore the installation of the steps and the lighting column does not appear to represent an acknowledgment by this Council that the path has public status.

8.5 The landowner, Mrs Pearson objected to the claim on the 20th January 2009 stating that the alleged footpath is overgrown and so can not have been used as often as alleged by the claimants as she says the path is currently difficult and dangerous to walk. She also states that part of the alleged footpath has been incorporated into the adjacent land owned by the Bonymaen Rugby Club who moved the boundary fence.

8.6 Whether or not the Rugby Club’s fence has encroached onto her land is not a matter that is relevant to this report. Map and aerial evidence suggests that the line of the footpath as claimed by the claimants is not affected by the fence at any point along its length.

Conclusion

9.1 Whilst there is sufficient evidence of long-term use, those in support of the application appear to reflect a special user group and therefore cannot be said to represent the public at large.

9.2 There is no evidence to suggest that common law dedication has taken place.

Financial Implications

10.1 There are no financial implications arising from this report.

Recommendation

11.1 That a recommendation be made to Cabinet to refuse the application to make a Modification Order to add the route to the Definitive Map and Statement.

Background papers

1. Documents contained within file ROW-49

Contact Officer: Kieran O’Carroll 01792 637233 File Reference: ROW-49/KAO

APPENDIX I

HIGHWAYS ACT, 1980

Section 31. Dedication of way as a highway presumed after public use for 20 years.

For Section 31(1) Highways Act, 1981 to operate and give rise to a presumption of dedication the following criteria must be satisfied:

APPENDIX II

WILDLIFE AND COUNTRYSIDE ACT, 1981

Section 53 Duty to keep the Definitive Map and Statement under continuous review.

(3) The events referred to in sub section (2) are as follows:-

(c) the discovery by the Authority of evidence which (when considered with all other relevant evidence available to them) shows:

APPENDIX III

DEDICATION UNDER COMMON LAW

No minimum period of use is required, but the claimants must show that if can be inferred by the landowners conduct, that he or she had actually dedicated the route. User of right, is not itself necessarily sufficient. Under statute, twenty years, if proved to have been uninterrupted will be sufficient to show presumed dedication.

Under common law it is still possible that use was due to the landowners tolerance rather than because that landowner had intended to dedicate. Consequently there needs to be evidence that the landowner (or owners) for whatever period is being considered, acquiesced to that use and took measures to facilitate public use.

Obviously this means the landowners have to be identified and evidence that they wished to have the route dedicated to the public.

APPENDIX IV

SPECIAL USER GROUPS

(a) The Planning Inspectorate has produced advice on this matter in that they say there is no strict legal interpretation of the term ‘public’. The dictionary definition being ‘the people as a whole’ or ‘the community in general’. Arguably and sensibly that use should be by a number of people who together may be taken to represent the people as a whole/the community.

However, Coleridge L J in R -v- Residents of Southampton 1887 said that “ ’use by the public’ must not be taken in its widest sense – for it is a common knowledge that in many cases only the local residents ever use a particular road or bridge”. Consequently, use wholly or largely by local people may be use by the public as depending on the circumstances of the case, that use could be by a number of people who may sensibly be taken to represent the local people as a whole/the local community”.

(b) In contrast to this view was the decision made by Lord Parke in Poole -v- Huskinson 1834 who concluded: “there may be dedication to the public for a limited purpose…but there can not be dedication to a limited part of the public”. This case was quoted by an Inspector in 1997 appointed to consider an application to add a public bridleway to the Definitive Map for North Yorkshire County Council. Here the route had also been in use for 40 to 50 years. That Inspector concluded: “In the case before Lord Parke, residents of the same parish were held to constitute a limited part of the public and I therefore believe the inhabitants of the Parish of Cliffs should also be held to constitute a limited part”. The Inspector refused to confirm the Order.

PLAN 1 CITY AND COUNTY OF SWANSEA Alleged Public Right of Way from Cefn Road to Cefn Hengoed Road Bonymaen

Cefn Hengoed Road

StILES Bonymaen Rugby Club

Cefn Road

Reproduced from the Ordnance Survey Map with the permission of the controller of HMSO Claimed Path Crown Copyright City and County of Swansea licence no. SCALE 1:1250 100023509 PLAN 2 CITY AND COUNTY OF SWANSEA Map showing location of Colwyn Avenue in relation to claimed path

Colwyn Avenue StILES

Cefn Hengoed Road

Bonymaen Rugby club

Cefn Hengoed School

A B

claimed path C

Cefn Road

Reproduced from the Ordnance Survey Map with the permission of the controller of HMSO Claimed Path Crown Copyright City and County of Swansea licence no. SCALE 1:5000 100023509

Item No. 6

Report of the Head of Legal & Democratic Services

Area 1 Development & Control Committee

16th February 2010

ALLEGED PUBLIC FOOTPATH FROM MYNYDD TERRACE TO PLOUGH ROAD

COMMUNITY OF LANDORE

Summary

Purpose: The Council’s statutory obligation to consider the evidence as to whether a Modification Order should be made to register a public footpath.

Policy Framework: The Countryside Access Policy.

Consultation: All the usual organisations and individuals have been consulted which includes Councillors R Speht and V Abbott; Mr Mildenhall (part owner with this Council); J Locke (local representative of the British Horse Society); Byways & Bridleways Trust; Countryside Council for Wales; The British Horse Society; The Commons Openspaces and Footpath Preservation Society; The Ramblers Association; Mr V Humphreys (The Green Openspaces and Heritage Alliance).

Recommendation: That a recommendation be made to Cabinet that a Modification Order be made under the provisions of the Wildlife & Countryside Act 1981 to register a public footpath from points A-C and if no objection are received to confirm the same as an unopposed Order.

1.1. An application was made on the 27th January, 2009 to register the tarmacked path shown on the attached plan. Fifteen people have submitted evidence forms showing an average of thirty years’ use of the path.

1.2. The path commences on Plough Road alongside one house and an area of grass at point A, terminating at the entrance to a row of garages on Mysydd Terrace at point C as shown on Plan No. 1. It is not adopted as a highway

1.3. The land is under the ownership of this Council between points A and B, and the remaining section between points B and C by Anison Construction Limited. That company have been granted consent to build a two storey block of four self contained flats and provision for car parking under reference 2008/1065

1.4. The basis of the claim is that the public have been able to make use of the path for a minimum of twenty years which has resulted in the acquisition of a right by presumed dedication. A further explanation is contained in Appendix 1 under Legal Principles.

The Evidence

2.1. The details of the user evidence can be found under Appendix 4 which shows there has been uninterrupted use for a twenty year period. Plan no 2 plots the location of the various premises to which the many claimants walk.

Special User Group

3.1. Even though there has been an uninterrupted period of twenty years use, there is still the question as to whether those who have used the path can be said to represent the general public (As required by one of the tests set out under Section 31 of the Highways Act 1980 (See Appendix 2).

It is apparent that many of those in support of the claim live in the area of the path. Appendix 5 provides further details on the concept of a special user group and the results of the investigation. On balance it can be concluded there is sufficient widespread use to reflect use by the public at large. Plan No 3 shows the distribution of the claimants' houses.

Maintenance

3.2 The path according to the principal claimant was tarmacked in 1980/1981 and has been maintained by this Council. The inference being that if this Council has been maintaining the path it must have at some point in the past accepted it was already a public right of way.

However this Council has no record of undertaking any maintenance on the path. Therefore there is no evidence to show the Council were involved in keeping the path open for the public.

Nonetheless the path was set out by someone, has remained tarmacked for some considerable period of time and therefore to all intents and purposes laid out for use by the public . Common Law Dedication

3.3In addition to considering the test under Section 31 of the Highways Act 1980 this Council must also consider any other evidence that may show the path may have been subject to a presumed dedication. (Appendix 3, paragraph (c)(1)). As explained in Appendix 6, no minimum period of twenty years is required but there has to be evidence that the landowner had set out the path and took measures to enable the public to use route.

3.4 There is evidence that someone has set out, tarmacked and maintained the path even though it is unadopted and there is no record of the path being tarmacked by this Council.

3.5 However, unless the landowner can be proved to have undertaken the work, which this Council denies, it cannot be concluded such a Common Law Dedication has arisen.

Documentary Evidence

4.1 Previous editions of the Ordnance Survey can provide supporting evidence of the existence of a path, its longevity, whether it has remained in the same place and/or if its width has varied. The plans in themselves, however, do not prove a public right of way exists. In this example the previous editions do establish that access has been available across the piece of land since 1948, although no defined path was shown at this time (details available in Appendix 7).

Conclusion

5.1. Three people state they have used the path for over forty years and another said for fifty three years and is generally well supported as a claim. The path has clearly been in use for the minimum period of twenty years the relevant period being from 1989-2009.

5.2. Use of the path can be said to be by the public at large. According to Ordnance Survey records access has been available since at least 1948.

5.3. This Council owns the majority of the path and has taken no measures to discourage or prevent use. Consequently the public have assumed this Council had encouraged and acquiesced to its use.

5.4. Those who support the claim have provided numerous reasons as to why the path provides a useful short cut.

5.5. Both the Council and Anison Construction Limited have not produced any evidence to show why the path does not carry public rights.

5.6. As a result of the above, it must be concluded that the path has been subject to a presumed dedication under Section 31 of the Highways Act, 1980.

5.7 It is not possible to conclude that there was dedication under common law.

Recommended: - that a recommendation be made to Cabinet a Modification Order be made under the Provisions of the Wildlife and Countryside Act 1981 to register a public footpath from points A-C and if no objections are received to confirm the same as an unopposed Order. APPENDIX 1

LEGAL PRINCIPLES

1.1 Under the provisions of the Wildlife and Countryside Act 1981 Section 53(2), this Council is obliged to keep the Council’s record of public rights of way, known as the Definitive Map and Statement under continuous review. Claims for additions to the Map and Statement are called “Schedule 14 applications” as they are made under this provision to the 1981 Act. They are often based on the public being able to demonstrate their long-term use of the path whether by showing:

(a) the minimum period of twenty years, as is required by Section 31 of the Highways Act; and/or:

(b) a greater or lesser period than twenty years but under common law;

1.2 The Council is also obliged to make amendments to the Map and Statement where it discovers other evidence that shows a public path exists.

1.3 The manner by which the Definitive Map and Statement can be changed is by making a Modification Order, which modifies that Map and Statement. That Order will be subject to objections and representations but can only be confirmed by this Council if it is unopposed. If it is opposed, the Order has to be referred to the National Assembly for Wales for determination. Once the Order has been made it cannot be withdrawn or abandoned. This is not the case with public path diversion, extinguishment and creation orders where the Council could decide not to pursue an order, perhaps for example, where there were overwhelming numbers of objections which it had not envisaged originally.

1.4 In terms of applications to add routes, under the provisions of Section 31 to the Highways Act 1980 (Appendix 2) a public right of way will be deemed to have been dedicated to the public if a minimum period of twenty years uninterrupted use can be shown to have been enjoyed by the public the provisions of Section 53(b) to the Wildlife and Countryside Act 1981 therefore apply (Appendix 3).

1.5 This twenty year period is calculated by counting retrospectively from the first occasion the public’s alleged right to use the way was brought into question. This usually happens when the path is blocked by something like a locked gate or fence. When the twenty year period has been identified it is usually termed the “relevant period”. If there is no physical barring of the way, then the relevant period is counted retrospectively from the date a Schedule 14 application is made.

1.6 Another means by which a path may be presumed to have been dedicated is under common law (Appendix 4). In these circumstances, the landowner would have to show that he or she had not just acquiesced to public use but in some way facilitated or encouraged that use. The owner of all the land containing the claimed public path would therefore have to be identified but the period of use need not necessarily be twenty years and could be for a lesser period.

1.7 In addition, the Council may discover other evidence which suggests a public path exists. Under the provision in Section 53(3)(c)(i) to the Wildlife and Countryside Act 1981, a Council is obliged to make a Modification even if it is only reasonable to allege such a way exists (Appendix 3). Such evidence could include user evidence and/or documentary evidence.

APPENDIX 2

HIGHWAYS ACT, 1980

Section 31. Dedication of way as a highway presumed after public use for 20 years.

Where a public way over land, other than a way of such a character that use of it by the public could not give rise at common law to any presumption of dedication, has actually been enjoyed by the public as of right and without interruption of a full period of 20 years, the way is deemed to have been dedicated as a highway unless there is sufficient that there was no intention during this period to dedicate it.

For Section 31(1) Highways Act, 1981 to operate and give rise to a presumption of dedication the following criteria must be satisfied:

APPENDIX 3

WILDLIFE AND COUNTRYSIDE ACT, 1981

Section 53 Duty to keep the Definitive Map and Statement under continuous review.

(3) The events referred to in sub section (2) are as follows:-

(b) the expiration, in relation to anyway in the area to which the map relates of any period such that the enjoyment by the public of the way during that period raises a presumption that the way has been dedicated as a public path or restricted byway;

(c) the discovery by the Authority of evidence which (when considered with all other relevant evidence available to them) shows:

(i) that a right of way which is not shown on the map and statement subsists or is reasonably alleged to submit over land in the area to which the map relates, being a right of way such that the land over which the right subsists is a public path, a restricted byway or, subject to section 54A a byway open top all traffic;

APPENDIX 4

THE EVIDENCE

1. Fifteen people submitted information sheets in support of the claim and an additional two people forwarded a short statement. Twelve have themselves claimed to have used the path for a minimum of twenty years, although the average use for the seventeen people is twenty nine years. The reason given for using the path vary widely, for example six people said as a means of walking to the shops, four to walk their dogs and six said to visit either their neighbours or friends. It is evidently shorter to walk along this path than the footway depending on your destination and so understandable why some should choose to do so. The various commercial premises and the location of the bus stop are shown on plan No. 2. 2. There are two people for whom it would not appear to provide a short cut and two other residents who live directly alongside the path, who said they use the path as a means of accessing the rear of the property. Consequently, for these two residents their use would have to be considered more compatible with the exercise of a private right of way.

3. According to two people, they confirmed the path has never been obstructed whether by a fence, stile or gate and would say has always been open.

4. Three say the path has been maintained by the Council and that it was responsible for placing tarmack on this path. The principal claimant said this occurred in either 1981 or 1982 In addition recalls a Council Road sweeper vehicle being driven along the path which she said occurred about twice per year. She also said that a park type wooden and concrete bench was placed on the grass, she assumes by this Council, although it later became vandalised and was subsequently removed. However this Council has no record of any maintenance or improvement work being undertaken on this path.

5. The relevant date to determine whether or not a minimum period of twenty years use has transpired will be 1989-2009. The application was submitted in 2009 and because there has been no physical barring of the way, the date of the application is the moment from which the Twenty year period is calculated retrospectively. The provisions of the Natural Environment and Rural Communities Act, 2006 identifies such a period in the absence of the way being called into question by an obstruction.

6. It is clear from the user evidence submitted that there has been such uninterrupted use during this period

APPENDIX 5

SPECIAL USER GROUP

However, Coleridge L J in R -v- Residents of Southampton 1887 said that “used by the public must not be taken in its widest sense – for it is a common knowledge that in many cases only the local residents ever use a particular road or bridge”. Consequently, use wholly or largely by local people may be use by the public as depending on the circumstances of the case, that use could be by a number of people who may sensibly be taken to represent the local people as a whole/the local community”.

(b) In contrast to this view was the decision made by Lord Parke in Poole - v- Huskinson 1834 who concluded: “ there may be dedication to the public for a limited purpose…but there can not be dedication to a limited part of the public”. This case was quoted by an Inspector in 1997 appointed to consider an application to add a public bridleway to the Definitive Map for North Yorkshire County Council. Here the route had also been in use for 40 to 50 years. That Inspector concluded: “In the case before Lord Parke, residents of the same parish were held to constitute a limited part of the public and I therefore believe the inhabitants of the Parish of Cliffs should also be held to constitute a limited part”. The Inspector refused to confirm the Order.

In this particular example the distribution of the homes of those who have supported the claim are shown on Plan No. 3.

This plan shows those who submitted evidence forms in yellow. The house furthest way to the south is 280m distant and those to the north, 240 metres.

There are two claimants who live directly adjacent to the path and have said they use the route to access the rear of their property. Any such use is more likely to reflect a private means of access therefore their use could not said to represent use by the general public.

There are also approximately 13 properties whose occupants could be said to live in close proximity to the path and might represent such a special user group. However this number is offset by another 13 properties who, as mentioned above, live further afield.

Consequently it may be concluded those that use the path come from an adequately wide area to represent the general public.

APPENDIX 6

DEDICATION UNDER COMMON LAW

No minimum period of use is required, but the claimants must show that it can be inferred by the landowner’s conduct that he or she had actually dedicated the route is not of itself necessarily sufficient as opposed to Section 31 of the Highways Act 1980 where under this statute, twenty years, if proved to have been uninterrupted will be sufficient to show presumed dedication.

Under common law it is still possible that use was due to the landlowner’s tolerance rather than because that landowner had intended to dedicate. Consequently, there needs to be evidence that the landowner (or owners) for whatever period is being considered, acquiesced to that use and took measures to facilitate public use.

This means the landowners have to be identified and that there is evidence to show they wished to have the route dedicated to the public.

APPENDIX 7

DOCUMENTARY EVIDENCE

1. The 1913 and 1951 Edition of the Ordnance Survey Maps are the only editions available at the 1:2500 scale prior to the most recent G.I.S. Ordnance Surveys. If the 1913 Edition is superimposed over the line of the claimed public path it is evident the path was not in existence in 1913 due to the presence of a Public House across the line of the present path. However by the 1951 Edition (which was revised in 1943) that Public House is absent and the same three houses, Nos. 2, 4 and 6 Plough Road remain. The area of land at the junction of these two roads, which is now grassed, appear open and unrestricted. It may be inferred that the public could have accessed this land by at least 1948 (even though at this time no path is defined).

4 3 LB

6 5 Chapel 1 9 E 2 3 RAC BRTYENR ta 6 b S 8 4 Su 7 l 15 E 2 Gym 1 1

9 D 3 A

2 RO 7

8 4 6 PH D 8

3 D LA Y 24 S 7 6 Play Area 6 Y 52.4m 1 8 M 8

3 2 7

7 5 2 3 7 7 3 2 1

3 9 7 9 ACE 371a Montana Park 7 G PL BUR 1 S ARP 7 H 8 9 S 3 36 9 7 9 3 6 a

7 6 9

3 8 3 6 2 7

3 0 39.0m P 4

1 82 StILES 1 o

6 7 5 s 3 6 8 a t Community Centre s 3 5 1

2 5

6 3

P o 1 LB s 1 t

0 s

1 1 6 M

1 1

3 o 46.6m 4 6 1 3 n 5

5 t

1 a 9 8

7 1

n 7

a 8

P 5

2 l a

6 1 5 c 2

1 2 3 e 1 2 David

3 Issac 1 4 Close 5 1

5 4 7 6 1

3 3 4 1 4 1 41.1m 4 1 33

3 e

1 3 D A c 1 8 3 O a 2 R 7 r P H r E

E e 3 G

D U T 3 LO N

5 5 P 0 n a 1 3 T 1 1 r 1 to 6 1 1 n R 3 e 3 t

6 E 4 s C

W 5 e 8 R Eaton - 1 1

a W Court T 3 4

r R 3 8 0 d

2 7 E

2 1 B 5

6 2

A 9 y 16 A R

Plough and 6 B E

1 Harrow D R (PH) A 2 4

O O 6 3 C T A 1 R 2 E 3 3 D H E 9 1 1 C 2 R A 3 T L S 9 4 E 7 1 1 Y 1 F 3 1 3 E 32 Y 1 5 R G 1 3 1 G 5 6 N 3 1

8 0 o 0 A 4 t 3 1 L 2 9 M 9 3 L m S 4 . 41.5m 2 d El Sub Sta 2 n 4 4 ou gr 3 0 0 M lay P 5 3 3 Y 1

0 S 1

0 5 Y

3 D

0 D

3 1 T 4 8 E 6 4 R 1 9 FB

R 2

2 PH A 5 C E Reproduced from the 40.8m 291 Ordnance Survey Map

6 8 with 3 7 3 1 0 2 the permission of the 8 8 3 1 1 controller of HMSO 5 3 4 4 8 5 9 6 6 3 1 1 8 1 Crown Copyright 7 1 3 45.1m

6 9 City and County of Scale7 1 :1,500 2 Swansea licence no. 4

3 r 100023509 4 e

t 5 Planl No 3

h SP

7 9 8 7 6 1

2 2 3 1 3 a a 9-18 1 4 e 1 rac s 0 g er 1 din 5 n T uil I33.5mLL 9 ry 7 a n B H B warde ARNE 2 Ha EH 18 1 -TR 0 Brynhyfryd E 7 1 Sunday 42.1mTR 0 Chapel EN 1 1 8 School P 3 4 4 N 4 LB

6 1 5 1 e Chapel

1 9 1 1 2 2 2 w ACE a 2 3 BTREYRNR t 2 0 6 0 S 0 t

0 a 4 b b o u c 8 d 1 7 S w l 15 E 2 n 1 Gym 1 D

9 A 3 O R 7 4 82 PH 6 1 D 8 2 6 D 1 3 LA2 4 47 Y 6 44.2m ET 6 ERICK STRE Play Area S

D 1 8 FRE 52.4m Y 11 8 18 M 2 Church 3 7 7

1 5 2 7

2 7

7 3 2 15 3 1

3 9 2 7 CE 6 9 LA 371a 7 G P 1 Montana Park UR 1 B 4 3 PS 7 R

9 0 8 A 4 9 H 3 S

3 3 9 8 6 69a 7 1 a 9 7 131 6

2 8 3 6 3 vets 3 7 P

1 0 4 39.0m

3 82 1 o 1 6 7 5 rch StILES 8 s 6 Chu 3 a t Community Centre 5 1

3 s 2

5 6 4

5 3 P 3 1

1 o

t LB 1 s M

o 0 W 2 t SANT RO 1 1 PLEA s

o 6 4 1 1

n 3 4 6 7 1 43.0m 46.6m 3 t 5 4 1 5 1 a 9

2 8 1 7 n 7

- 8 a

6 4 1 5 E P 03 3 2 1 l 6 A 5 9 4 a 2 1 1 2

T 3 tv repairs a c 3 2 O David e 9 3 Issac

N Close4 1 1 3 5 R 0 4

O 1 6 3

A 5 9 1 D 4 7 6 3 4 1 3 3 4 1 41.1m 4 1 4 3 e 3 c

P 3 a

D 1 r E 3 chinese 1 A r 1 E O 1 4 N 8 3 e R 7 D 2 3 4 T 1 3 takeaway H T 3 G 4 3 a U R n 8 r 5 5 O 0 1 n 1 1 L 3 E 1 to 6 1 P e d 1 3 3 t

6 s 1 4 -

2 W e R 5 1 5 Eaton 1 T 8

2 4 1 pub a 3 Court R 3 W

9 3 0 r 8

2 E d 7 1 42.1m 2

H 2

9 6 A d A 1

2 R y D 6 A B N Plough and 6 1

Harrow E O 4 (PH) 2 T 6 R 1 C R 3 E H 2 3 E O

9 C 31 1 R 2 A A tv repairs T 3 D L S off licene 9 7 4 1 E 1 1 Y 1 3 32 F 3 E 5 1 1 Y 1 1 3 R 5 6 G 3 4 0 o 0 hairdresser G 8 t 1 N 2 9 3 m M 9 3 A 4 S tanning centre L . M 41.5m

2 d El Sub Sta 4 L 2 n Y u ro 3 0 4 g 0 y a 5 S Pl 3 3

1 0 Y 1

0 newsagents 5 D

3 3

1 3 pub T 8 2 4 E 4 6 2 1 TCB's 9 R FB a 2 2 R PH 5 15a A 3 C betting shop 40.8m E 1 291 0 2

a 48.2m 6 8 3 7 3 2 1 08 8 3 81 5 3 1 15 4 4 5 3 9 8 6 7 chinese takeaway1 1 8 6 5 7 1 12 3 1 45.1m 9 9 6 56 7 1 2 4

r bus stop 3 bus stop e 4

l 5 e SP h

S 4 2 7 3 9 8 7 8 6 6 1 Car 2 3 Park 8 4 0 8 Reproduced from the 2 8 V 1 3 Ordnance Survey Map

E 2 R 4 5 with 3 5 I G Car 1 Park 9 the permission of the S 1 1 T controller of HMSO 8 R two pubs close3 to the railway bridge E 1 9 Swansea CrownLoop West Copyright Junction E 9 1 1 3000 61 T 9 City and County of 7 2 4 Swansea licence no. 1 PLan1 No 2 Pentrehafod School 2 100023509 / Ysgol Pentrehafod Scale 1:2000

2 2 9 4 6 7

4 3

3 3 5 5 1 11

StILES

a 5 n

d C

W R

5 3

16 A

6 B 2

3 2 C 3

D 1 A O 1 R 2 3 H C A L E F Y 9 G 1 7 N 3 1 A 3 L L

5 1 3

9 M

Reproduced from the Ordnance Survey Map with the permission of the controller of HMSO Crown Copyright City and County of

5 Swansea licence no. M

Y 100023509

CITY AND COUNTY OF SWANSEA DINAS A SIR ABERTAWE

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

Area 1 Development Control Committee

DATE: 16TH FEBRUARY 2010

19 30

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

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

ITEM APP. NO. SITE LOCATION OFFICER REC.

1 2009/1528 133 Colwyn Avenue Winch Wen Swansea SA1 7EW APPROVE Change of use of part of ground floor from retail (Class A1) to a hot food takeaway (Class A3) and launderette with new shop front, side door and side flue

2 2008/1575 Land between 57 & 63 Alltiago Road, Pontarddulais, APPROVE Swansea, SA4 8HU Two detached dwellings and one pair of semi- detached dwellings with integral garages

3 2009/1636 24-27 St Helens Road, Swansea, SA1 4AG APPROVE Installation of shopfront

4 2009/1642 24-27 St Helens Road, Swansea, SA1 4AG APPROVE One internally illuminated fascia sign and two internally illuminated projecting signs

5 2009/1488 Land between 47 & 53, Penygraig Road, Mount APPROVE Pleasant, Swansea Detached dwelling and garage (renewal of planning permission 2007/1182 granted on 8th August 2007)

6 2009/1614 Land at junction of Pen-Y-Graig Road and Fairfield APPROVE Terrace, Swansea Variation of condition 4 of planning permission 2005/2179 granted 31st January 2006 to allow for the occupation of the dwellings without widening of the footway on Pen-Y-Graig Road

7 2009/1728 23 Highbury Close Cwmbwrla Swansea SA5 8BJ REFUSE Retention of first floor rear balcony

8 2009/1300 Land at Portmead Avenue Blaenymaes Swansea APPROVE Supported residential housing accommodation with associated parking (Class C3)

AREA 1 DEVELOPMENT CONTROL COMMITTEE – 16TH FEBRUARY 2010

ITEM APP. NO. SITE LOCATION OFFICER REC.

9 2009/1474 Land between 60 Martin Street and Old Police Station APPROVE Morriston Swansea One pair of semi-detached dwellings

10 2009/1315 Ynysforgan Farm Ynysforgan Swansea SA6 6QL APPROVE Variation of condition 3 of planning permission 89/1917 and part iii of the Section 106 agreement granted on 27th September 1991 to allow for 12 months holiday accommodation

11 2009/1316 Ynysforgan Farm Ynysforgan Swansea SA6 6QL APPROVE Variation of condition (c) of planning permission 85/0840 granted on 31st October 1995 to allow for 12 months holiday accommodation

12 2009/1071 Exall and Jones Pipehouse Wharf Morfa Road Swansea APPROVE SA1 2EN Retention of the siting of a mobile catering unit

13 2009/1611 Ospreys Public House, 376 Neath Road, Plasmarl, APPROVE Swansea, SA6 8JN Change of use of ground floor public house (Class A3) to two self contained flats (Class C3) and conversion of former first floor function room to domestic storage only.

14 2009/1814 Pic Up Spares 243 Viaduct House Neath Road Landore REFUSE Swansea SA1 2JG Use of car parking area for the storage and sale of motor vehicles and parking of customer vehicles in association with existing business

15 2008/0919 Land south of Morfa, Neath Road, Swansea APPROVE Construction of Morfa distributor road and widening of existing express bus route (Council Development Regulation 3)

AREA 1 DEVELOPMENT CONTROL COMMITTEE – 16TH FEBRUARY 2010

ITEM APP. NO. SITE LOCATION OFFICER REC.

16 2009/0472 Land at Phoenix Way Retail Park, Swansea Enterprise REFUSE Park, Llansamlet, Swansea SA7 9EH Reconfiguration of existing retail park with demolition of existing single detached retail unit and part demolition of further retail unit, construction of 3 no. attached retail units (Class A1) - 2,787 sq m gross floorspace, (resulting in 7 retail units overall), freestanding food and drink unit (Class A3) - 279 sq m gross floorspace together with new vehicular access onto Fendrod Way, car parking (299 spaces overall), infrastructure and landscaping works

17 2008/1615 Bernard Hastie and Co and adjacent Maliphant Sidings, APPROVE Morfa Road, Swansea, SA1 2EW Redevelopment of site with construction of up to 52 houses (3 storey) and 84 apartments (5 storey) together with phase 2 Morfa Distributor Road, new access road, car parking, landscaping, infrastructure, re-profiling and engineering works (outline)

AREA 1 DEVELOPMENT CONTROL COMMITTEE – 16TH FEBRUARY 2010 AREA 1 DEVELOPMENT CONTROL COMMITTEE – 16TH FEBRUARY 2010

ITEM 1 APPLICATION NO. 2009/1528 WARD: Bonymaen Area 1

Location: 133 Colwyn Avenue Winch Wen Swansea SA1 7EW Proposal: Change of use of part of ground floor from retail (Class A1) to a hot food takeaway (Class A3) and laundrette with new shop front, side door and side flue Applicant: Mr Bal

BACKGROUND INFORMATION

POLICIES

Policy Policy Description Policy EV13 Proposals for new or renovated shopfronts, including security grilles, should be sympathetic to the character of the building, adjacent properties and the surrounding area. (City & County of Swansea Unitary Development Plan 2008)

Policy ECNR Proposals for non retail uses at ground floor level within shopping centres will be assessed against defined criteria, including their relationship to other existing or approved non retail uses; their effect upon the primary retail function of the centre; the proposed shop front and window display; the time the unit has been marketed for A1 uses, and its likelihood of continuing to be vacant; its location in relation to the primary shopping area; and its impact upon the vitality, viability and attractiveness of the centre. (City & County of Swansea Unitary Development Plan 2008)

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

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

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

SITE HISTORY

App No. Proposal 2003/2074 Internally illuminated ATM sign Decision: Grant Advertisement Consent (C) Decision Date: 28/11/2003

AREA 1 DEVELOPMENT CONTROL COMMITTEE – 16TH FEBRUARY 2010

ITEM 1 (CONT’D) APPLICATION NO. 2009/1528

2003/2075 Installation of ATM machine on front elevation Decision: Grant Permission Conditional Decision Date: 28/11/2003

2008/1848 Change of use of part of ground floor from retail (Class A1) to a launderette and hot food takeaway (Class A3) and creation of parking area to the front elevation Decision: Refuse Decision Date: 21/05/2009

87/0332/03 ALTERATIONS TO LAYOUT FOR USE AS KWIK SAVE SUPERMARKET. Decision: *HGPC - GRANT PERMISSION CONDITIONAL Decision Date: 07/04/1987

74/0982/03 ERECTION OF SUPERSTORE Decision: *HGPC - GRANT PERMISSION CONDITIONAL Decision Date: 31/10/1974

RESPONSE TO CONSULTATIONS

The application was advertised on site, and via direct neighbour consultation. TWO PETITIONS OF OBJECTION containing a total of 237 signatures and TWO LETTERS OF OBJECTION have been received, which can be summarised as follows:

Petition of Objection

1. We have already got four busy shops here, and any more would cause increasing problems with litter, noise and traffic congestion. 2. We understand that the applicant has been canvassing support for the proposal in the neighbourhood, but anyone not living opposite would not be aware of the daily mess. 3. The proposed development is too close to our chip shop and there is not enough trade for two takeaways. 4. The proposal is very close to a busy bus stop and there is not enough car parking for customers of the proposed facilities.

Letters of Objection

1. There are already a number of shops here, including a chip shop next to my property creating traffic problems, anti social behaviour and litter, and the proposal would make matters much worse. 2. There is no shortage of food service shops in the area, and as these local shops are struggling financially the competition from another would not be welcome.

Voluntary Customer Survey

The applicant has provided a Voluntary Customer Survey containing 467 signatures of people stating they would use the new facilities if they were to be provided. AREA 1 DEVELOPMENT CONTROL COMMITTEE – 16TH FEBRUARY 2010

ITEM 1 (CONT’D) APPLICATION NO. 2009/1528

Highway Safety

The Head of Transportation and Engineering has advised as follows:-

The application is for a change of use of part of ground floor from retail (Class A1) to a hot food takeaway (Class A3) and laundrette with new shop front, side door and side flue.

The application is a resubmission of a previously refused scheme but now the customer parking has been relocated to the side of the building with a separate access and no longer impacts on the pedestrian access to the frontage, nor to the access to the bus stop to the front.

The site currently benefits from a car parking hard standing area to the frontage but use of this area results in detriment to pedestrian safety. The use of the area to the side of the unit for customer parking will be beneficial in terms of highway safety.

The area is currently gated but the plans show the removal of this gate to allow free access for customers and deliveries.

The car park layout as submitted allows for six parking spaces, together with an area for deliveries. However the layout does not comply with our guidelines with regard to length of the spaces for the tandem arrangement as indicated on the plans and these should be 6m length, not the 4.8m as shown. If the correct lengths are plotted then the provision is reduced from six to five spaces but this is acceptable considering the current provision.

No cycle parking has been shown and this should be addressed to encourage non car forms of transport.

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

1. The car park layout being revised to provide spaces of minimum dimensions of 2.4m width by 6m length, and the car park to be laid out prior to the beneficial use of the take away/launderette commencing. 2. The gates being removed to allow for constant access to the parking area. 3. Cycle parking being provided in accordance with details to be submitted for approval.

Head of Environmental Management and Protection - Pollution Control - No objection.

APPRAISAL

Planning permission is sought for the change of use of part of the ground floor of No. 133 Colwyn Avenue, Winch Wen, from retail (Class A1) to a laundrette (sui generis) and a hot food takeaway (Class A3).

The application site is a detached commercial unit presently trading as a shop premises with access off Colwyn Avenue. It is of conventional cavity brick/block construction with a steel portal frame structure supporting the flat roof. The external walls have a finish of dry dash cement render and face brickwork at low level. The main roof is of flat design which has a metal profile roof covering. AREA 1 DEVELOPMENT CONTROL COMMITTEE – 16TH FEBRUARY 2010

ITEM 1 (CONT’D) APPLICATION NO. 2009/1528

The proposal is to sub-divide part of the existing shop unit, with new openings proposed for the launderette and takeaway with the provision of six car parking spaces within the forecourt area.

Two additional full time workers will be employed by the development, while the proposed hours of operation are as follows:

Takeaway- Monday to Friday 5pm -12pm Saturday 5pm -12pm Sundays, Bank and Public Holidays 6pm-11pm

Laundry- Monday to Saturday 9am -6pm

Planning permission was recently refused in May 2009 (2008/1848) for a similar change of use of part of the ground floor of No. 133 Colwyn Avenue, Winch Wen, from retail (Class A1) to a laundrette (sui generis) and a hot food takeaway (Class A3).

That application was refused on the following grounds: “By virtue of the inappropriate location of the parking area, entry and exit to the proposed parking bays is likely to result in manoeuvres that would compromise highway safety, with particular regard to pedestrians in that vicinity. The proposal is therefore contrary to Policies AS4, AS6, EV1, EV3 and EV13 of the Unitary Development Plan (November 2008)”.

The main issue for consideration in the determination of this application, therefore, is whether the amended scheme overcomes the previous reasons for refusal, having regard to impact upon visual and residential amenity and highway safety in the context of prevailing City and County of Swansea Unitary Development Plan (UDP) policies. There are in this instance no additional overriding issues for consideration under the provisions of the Human Rights Act.

Whilst it is acknowledged that there is one other takeaway along this stretch of Colwyn Avenue, the area has not been identified as within the City Centre and District Shopping Areas in the Unitary Development Plan. However Policy EC NR states that the acceptability of non retail uses within such areas will be determined having regard to the relationship of the proposal to other existing or approved non-retail uses. As the main part of the property will remain intact as the primary use on the site, with the A3 element being occupying a small area of the shop, it is considered that the proposal would conform to the requirements of this policy, and not would adversely affect the vitality or viability of the shopping centre. Policy EC NR states that appropriate shopping and neighbourhood facilities will be encouraged within areas of acknowledged deficiency. It is acknowledged that there is another A3 use in close proximity to the application site however it is not considered that the addition of a further A3 use at this location would result in an excessive number in the locality.

The proposed partial change of use of the property including the formation of two additional shop fronts is not considered to have a detrimental impact on the visual amenity of the area and as such is considered to comply with the requirements of Policy EV1 and of the Unitary Development Plan. AREA 1 DEVELOPMENT CONTROL COMMITTEE – 16TH FEBRUARY 2010

ITEM 1 (CONT’D) APPLICATION NO. 2009/1528

With regards to direct impact on residential amenity, there are existing uses such as the fish and chip shop (takeaway), news agents and supermarket within the parade of shops that create a constant flow of pedestrians and vehicles. The existing chip shop is located immediately adjacent to the proposed takeaway. Whilst two petitions and two letters have been received that object to the proposal, it is considered that a launderette and takeaway would extend the services available to the local residents without having an increased adverse effect on their amenity as a result of noise, smell or other disturbances.

The Pollution Control Division of the Environment Department has no objection to make on this application, while conditions can be attached to any consent granted that limit the opening times of the launderette and takeaway accordingly and for the flue extraction system.

A waste management regime has been received, which indicates the provision of litter bins, both inside and outside the takeaway premises, and a regular litter picking exercise by the takeaway staff at no more than two hour intervals. This would ensure that litter is kept to a minimum in order to ensure that the proposal does not have a direct detrimental impact on the residential amenities of the nearby residents.

In terms of access and highway safety, the comments of the Head of Transportation and Engineering are set out in the response to consultations section of this report. It is recommended that no objections are raised to the current application subject to conditions, as the customer parking has been relocated to the side of the building with a separate access which no longer impacts, it is considered, on the pedestrian access to the front.

The concerns raised by objectors relating to residential amenity, litter and highway safety have been addressed above. The concerns regarding competition are not a material planning issue.

CONCLUSION

In conclusion, it is considered that the proposed change of use represents an acceptable form of development that would have no adverse impact on public safety, visual and residential amenity or highway safety, and complies with Polices EV1, EV2, EV3, EV13 and ECNR of the Unitary Development Plan. Approval is therefore recommended.

RECOMMENDATION

APPROVE, subject to the following conditions:

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

AREA 1 DEVELOPMENT CONTROL COMMITTEE – 16TH FEBRUARY 2010

ITEM 1 (CONT’D) APPLICATION NO. 2009/1528

2 No development shall take place until a scheme, which specifies the provisions to be made for the control of ventilation and fume extraction has been submitted to and approved by the Local Planning Authority. Such works that form part of the approved scheme shall be completed before the premises are occupied. Reason: In the interest of residential amenity.

3 The Class A3 element of the proposal (the hot food takeaway) hereby approved shall not be used by customers before 17.00 nor after 00.00 hrs Monday to Saturday and between 18:00 and 23:00 hrs on Sunday and Bank Holidays, unless otherwise agreed in writing by the Local Planning Authority. Reason: To safeguard the amenities of the occupiers of neighbouring properties.

4 The Class A1, laundry element of the proposal hereby approved shall not be used by customers before 09.00 nor after 18.00 Monday to Saturday and not at all on Sunday and Bank Holidays, unless otherwise agreed in writing by the Local Planning Authority. Reason: To safeguard the amenities of the occupiers of neighbouring properties.

5 Notwithstanding the submitted plans, the car park layout shall be revised in accordance with details to be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority to provide spaces of minimum dimensions of 2.4m width by 6m length, and the car park shall be laid out as such prior to the beneficial use of the take away/launderette commencing. Reason: In the interests of highway safety.

6 Prior to the first use of the development hereby approved the gates shall be removed to allow for constant access to the parking area, and cycle parking shall be provided in accordance with details to be submitted to and agreed in writing by the Local Planning Authority, prior to the premises being occupied. Reason: In the interests of highway safety.

INFORMATIVES

PLANS

Site location plan, 29 466 05 block plan, 29 466 01A existing floor plans, 29 466 02 existing elevations, 29 466 03 proposed floor plans, 29 466 04 proposed elevations, design and access statement received 2nd December 2009

AREA 1 DEVELOPMENT CONTROL COMMITTEE – 16TH FEBRUARY 2010

ITEM 2 APPLICATION NO. 2008/1575 WARD: Pontarddulais Area 1

Location: Land between 57 & 63 Alltiago Road, Pontarddulais, Swansea, SA4 8HU Proposal: Two detached dwellings and one pair of semi- detached dwellings with integral garages Applicant: Mr N Madden

BACKGROUND INFORMATION

This application was DEFERRED FOR A SITE VISIT at the Area 1 Development Control Committee on the 19th May 2009 to view the topography of the site relative to neighbouring properties and the access to the site.

The application was also DEFERRED at the Area 1 Development Control Committee on the 16th June 2009 to obtain surface and foul water drainage details from the developer and consultations to be undertaken with the Council’s Drainage engineers and Dwr Cymru Welsh Water.

The drainage details have been submitted and consultation undertaken with the Council’s Drainage Engineer and Dwr Cymru Welsh Water. No additional comment has been made by Dwr Cymru Welsh Water. On the basis of comments of the Council’s Drainage Engineer, the use of soakaways to drain the surface water runoff is considered to be acceptable in principle. Condition 7 has been added to ensure the drainage layout is constructed as illustrated on the submitted drainage plan. Condition 8 has been added to require agreement of construction details and levels for the proposed soakaways. My recommendation of approval remains unchanged.

POLICIES

Policy Policy Description Policy AS2 Accessibility - Criteria for assessing design and layout of new development. (City & County of Swansea Unitary Development Plan 2008)

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

AREA 1 DEVELOPMENT CONTROL COMMITTEE – 16TH FEBRUARY 2010

ITEM 2 (CONT’D) APPLICATION NO. 2008/1575

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

SITE HISTORY

App No. Proposal LV/92/0274/01 RESIDENTIAL Decision: *HGPC - GRANT PERMISSION CONDITIONAL Decision Date: 24/09/1992

LV/79/0616/01 RESIDENTIAL Decision: *HGPC - GRANT PERMISSION CONDITIONAL Decision Date: 27/11/1979

LV/95/0390/02 ONE DWELLING Decision: *HGCC - GRANT CONSENT WITH CONDITIONS Decision Date: 27/10/1995

LV/87/0279/01 RESIDENTIAL Decision: *HGPC - GRANT PERMISSION CONDITIONAL Decision Date: 30/07/1987

2007/2395 Renewal of planning application 2004/1417 granted 9th November 2004 for residential development (Outline) Decision: Grant Permission Conditional Decision Date: 11/01/2008

2004/1417 Residential development (outline) Decision: Grant Permission Conditional Decision Date: 09/11/2004

RESPONSE TO CONSULTATIONS

ORIGINAL PLANS

The application was advertised on site and thirteen occupiers were individually consulted. THREE LETTERS OF OBJECTION have been received including ONE PETITION OF OBJECTION containing fifteen signatures and one letter from Pontarddulais Town Council. The objections can be summarised as follows: AREA 1 DEVELOPMENT CONTROL COMMITTEE – 16TH FEBRUARY 2010

ITEM 2 (CONT’D) APPLICATION NO. 2008/1575

• Refer to previous letters of objections sent to the Planning Department raising concerns regarding noise, blocking of sunlight and de-valuation of properties. • Dangerous access onto Alltiago Road • Invasion of privacy to properties in Glanyrafon Road. • There are concerns that the proposed soakaways would not be able to cope with the amount of surface water generated from 4 dwellings on this steep site, which may result in overflow into the gardens of Oakfield Street and Cross Street. • Concerns at how ‘dirty’ water will be managed as the sewer system on Alltiago Road is above the area planned for development. • The addition of 4 dwellings could potentially overload the existing sewer system.

AMENDED PLANS

Thirteen occupiers were individually consulted. SIX LETTERS OF OBJECTION have been received including one letter from Pontarddulais Town Council. In addition to the above objections, the following additional objections have been raised:

• The applicant previously had planning permission (on another site) which he did not adhere to. • There is an objection to drainage passing through the lane to Cross Street. • The area is densely populated the development will result in more traffic and parking problems. • The development would result in noise from building works.

Environment Agency - No objection to the proposal.

Dwr Cymru / Welsh Water - Recommend standard conditions and advisory notes are included to ensure no detriment to existing residents or the environment and to Dwr Cymru’s assets.

The conditions/advisory notes are added as informatives to this report.

Welsh Water were consulted on the additional drainage details submitted but no additional comments have been received.

Drainage Section

The applicant proposes to use soakaways to cater for the disposal of surface water from the above development. The soakaway has been designed to current standards but the applicant should note that any soakaway must be constructed and located in accordance to the requirements and criteria contained within the building regulations. This will ensure no nuisance is created to any lower lying adjacent land. If ground conditions prove to be unsatisfactory for soakaway drainage then the applicant must provide alternative proposals for dealing with surface water run-off. I have seen no construction detail for the soakaway and would expect to see a cross section showing relative site levels, soakaway details and existing ground levels of adjacent properties. I would suggest that the applicant provides sufficient information to ensure suitable arrangements are going to be made during and post construction, for proper drainage of the site, to mitigate potential run-off, to ensure no nuisance is created to adjoining properties. AREA 1 DEVELOPMENT CONTROL COMMITTEE – 16TH FEBRUARY 2010

ITEM 2 (CONT’D) APPLICATION NO. 2008/1575

Highways Comments

Outline consent for residential development has been granted for this site in 2004 and renewed in 2007. This proposal is for 4 dwellings accessed off a shared private drive. The geometry of the access road conforms with guidelines for shared private drives and the internal layout is acceptable with adequate parking for residents and visitors all contained within the site.

I am satisfied that the volume of traffic movements will not be excessive and there are unlikely to be any highway safety implications with the proposal as the access conforms with recommended standards.

I recommend that no highway objections are raised subject to all access works being completed prior to beneficial occupation of any of the dwellings.

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

APPRAISAL

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

This application seeks planning permission for the construction of two detached dwellings and a pair of semi detached dwellings on a vacant plot accessed off Alltiago Road Pontarddulais.

It is noted that there is a current enforcement enquiry relating to the deposition of materials at the site.

The application site comprises of an irregularly shaped parcel of land. The site frontage has a width of some 17 metres but widens to 39 metres to the rear of the site. The site is relatively flat near its frontage, however the land level drops sharply towards the rear boundaries of properties fronting onto Glanyrafon Road to the north and Cross Street to the west. There is also a change in levels across the rear of the site, which drop down towards Glanyrafon Road.

The site has an established history of outline planning consents, which date back to 1979. The principle of residential development at this location has therefore been established.

Visual Amenity

The area is residential in character comprising of mainly traditional two storey dwellings. The site is defined to the north by the detached dwelling at No.63 and terraced dwellings on Glanyrafon Road and to the south by the semi detached dwelling at No.57 Altiago Road which has a retaining wall which defines the south boundary of the application site. These retaining works have resulted in the garden of No. 57 being at a higher level than the application site. To the west of the site are terraced dwellings fronting onto Cross Street, which have long rear gardens of approximately 45 metres in depth. AREA 1 DEVELOPMENT CONTROL COMMITTEE – 16TH FEBRUARY 2010

ITEM 2 (CONT’D) APPLICATION NO. 2008/1575

The eastern boundary of the site is currently defined by a low boundary wall with an access gate in the south west corner with dropped curb onto Alltiago Road. This will form the access point for the development with the first unit located to the north and the remainder of the dwellings located at a lower level to the west.

Unit 1 fronts onto Alltiago Road thereby positively filling a gap in the street scene whilst also creating a focal point at the entrance to the development. The dwelling has been sited approximately 6 metres from the front boundary wall in order to provide a parking/turning area to the front of the property. Because of the change in levels this setback will result in the front elevation of the dwelling being approximately 1 metre below road level, which would not be out of character with the neighbouring dwellings at No. 63 and 65 which are also below road level.

In terms of its design the proposed dwelling at Unit 1 differs from the neighbouring properties either side of the application site which comprise of a traditional semi detached dwelling (No. 57) and detached double fronted dwelling (No. 63). Instead the design of the dwelling has taken inspiration from an old infill dwelling at No. 32 on the east side of Alltiago Road which has a characteristic hipped roof, projecting front element and hipped roof porch. This is considered a valid response to the site context.

The four bedroom dwelling on plot 1 is designed with a hipped roof and an integral side garage to the south with a dormer window above, which serves a bedroom. The dwelling has a maximum width of 9.5 metres, a maximum depth of 8.3 metres and a ridge height of approximately 7.2 metres. Because of the change in levels terracing works are required to the rear to provide a level area (3 metres in depth and 9.5 metres in width) accessed from steps from the rear French doors with further steps leading to the garden below. Whilst such retaining works are undesirable on access grounds, the development of such a sloping site will inevitably require such works and it is important to note that the neighbouring dwelling at No. 63 also has a large terrace abutting the rear of that dwelling. Therefore it is not considered that such works would have a significant adverse impact on the visual amenities of the area and would not constitute an appropriate reason for refusal.

The steep nature of the land has resulted in the access road sweeping down through the site and around the back of Unit 1, terminating in a turning head that leads to the driveways of the pair of semis (Units 2 and 3) and the detached dwelling at Unit 4.

Units 2 and 3 exhibit similar design characteristics to Unit 1 but are joined at the garages resulting in a building of some 19 metres in width. The dwellings are set back from the access road by some 9 metres resulting in sizable front gardens and are splayed away from the side boundary of No. 57. The design of the dwellings has been amended to address concerns regarding the proximity of habitable room windows to the garden of No. 57. This has resulted in a small two storey side addition to Unit 2 to accommodate a stairwell, furthermore the semis have been re-designed to be asymmetrical.

Unit 4 is located approximately 2 metres to the north of Unit 2, its siting has been amended to increase the separation distance from the rear boundaries of dwelling fronting onto Cross Street. This has resulted in the dwelling being approximately 6 metres forward of the building line of Unit 3 however its prominence is somewhat reduced by its siting some 1 metre below the floor level of units 2 and 3. AREA 1 DEVELOPMENT CONTROL COMMITTEE – 16TH FEBRUARY 2010

ITEM 2 (CONT’D) APPLICATION NO. 2008/1575

The layout and design of the scheme has clearly developed as a result of the steep change in levels through the site. This change in levels and the requirement to provide an access road of a suitable gradient has meant that the finished floor levels of the development would be, at the most, approximately 2 metres above the existing ground levels of the neighbouring rear gardens on Cross Street and approximately 1.5 metres above the rear gardens of Glanyrafon. The proposal would therefore be relatively prominent from the rear elevations of surrounding dwellings.

With the exception of Unit 1, which fronts onto Alltiago Road, the remaining units to the rear of the site form part of a self contained development with its own individual design character. The layout and design of the proposal is considered to be satisfactory therefore it is not considered that the proposal would result in an over intensive form of development at the site and the key frontage onto Alltiago Road would benefit the visual amenities of the area by filling in the existing gap in the street scene. Overall the proposal is considered to be satisfactory in terms of visual amenity in accordance with development plan policies and would provide housing on a previously overgrown site which has a history of outline planning permissions dating back to 1979.

Residential Amenity

In terms of residential amenity the side elevation of Unit 1 would be located approximately 12 metres from the side extension of No. 63 which has windows that would face the application site. The boundary with this dwelling is currently defined by the rear wall of an outbuilding, which abuts the boundary, and a low blockwork wall. Therefore there are views from the application site towards this property. Although the rear elevation of Unit 1 is orientated west, away from the side boundary with No. 63, because of the change in levels through the site, the raised terrace to the rear of the unit 1 would provide views towards the side extension and garden of No. 63. The proposal has therefore been amended to include the provision of a two metre high solid screen to protect the amenities of the occupiers of this dwelling. A tree screen has also been indicated on the submitted plans which can be secured by condition. Therefore it is not considered that Unit 1 would have a significant overbearing or overlooking impact upon No. 63. Furthermore, by virtue of its siting and orientation, the resultant loss of daylight and sunlight to No. 63 would not result in significant material harm to the occupiers of this dwelling.

Turning to Unit 2, the rear elevation of this dwelling would face the side boundary of No 57 which has raised concerns with regards to potential overlooking from the first floor habitable windows to the rear garden of that dwelling, which appears to be in frequent use by the occupiers. The garden of No. 57 is higher than the application site with the boundary comprising a high stone retaining wall (approximately 2 metres in height). There is a 2 metre hedge above the retaining wall within the ownership of No. 57. A cross section has been submitted by the applicant to demonstrate that the first floor windows of Unit 1 would be at a similar height to the existing hedge. Therefore, given that the closest first floor habitable room window would be approximately 9 metres from the side boundary of No. 57, this would prevent any significant overlooking impacts upon the occupiers of this dwelling. Furthermore, by virtue of its siting and orientation it is not considered that the proposal would have any significant overbearing or overshadowing impacts upon the occupiers of No. 57. AREA 1 DEVELOPMENT CONTROL COMMITTEE – 16TH FEBRUARY 2010

ITEM 2 (CONT’D) APPLICATION NO. 2008/1575

The submitted sections indicate that the slab level of Units 2 and 3 would be approximately 2 metres above the rear garden level of the dwellings to the west on Cross Street. At its closest, the western most corner of unit 3 would be approximately 6.5 metres from the rear boundary of No. 22 Cross Street with direct views from the nearest first floor window of unit 3 being approximately 10 metres to the rear boundary of this dwelling. The elevated nature of the site above the garden level of dwellings on Cross Street would increase the potential for overlooking to the rear portion of the gardens, however dwellings on Cross Street have rear gardens in excess of 45 metres in length, therefore it is not considered that the proposal would result in any significant material overbearing or overshadowing impacts upon the occupiers of these dwellings or result in an unacceptable loss of privacy. The application drawings have indicated timber fencing and tree planting to supplement the existing boundary treatment which would further mitigate potential overlooking. It is recommending that, if approved, the boundary treatment and tree planting along this elevation is secured by conditions.

The siting of Unit 4 has been amended to bring the dwelling away from the rear boundary with No. 24 and No. 26 Cross Street and to address potential overlooking of the private amenity space of Unit 3. At its closest the western corner of Unit 4, which is single storey with accommodation above, would be some 5 metres from the rear boundary with No. 26 Cross Street. Given the depth of the rear gardens on Cross Street and a separation distance of approximately 9 metres from the nearest first floor habitable room window to the rear boundary of No. 24 Cross Street (which has an outbuilding abutting the rear boundary), it is not considered that the proposal would result in any significant material overbearing or overlooking impacts upon the occupiers of this dwelling.

Unit 4 would be clearly visible from the rear elevations and gardens of properties fronting on to Glanyrafon Road, its prominence would also be increased by the ground floor level of unit 4 being some 1.5 metres above the rear garden level of these dwellings. A separation distance of over 20 metres is maintained from the side elevation of unit 4 to the rear elevations of dwellings fronting Glanyrafon Road, furthermore at its closest, the side elevation of the garage of unit 4 would be some 5 metres from the rear boundary with No. 48. These separation distances are considered to be satisfactory to mitigate any significant concerns with regards to physical overbearance or overshadowing of these dwellings. Notwithstanding this to soften the appearance of the proposal it is suggested that a condition is included to provide a tree screen along the northern boundary.

In terms of noise and disturbance arising from the proposal, it is acknowledged that there would be some disturbance to neighbouring occupiers from vehicles using the access road but this would not be significant given the number of dwellings proposed. Satisfactory boundary treatments and tree screening would further mitigate any potential noise impacts upon neighbouring dwellings.

Access and Highways

Objections have been received with regards to highway safety concerns.

Outline consent has previously been granted for the site, most recently in 2007, where the highways observations noted that: AREA 1 DEVELOPMENT CONTROL COMMITTEE – 16TH FEBRUARY 2010

ITEM 2 (CONT’D) APPLICATION NO. 2008/1575

‘A gated field access is currently in existence and visibility for emerging drivers is of a satisfactory standard as it is located on the outside of the bend. Accessing the site with a left-in manoeuvre can be accommodated without any problems, the right-turn in however has restricted forward visibility. This aspect is the same for other accesses nearby, both on the adjacent site and opposite. I do not consider that this would constitute a sustainable reason for refusal’.

The current proposal is for 4 dwellings accessed off a shared private drive. The geometry of the access road conforms with guidelines for shared private drives and the internal layout is acceptable with adequate parking for residents and visitors all contained within the site.

It is not considered that the volume of traffic movements would be excessive and there are unlikely to be any highway safety implications with the proposal as the access conforms with recommended standards.

Surface Water Runoff and Drainage

In response to consultees, concerns have been expressed regarding potential surface water runoff as a result of the development given the steep nature of the site and the amount of hard surfaces proposed. Concerns have also been expressed regarding the adequacy of the soakaways to cope with the amounts of surface water run-off.

The developer has provided a drainage plan indicating surface water and foul water details. Each dwelling would be fitted with a grey water harvesting unit and would have a soakaway within the curtilage. These soakaways would, in turn, be connected by a trench soakaway to provide additional capacity. The road, footpath and driveways would also be surfaced in open joint block paviors.

The foul water from the dwellings will be pumped up to a connection on Alltiago Road and not Cross Street as previously indicated.

The Council’s Drainage section have been consulted on the submitted drainage scheme and comment that the soakaways have been designed to current standards but must be constructed and located in accordance with the requirements and criteria contained within the building regulations and subject to construction detail for the soakaways and cross sections showing relative site levels, soakaway details and existing ground levels of adjacent properties.. This will ensure no nuisance is created to any lower lying adjacent land. If ground conditions prove to be unsatisfactory for soakaway drainage then the applicant must provide alternative proposals for dealing with surface water run-off. Conditions are therefore recommended in this respect.

Other Matters

Concerns regarding visual amenity, residential amenity and access have been addressed above. Turning to other concerns, the impact of the proposal on neighbouring house values and the potential noise and disturbance generated from the proposed dwellings and their construction would not be material planning considerations that would affect the determination of this application. AREA 1 DEVELOPMENT CONTROL COMMITTEE – 16TH FEBRUARY 2010

ITEM 2 (CONT’D) APPLICATION NO. 2008/1575

Conclusions

Having regard to all material planning considerations, including the provisions of the Human Rights Act, the application is considered to be an appropriate form of residential development. The proposal would utilise a large overgrown site within a built up area that would positively relate to the street scene and would not result in any significant harm to the amenities of neighbouring occupiers. The proposal in therefore considered to be satisfactory in accordance with Policies EV1, EV2 and HC2 of the City and County of Swansea Unitary Development Plan.

RECOMMENDATION

APPROVE, subject to the following conditions:

1 The development shall be commenced not later than the expiration of 5 years from the date of this planning permission. Reason: To comply with the provisions of Section 91 of the Town and Country Planning Act, 1990.

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

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

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

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

AREA 1 DEVELOPMENT CONTROL COMMITTEE – 16TH FEBRUARY 2010 ITEM 2 (CONT’D) APPLICATION NO. 2008/1575

6 All access works to the site and the dwellings shall be completed prior to the beneficial occupation of any of dwellings, unless otherwise agreed in writing with the Local Planning Authority. Reason: In the interests of highway safety.

7 The drainage scheme shall be completed in accordance with the details submitted on drawing No. 10c received on 19th January 2010, unless otherwise agreed in writing by the Local Planning Authority. Reason: In order to ensure no nuisance to adjacent properties

8 Prior to the commencement of development full construction details for the soakaways including cross sections showing relative site levels, soakaway details and existing ground levels of adjacent properties shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The development shall be completed in accordance with the approved details. Reason: In order that the soakaway details are satisfactory to ensure no nuisance to adjacent properties.

INFORMATIVES

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

2 The Developer is reminded that consent under the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 conveys no approval under the Highways Act 1980 for works to be undertaken affecting any part of the public highway including verges and footways and that before any such works are commenced the developer must: i) obtain the approval of City and County of Swansea as Highway Authority to the details of any works to be undertaken affecting the public highway; ii) indemnify the City and County Council against any and all claims arising from such works; iii) give not less than one calendar month's notice in writing of the date that the works are to be commenced to the Director of Technical Services, at the County Hall, City and County of Swansea, Oystermouth Road, Swansea. Tel. 636000.

3 Please note that this consent is specific to the plans and particulars approved as part of the application. Any departure from the approved plans will constitute unauthorised development and may be liable to enforcement action. You (or any subsequent developer) should advise the Council of any actual or proposed variations from the approved plans immediately so that you can be advised how to best resolve the matter. In addition, any conditions that the Council has imposed on this consent will be listed above and should be read carefully. It is your (or any subsequent developers) responsibility to ensure that the terms of all conditions are met in full at the appropriate time (as outlined in the specific condition). AREA 1 DEVELOPMENT CONTROL COMMITTEE – 16TH FEBRUARY 2010

ITEM 2 (CONT’D) APPLICATION NO. 2008/1575

The commencement of development without firstly meeting in full the terms of any conditions that require the submission of details prior to the commencement of development will constitute unauthorised development. This will necessitate the submission of a further application to retain the unauthorised development and may render you liable to formal enforcement action. Failure on the part of the developer to observe the requirements of any other conditions could result in the Council pursuing formal enforcement action in the form of a Breach of Condition notice.

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

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

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

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

8 The development plan covering the City and County of Swansea is the City and County of Swansea Unitary Development Plan. The following policies were relevant to the consideration of the application: AS2, EV1, EV2, HC2.

9 It is an offence under the Wildlife & Countryside Act 1981 (as amended) to intentionally (intentionally or recklessly for Schedule 1 birds) to: - Kill, injure or take any wild bird - Take, damage or destroy the nest of any wild bird while that nest in use or being built - Take or destroy an egg of any wild bird You are advised that any clearance of trees, shrubs, scrub (including gorse and bramble) or empty buildings should not be undertaken during the bird nesting season, 1st March - 31st August and that such action may result in an offence being committed.

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

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

AREA 1 DEVELOPMENT CONTROL COMMITTEE – 16TH FEBRUARY 2010

ITEM 2 (CONT’D) APPLICATION NO. 2008/1575

PLANS

Site location plan, 4th August 2008. Amended plans 1 block plan received 1st May 2009, 2 proposed floor plans and elevations, 3 proposed section and west elevation, 4 proposed first floor plan units 2&3, 5 proposed floor plans for unit 1, 6 proposed elevations, 7 proposed elevations, 8 proposed section received 3rd March 2009. Additional plans section B-B and existing survey received 1st May 2009. Additional plans drainage layout received 19th January 2010.

AREA 1 DEVELOPMENT CONTROL COMMITTEE – 16TH FEBRUARY 2010

ITEM 3 APPLICATION NO. 2009/1636 WARD: Castle Area 1

Location: 24-27 St Helens Road, Swansea, SA1 4AG Proposal: Installation of shopfront Applicant: Tesco Stores Ltd

BACKGROUND INFORMATION

This application was DEFERRED FOR A SITE VISIT AT THE Area 1 Development Control Committee on the 26th January 2010 to consider parking issues.

POLICIES

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

Policy EV13 Proposals for new or renovated shopfronts, including security grilles, should be sympathetic to the character of the building, adjacent properties and the surrounding area. (City & County of Swansea Unitary Development Plan 2008)

SITE HISTORY

App No. Proposal 2009/0457 Use of ground floor for retail purposes (Class A1) Decision: Grant Permission Conditional Decision Date: 19/05/2009

2001/1183 Change of use from retail (Class A1) to church meeting centre (Class D1) and installation of new shop front Decision: Grant Permission Conditional Decision Date: 30/08/2001

2005/1833 Demolition of existing buildings and construction of 5 storey building containing 19 flats, ground floor restaurant and 13 car parking spaces at lower ground floor level Decision: Grant Permission Conditional Decision Date: 17/05/2006

2003/2221 Construction of one part 4 storey /part 5 storey block containing 19 flats and retail unit at ground floor and one two storey block incorporating car parking and 2 flats and provision of courtyard parking area Decision: Grant Permission Conditional Decision Date: 13/01/2004

AREA 1 DEVELOPMENT CONTROL COMMITTEE – 16TH FEBRUARY 2010

ITEM 3 (CONT’D) APPLICATION NO. 2009/1636

87/1300/03 CHANGE OF USE TO COMMUNITY CHURCH AND WELFARE CENTRE, GROUND FLOOR TO BE RETAINED AS SHOP. Decision: *HGPC - GRANT PERMISSION CONDITIONAL Decision Date: 13/10/1987

86/1796/03 CHANGE OF USE OF FIRST + SECOND FLOORS FROM FURNITURE SHOWROOM TO LICENSED RESTAURANT + BAR. Decision: *HGPC - GRANT PERMISSION CONDITIONAL Decision Date: 10/03/1987

89/0534/03 ENTRANCE TO BE MADE INTO 24 ST.HELENS RD. TO THE APOSTOLIC COMMUNITY CHURCH AND OFFICES Decision: *HGPC - GRANT PERMISSION CONDITIONAL Decision Date: 06/06/1989

95/1073 RETENTION OF USE AS A CAFE AND SANDWICH BAR Decision: *HGPCU - GRANT PERMISSION UNCONDITIONAL Decision Date: 08/11/1995

99/1401 CHANGE OF USE FROM CAFE (CLASS A3) TO AREA FOR CHURCH USE (CLASS D1) Decision: *HGPC - GRANT PERMISSION CONDITIONAL Decision Date: 30/11/1999

99/0611 CHANGE OF USE FROM RETAIL SHOP (CLASS A1) TO OFFICE/CHRISTIAN INFORMATION CENTRE (CLASS B1) Decision: *HGPC - GRANT PERMISSION CONDITIONAL Decision Date: 06/07/1999

2007/2478 Demolition of existing buildings and construction of 5 storey building containing 19 flats, ground floor restaurant and 13 car parking spaces at lower ground floor level (variation of condition 1 of planning permission 2005/1833 granted on 17th May 2006 to allow for amendments) Decision: Approve Conditional (S73) Decision Date: 21/01/2008

2009/1640 Installation of ATM to front elevation Decision: Officer Consideration Decision Date: 14/12/2009

2009/1642 One internally illuminated fascia sign and two internally illuminated projecting signs Decision: Grant Advertisement Consent (C) Decision Date: 26/01/2010

AREA 1 DEVELOPMENT CONTROL COMMITTEE – 16TH FEBRUARY 2010

ITEM 3 (CONT’D) APPLICATION NO. 2009/1636

RESPONSE TO CONSULTATION

The application was advertised on site and forty five neighbouring properties were individually consulted. TWO LETTERS OF OBJECTION have been received which are summarised as follows:

1. Concerns of residents that a new Tesco store with long hours of opening and an off- license may result in an escalation of nuisance, racially aggravated harassment and bullying within this area. 2. The Tesco store will have a negative impact to local businesses in the area.

Swansea Civic Society – No response.

Highway Observations – No objection

APPRAISAL

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

This application seeks full planning permission for a new shop front in association with the proposed use of the premises as a Tesco Express store at 24-27 St Helens Road, Swansea. Planning permission has previously been granted for the retail use of the premises. Planning permission Ref. 2009/0457 refers which was approved 19th May 2009.

This is one of a number of current applications submitted in relation to the above premises which are under consideration. Planning application Ref. 2009/1642 for the installation of one internally illuminated fascia sign and two internally illuminated projecting signs is included for consideration elsewhere on this agenda. Planning application Ref. 2009/1640 for the installation of an ATM to the front elevation of the premises is currently under consideration.

The main issues for consideration in this instance are the acceptability of the proposed shopfront in terms of visual and residential amenity having regard to prevailing Development Plan Policies particularly Policies EV1 (Design), and EV13 (Shopfronts) of the City and County of Swansea Unitary Development Plan. There are in this instance no additional issues for consideration arising from the provisions of the Human Rights Act.

Policy EV1 seeks to ensure that new development accords with criteria of good design. Policy EV13 seeks to ensure that proposals for new or renovated shopfronts, including security grilles are sympathetic to the character of the building, adjacent properties and the surrounding area.

The application premises are sited within a busy commercial area and in close proximity to a number of other commercial premises which maintain a variety of shop front styles. The proposal is considered to be in keeping with the character, scale and proportions of the existing building, and no alterations are proposed above the shopfront other than the installation of the fascia and projecting signs which are covered by a separate application. AREA 1 DEVELOPMENT CONTROL COMMITTEE – 16TH FEBRUARY 2010

ITEM 3 (CONT’D) APPLICATION NO. 2009/1636

In the circumstances, it is considered that the shopfront would respect the character of this building and the surrounding area generally, and would make a positive contribution to the street scene in the vicinity. The proposal is therefore considered to comply with the requirements of Policy EV1 and EV13 of the Unitary Development Plan (November 2008).

An ATM is illustrated on the submitted plans but is subject to a separate planning application (Ref. 2009/1640). A condition is therefore recommended excluding this element of the scheme.

In terms of residential amenity, the installation of the new shop front is not considered to have a detrimental impact on the amenities of the residential properties located above the application site. The proposal is therefore considered to comply with Policy EV1 of the Unitary Development Plan (November 2008).

With regards access and highway safety there are no highway safety implications with this proposal. The Head of Transportation and Engineering has raised no highway objection to the proposal.

Notwithstanding the above, two letters of objection have been received objecting to the Tesco store opening at St Helens Road. This application relates solely to the installation of a shopfront. Whilst the applicant is Tesco Stores Limited the principle of the retail use is not a matter for consideration at this stage given the previous grant of planning permission for the use of the ground floor of this property for retail purposes (Ref. 2009/0457) on 19th May 2009. In respect of concerns regarding opening hours and the sale of alcohol, there are no planning conditions restricting the retail use in this respect; however the sale of alcohol is covered under separate legislation and is not a matter for consideration as part of this application.

In conclusion, having regard to all material planning considerations, including the Human Rights Act, the proposed shopfront by virtue of its satisfactory design is considered to be an acceptable proposal in accordance with the requirements of Policies EV1 and EV13 of the City and County of Swansea Unitary Development Plan (adopted November 2008). Approval is therefore recommended.

RECOMMENDATION

APPROVE, subject to the following conditions;

AREA 1 DEVELOPMENT CONTROL COMMITTEE – 16TH FEBRUARY 2010

ITEM 3 (CONT’D) APPLICATION NO. 2009/1636

2 Notwithstanding the details shown on the submitted drawings, the proposed ATM and its relative signage as shown on Drawing No. 08514/AL12 B dated 4th November 2009 is hereby excluded from this planning permission. Reason: For the avoidance of doubt and in the interest of highway safety.

INFORMATIVES

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

2 The development plan covering the City and County of Swansea is the City and County of Swansea Unitary Development Plan. The following policies were relevant to the consideration of the application: EV1 and EV13 of the Unitary Development Plan (November 2008).

PLANS

08514/AL16 site location plan, 08514/AL04 existing elevations and site section, 08514/AL12 proposed elevation, design and access statement received 4th November 2009

AREA 1 DEVELOPMENT CONTROL COMMITTEE – 16TH FEBRUARY 2010

ITEM 4 APPLICATION NO. 2009/1642 WARD: Castle Area 1

Location: 24-27 St Helens Road, Swansea, SA1 4AG Proposal: One internally illuminated fascia sign and two internally illuminated projecting signs Applicant: Tesco Stores

BACKGROUND INFORMATION

This application was DEFERRED FOR A SITE VISIT at the Area 1 Development Control Committee on the 26th January 2010 to consider parking issues

POLICIES

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

SITE HISTORY

App No. Proposal 2009/0457 Use of ground floor for retail purposes (Class A1) Decision: Grant Permission Conditional Decision Date: 19/05/2009

86/1796/03 CHANGE OF USE OF FIRST + SECOND FLOORS FROM FURNITURE SHOWROOM TO LICENSED RESTAURANT + BAR. Decision: *HGPC - GRANT PERMISSION CONDITIONAL Decision Date: 10/03/1987

87/1300/03 CHANGE OF USE TO COMMUNITY CHURCH AND WELFARE CENTRE, GROUND FLOOR TO BE RETAINED AS SHOP. Decision: *HGPC - GRANT PERMISSION CONDITIONAL Decision Date: 13/10/1987

89/0534/03 ENTRANCE TO BE MADE INTO 24 ST.HELENS RD. TO THE APOSTOLIC COMMUNITY CHURCH AND OFFICES Decision: *HGPC - GRANT PERMISSION CONDITIONAL Decision Date: 06/06/1989

95/1073 RETENTION OF USE AS A CAFE AND SANDWICH BAR Decision: *HGPCU - GRANT PERMISSION UNCONDITIONAL Decision Date: 08/11/1995

AREA 1 DEVELOPMENT CONTROL COMMITTEE – 16TH FEBRUARY 2010

ITEM 4 (CONT’D) APPLICATION NO. 2009/1642

99/0611 CHANGE OF USE FROM RETAIL SHOP (CLASS A1) TO OFFICE/CHRISTIAN INFORMATION CENTRE (CLASS B1) Decision: *HGPC - GRANT PERMISSION CONDITIONAL Decision Date: 06/07/1999

99/1401 CHANGE OF USE FROM CAFE (CLASS A3) TO AREA FOR CHURCH USE (CLASS D1) Decision: *HGPC - GRANT PERMISSION CONDITIONAL Decision Date: 30/11/1999

2009/1636 Installation of shopfront Decision: Grant Permission Conditional Not yet determined

2009/1640 Installation of ATM to front elevation Decision: Officer Consideration Not yet determined

RESPONSE TO CONSULTATION

The application was advertised on site and twenty four neighbouring properties were individually consulted. TWO LETTERS OF OBJECTION have been received which are summarised as follows:

1. Concerns of residents that a new Tesco store with long hours of opening and an off-license may result in an escalation of nuisance, racially aggravated harassment and bullying within this area; 2. The Tesco store will have a negative impact to local businesses in the area. AREA 1 DEVELOPMENT CONTROL COMMITTEE – 16TH FEBRUARY 2010

ITEM 4 (CONT’D) APPLICATION NO. 2009/1642

Highway Observations - There are no highway objections in principle to the signs application however we have raised an objection to the ATM application (2009/1640). Subject to the signs relating to the ATM being excluded from the permission I recommend that no highway objection are raised to the proposal.

APPRAISAL

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

This application seeks advertisement consent for one internally illuminated fascia sign and two internally illuminated projecting signs in association with the proposed use of the premises as a Tesco Express Store (Class A1) at 24-27 St Helens Road, Swansea (2009/0457 refers) which was approved on the 19th May 2009.

This is one of a number of current applications submitted in relation to the above premises which are under consideration. Planning application 2009/1636 for the installation of a shopfront at the above premises is included for consideration elsewhere on this agenda. Planning application 2009/1640 for the installation of an ATM to the front elevation of the premises is currently under consideration.

The main issues for consideration in this instance are the acceptability of the proposed signs in terms of visual and residential amenity having regard to prevailing Development Plan Policies particularly Policy EV14 (Advertisements) of the City and County of Swansea Unitary Development Plan.

Policy EV14 seeks to ensure that the design of advertisements is: appropriate to their surroundings; respects the architectural qualities of the building on which they are displayed; are appropriate to the location in terms of method of display and support and the type and intensity of illumination and; they are acceptable in terms of highway safety.

In terms of visual amenity, the proposed fascia sign and projecting signs are considered acceptable, having no detrimental visual impact upon the building to which they relate or the street scene and wider surrounding area, bearing in mind the existence of many similar fascia signs along the length of this section of St Helens Road, and the scale of the host building. As such, it is not considered that the proposed signage would have an unacceptable adverse impact on the property itself, or the character and appearance of the streetscene. In addition, it is not considered that the externally illuminated fascia sign and projecting signs would have a significant adverse impact on the amenities of the surrounding occupiers by way of loss of light or loss of privacy. The proposal is therefore considered acceptable in accordance with the requirements of Policy EV14 in these respects.

The Head of Transportation and Engineering has advised that there are no highway objections in principle to the signs however a highway objection has been raised to the ATM application (Ref. 2009/1640) and negotiations are ongoing in this respect. It is recommended, therefore, that the signage relating to that item should be excluded from this application. No highway objections are raised to the proposal therefore subject to the signs relating to the ATM application being excluded from this permission. AREA 1 DEVELOPMENT CONTROL COMMITTEE – 16TH FEBRUARY 2010

ITEM 4 (CONT’D) APPLICATION NO. 2009/1642

Notwithstanding the above, two letters of objection have been received objecting to the Tesco store opening at St Helens Road raising concerns regarding anti social behaviour, racial abuse, and impact upon local businesses. This application however, relates solely to the proposed advertisements. Whilst the applicant is Tesco Stores Limited the principle of the retail use is not a matter for consideration at this stage given the previous grant of planning permission for the use of the ground floor of this property for retail purposes (Ref. 2009/0457) on 19th May 2009. In respect of concerns regarding the sale of alcohol, there are no planning conditions restricting the retail use in this respect, and at this stage this issue is covered under separate legislation and not a matter for consideration as part of this application.

In conclusion, it is considered that the proposed internally illuminated fascia sign and two internally illuminated projecting signs accords with Policy EV14 of the City and County of Swansea Unitary Development Plan (adopted November 2008). Approval is therefore recommended.

RECOMMENDATION APPROVE, subject to the following conditions:

1 Before any advertisement is displayed on land pursuant to this consent the permission of the owner of that land or other person entitled to grant permission in relation thereto shall be obtained. Reason: To comply with the requirements of the Town and Country Planning (Control of Advertisement) Regulations, 1992.

2 All advertisements displayed, and any land used for the display of advertisements, shall be maintained in a clean and tidy condition to the reasonable satisfaction of the Local Planning Authority. Reason: To comply with the requirements of the Town and Country Planning (Control of Advertisement) Regulations, 1992.

3 Any hoarding or similar structure, or any sign, placard, board or device erected or used principally for the purpose of displaying advertisements shall be maintained in a safe condition to the reasonable satisfaction of the Local Planning Authority. Reason: To comply with the requirements of the Town and Country Planning (Control of Advertisement) Regulations, 1992.

4 Where any advertisement is required under the above-mentioned regulations to be removed, the removal thereof shall be carried out to the reasonable satisfaction of the Local Planning Authority. Reason: To comply with the requirements of the Town and Country Planning (Control of Advertisement) Regulations, 1992.

5 Notwithstanding the details shown on the submitted drawings, the proposed ATM signage as shown on Drawing No. 08514/AL12 B dated 4th November 2009 is hereby excluded from this consent unless otherwise agreed in writing by the Local Planning Authority. Reason: For the avoidance of doubt and in the interest of highway safety.

AREA 1 DEVELOPMENT CONTROL COMMITTEE – 16TH FEBRUARY 2010

ITEM 4 (CONT’D) APPLICATION NO. 2009/1642

INFORMATIVES

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

2 The development plan covering the City and County of Swansea is the City and County of Swansea Unitary Development Plan. The following policies were relevant to the consideration of the application: Policy EV14 of the City and County of Swansea Unitary Development Plan.

PLANS

08514/AL16 site location plan, 08514/AL04 existing elevations & site section, 08514/AL Rev B signage elevation received 4th November, 2009

AREA 1 DEVELOPMENT CONTROL COMMITTEE – 16TH FEBRUARY 2010

ITEM 5 APPLICATION NO. 2009/1488 WARD: Area 1 Uplands

Location: Land between 47 & 53, Penygraig Road, Mount Pleasant, Swansea Proposal: Detached dwelling and garage (renewal of planning permission 2007/1182 granted on 8th August 2007) Applicant: D C Phillips

BACKGROUND INFORMATION

This application was DEFERRED FOR A SITE VISIT at the Area 1 Development Control Committee on the 26th January 2010 to assess impacts upon highway safety.

POLICIES

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

SITE HISTORY

App No. Proposal 91/1360 ERECTION OF DWELLING AND GARAGE (OUTLINE) Decision: *HGPC - GRANT PERMISSION CONDITIONAL Decision Date: 26/02/1992

99/0752 ERECTION OF A DWELLING HOUSE & GARAGE (RENEWAL OF OUTLINE PLANNING PERMISSION 97/0947 DATED 19th AUGUST 1997) Decision: *HGPC - GRANT PERMISSION CONDITIONAL Decision Date: 17/08/1999

AREA 1 DEVELOPMENT CONTROL COMMITTEE – 16TH FEBRUARY 2010

ITEM 5 (CONT’D) APPLICATION NO. 2009/1488

2001/0834 Erection of a dwelling house and garage (Renewal of Outline Planning Permission 99/0752 dated 17th August 1999) Decision: Grant Permission Conditional Decision Date: 17/07/2001

2003/0934 Construction of a dwelling house and garage (renewal of outline planning permission 2001/0834 granted 17th July 2001) Decision: Grant Permission Conditional Decision Date: 08/07/2003

2005/0983 Dwelling house and garage (renewal of outline planning permission 2003/0934 granted 8th July 2003) Decision: Grant Permission Conditional Decision Date: 23/08/2005

2007/1182 Detached dwelling and garage (renewal of outline planning permission 2005/0983 granted on 23rd August 2005) Decision: Grant Permission Conditional Decision Date: 08/08/2007

87/1634/01 ERECTION OF 1 NO. DWELLING HOUSE OR BUNGALOW AND GARAGE. (RENEWAL OF TIME LAPSE). Decision: *HGPC - GRANT PERMISSION CONDITIONAL Decision Date: 08/12/1987

93/1234 ERECTION OF DWELLING HOUSE AND GARAGE (RENEWAL OF OUTLINE PLANNING PERMISSION REF NO: 91/1360) Decision: *HGPC - GRANT PERMISSION CONDITIONAL Decision Date: 17/11/1993

95/0956 ERECTION OF DWELLING HOUSE AND GARAGE (RENEWAL OF OUTLINE PLANNING PERMISSION REF. 93/1234 GRANTED ON 17TH NOVEMBER 1993) Decision: *HGPC - GRANT PERMISSION CONDITIONAL Decision Date: 27/09/1995

97/0947 ERECTION OF DWELLING HOUSE AND GARAGE (RENEWAL OF OUTLINE PLANNING PERMISSION 95/0956 DATED 27.09.95) Decision: *HGPC - GRANT PERMISSION CONDITIONAL Decision Date: 19/08/1997

RESPONSE TO CONSULTATIONS

Objections THREE LETTERS OF OBJECTION have been received, all from occupants of the same property, summarised as follows: AREA 1 DEVELOPMENT CONTROL COMMITTEE – 16TH FEBRUARY 2010

ITEM 5 (CONT’D) APPLICATION NO. 2009/1488

1. The proposed dwelling would overlook and overshadow my property and my neighbours, severely affecting our amenity and privacy. 2. The proposed dwelling would directly increase the amount of surface water discharge to my property, creating drainage problems. 3. The construction and occupation of the property would increase noise and artificial light pollution. 4. The proposed dwelling would severely affect the stability of my plot, given its elevated nature and concerns relating to the strength of the existing boundary treatment. 5. Access is inadequate, as it would have to serve two dwellings. 6. Would this proposal if approved alter my own prospects of planning permission in the future.

Highway Safety - The application is for the renewal of consent for a single dwelling and garage on land between 47 and 53 Penygraig Road. No highway objections were raised during the previous applications and there have been no material changes on site which would change our view.

There are no highway objections subject to suitable access and parking arrangements within the site curtilage.

Dwr Cymru/Welsh Water - No objection, subject to standard conditions/informatives to protect the integrity of the sewerage system.

APPRAISAL

This application is reported to Committee for decision as the applicant is a member of staff of the Environment Department.

Full planning permission is sought for the renewal of outline planning permission 2007/1182, which was granted permission for the construction of a dwelling house and garage on the 8th August 2007. The application site comprises of a parcel of land, which currently forms part of the front garden to No. 51 Penygraig Road.

The application site which is roughly square in shape, being up to 23 metres in length and 20 metres in width steps down through a combination of terraces and banks from the boundary wall on Penygraig Road towards the rear of properties on Fairfield Terrace, above which it is elevated by approximately 9m. Access is proposed via the existing gateway serving No.51 Penygraig Road. From officer site visit it is clear that there is some Japanese Knotweed present at the rear of the plot.

This application, in line with previous permissions, reserves all matters of detail for subsequent approval. Whilst submitted in outline form, illustrative details of siting and means of access have been submitted in support of the Design and Access Statement.

Given that the principle of this development has already been established by the previous outline consents in 2001, 2003, 2005 and 2007 the main issues for consideration in this instance is whether there has been a material change in circumstances in the locality and to prevailing planning policies. There are in this case considered to be no additional overriding issues for consideration under the provisions of the Human Rights Act. AREA 1 DEVELOPMENT CONTROL COMMITTEE – 16TH FEBRUARY 2010

ITEM 5 (CONT’D) APPLICATION NO. 2009/1488

It is not considered that there has been any material change in planning circumstances since the previous planning permission was granted in 2007, other than the adoption of the City and County of Swansea Unitary Development Plan (UDP) in November 2008.

As this is an application for the renewal of an outline planning permission with all matters reserved for further consideration as previously, the siting and design of the proposed dwelling is not under consideration at this stage. It is considered that whilst relatively small, a sensitively designed modest dwelling could be accommodated on the plot without resulting in direct overlooking, loss of privacy overshadowing or overbearing physical impact on amenity of occupiers of neighbouring.

However, as stated above, illustrative details of siting and elevations have been submitted (Block Plan 001 and sketch 004), which indicate a two-storey, split level dwelling, with front elevation having a northerly aspect. The block plan also indicates screen planting along the rear boundary with Nos. 10-12 Fairfield Terrace. The dwelling would have a width of 12m and maximum depth of 9m with maximum ridge height of 7.8m.

This is considered excessive for the size of the plot, however, and in addition its orientation gives cause for concern with regard to potential overlooking and overbearing impact on neighbouring properties. In particular, the proposed front elevation would be sited approximately 9m from the side elevation of the property to the north, No 53 Penygraig Road, and approximately 7m from side elevation of No 47, both of which have habitable room windows. The proposed rear elevation would also be 7m from the rear gardens of the Nos. 10-12 Fairfield terrace, and being approximately 9m higher than those properties, and would consequently have a significant overlooking and overbearing impact on the amenity of the occupiers of those properties, which could not be overcome by the proposed screen planting.

Therefore, as the applicant has applied for outline permission only, with all matters reserved, it is considered that planning permission should be granted on this basis only, with detailed consideration being provided at the reserved matters stage.

The concerns raised by neighbours relating to residential amenity and highway safety have been addressed above. With regard to drainage issues raised, Dwr Cymru/Welsh Water have no objection to the proposal, subject to standard conditions/informatives being imposed to protect the integrity of the sewerage system. Noise levels generated by an adjoining residential dwelling is not a material planning consideration in this instance which would justify a recommendation of refusal. Any damage to an adjoining property as a result of carrying out the proposed works would be a party wall issue, outside of planning control. Each planning application is also determined on its individual merits, which would be the case in the event of the objector submitting any future planning application.

In conclusion, therefore, and having regard to all material considerations, it is considered that the renewal of this outline planning permission represents a satisfactory form of development that complies with Policies EV1, EV2 and HC2 of the UDP. Approval is therefore recommended. AREA 1 DEVELOPMENT CONTROL COMMITTEE – 16TH FEBRUARY 2010

ITEM 5 (CONT’D) APPLICATION NO. 2009/1488

RECOMMENDATION

APPROVE, subject to the following conditions:

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

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

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

4 The development shall be completed in accordance with the approved plans prior to any part of the development being brought into beneficial use. Reason: To ensure that the development is completed in accordance with the plans approved by the Council, and so avoid any detriment to amenity or public safety by works remaining uncompleted.

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

6 The development hereby approved shall at all times retain at least two car parking spaces and a turning facility within the curtilage of the site which shall be used as such unless agreed otherwise in writing by the Local Planning Authority. Reason: In the interests of highway safety.

AREA 1 DEVELOPMENT CONTROL COMMITTEE – 16TH FEBRUARY 2010

ITEM 5 (CONT’D) APPLICATION NO. 2009/1488

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

8 Notwithstanding the layout block plan detailed on Drawing 001 and the elevational sketch detailed in Drawing 004, these details are not approved as part of this outline planning permission. Reason: The submitted details are regarded as unacceptable and would be detrimental to the visual amenities of the area and residential amenities of neighbouring properties.

INFORMATIVES

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

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

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

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

6 The siting and elevational details submitted on drawings Nos. 001 and 004 are not regarded as acceptable. The applicant is therefore advised to seek pre application advice from the Local Planning Authority prior to the submission of any subsequent reserved matters application.

PLANS

001 site location plan and block plan, 004 proposed section, 003 photo montage, 002 photo montage, design and access statement received 6th October 2009

AREA 1 DEVELOPMENT CONTROL COMMITTEE – 16TH FEBRUARY 2010

ITEM 6 APPLICATION NO. 2009/1614 WARD: Uplands Area 1

Location: Land at junction of Pen-Y-Graig Road and Fairfield Terrace, Swansea Proposal: Variation of condition 4 of planning permission 2005/2179 granted 31st January 2006 to allow for the occupation of the dwellings without widening of the footway on Pen-Y-Graig Road Applicant: Mr Reginald Burgess

BACKGROUND INFORMATION

This application was DEFERRED FOR A SITE VISIT at the Area 1 Development Control Committee on the 26th January 2010 to assess the impact upon highway safety.

POLICIES

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

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

SITE HISTORY

App No. Proposal 2001/1177 Erection of 8, one bed flats in split level two/three storey block incorporating 8 integral garages Decision: Refuse Decision Date: 18/09/2001

2002/0271 Construction of four, three storey dwelling houses with integral garages Decision: Grant Permission Conditional Decision Date: 16/04/2002

96/0649 RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT (OUTLINE) Decision: *HGPC - GRANT PERMISSION CONDITIONAL Decision Date: 01/10/1996

AREA 1 DEVELOPMENT CONTROL COMMITTEE – 16TH FEBRUARY 2010

ITEM 6 (CONT’D) APPLICATION NO. 2009/1614

88/1746/01 DEMOLITION OF EXISTING ACCOMMODATION + CONSTRUCTION OF TWO NO PAIRS OF SPLIT LEVEL SEMI DETACHED DWELLINGS. Decision: *HGPC - GRANT PERMISSION CONDITIONAL Decision Date: 03/01/1989

88/1526/03 CHANGE OF USE TO BED + BREAKFAST ACCOMMODATION BY RESTORATION AND REFURBISHMENT OF EXISTING BUILDING. Decision: *HRP - REFUSE PERMISSION Decision Date: 06/12/1988

87/1069/03 CHANGE OF USE TO A PRIVATE NURSING HOME FOR NOT MORE THAN TEN RESIDENTS ALSO REPAIRS AND ALTERATIONS. Decision: *HGPC - GRANT PERMISSION CONDITIONAL Decision Date: 13/10/1987

86/1735/03 CHANGE OF USE FROM VACANT SOCIAL CLUB TO PRIVATE DWELLING; REPAIRS + ALTERATIONS. Decision: *HGPC - GRANT PERMISSION CONDITIONAL Decision Date: 05/05/1987

84/0124/01 ERECT TWELVE FLATS WITH FIFTEEN CAR PARKING SPACES. Decision: *HGPC - GRANT PERMISSION CONDITIONAL Decision Date: 26/04/1984

2005/2179 Construction of 4 linked 3 storey dwelling houses with integral garages Decision: Grant Permission Conditional Decision Date: 31/01/2006

RESPONSE TO CONSULTATIONS

TWENTY FOUR neighbouring properties were consulted and the proposal was advertised on site. ONE LETTER OF REPRESENTATION has been received which is summarised as follows:

1) The loss of the footway will result in pedestrian and vehicular problems 2) There is a drop of 3m from the existing footpath and the temporary fence is not safe enough. 3) The council must ensure that the properties are sold or let as residential and not as a hostel.

Highway Observations - The application is for Variation of condition 4 of planning permission 2005/2179 granted 31st January 2006 to allow for the occupation of the dwellings without the improvement of the footway on Pen-Y-Graig Road.

AREA 1 DEVELOPMENT CONTROL COMMITTEE – 16TH FEBRUARY 2010

ITEM 6 (CONT’D) APPLICATION NO. 2009/1614

In the 2005 application it was envisaged that the footway could be widened to allow easier pedestrian movements and give better visibility for egressing vehicles. The footway was intended to be supported by new retaining walls but following discussion between the original Developer (who has since ceased trading) and the council's Bridges and Structures section it became apparent that this was not feasible due to the level differences and the limited area available in which to carry out the necessary excavations, which would have been required to accommodate the retaining structures resulting in the cost of the retaining works making the development unviable.

The site remains uncompleted and a temporary fence is in place at the rear of the plot adjacent to Pen-y-Graig Road. It falls therefore to be considered how essential the originally intended works were in terms of highway safety.

A site visit has taken place with a prospective purchaser who wishes to take over the Development and complete the finishing works.

Whilst the widening is not in a position to be completed as per the original consent it is possible to provide localised widening and it is worth pointing out that at no location is any footway width being reduced or lost. In terms of safety therefore, provided that visibility is not prejudiced then the need to have the footway widened is lessened.

Visibility would have been improved by the original footway widening but this can be achieved by removing the brick built structure down to pavement level at the junction of Fairfield Terrace and Pen-y-Graig Road which will improve visibility for egressing vehicles and improve highway safety at the site as was originally intended. This is achievable at a reasonable cost and will address the safety concerns that were originally raised.

The following boundary treatments have been agreed:

1. Pedestrian visirail (to accommodate visibility at junctions, for the first 18.8m measured from the junction)

2. Close boarded fence for the next 8.7m attached to the existing box section posts.

3. Close boarded fence for the next 9m attached to the rear of the existing post and rail fence.

4. Dwarf (700mm high) stonework wall to match existing for the next 6m, with 1.1m high close boarded fence on top.

5. Removal of the brick built structure remaining at the junction of Pen-y-Graig Road and Fairfield Terrace to allow for improved visibility.

Remainder of the wall to remain as is.

Fixing/mounting details to be agreed with the Highway Authority.

I recommend that no highway objections are raised to the removal of the condition subject to:-

AREA 1 DEVELOPMENT CONTROL COMMITTEE – 16TH FEBRUARY 2010

ITEM 6 (CONT’D) APPLICATION NO. 2009/1614

1. All boundary works being undertaken to Highway Authority Standards and Specifications in accordance with details to be submitted and approved.

2. Resurfacing of the footway along the Pen y Graig Road frontage in accordance with details to be agreed.

APPRAISAL

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

Permission is sought for the variation of condition 4 of planning permission 2005/2179 granted 31st January 2006 to allow for the occupation of the dwellings without the footway on Pen-Y-Graig Road, Swansea.

The development has been practically implemented with the four 3-storey dwellings being constructed. Condition 4 of Planning Permission Ref: 2005/2179 stated that:

‘Prior to the occupation of the dwellings, the footway on Pen-Y-Graig Road shall be widened in accordance with full engineering details to be submitted and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority.’

The footway was intended, however, to be supported by new retaining walls but following discussion between the original developer and the Council's Bridges and Structures Section it became apparent that this was not feasible due to the level differences and the limited area available in which to carry out the necessary excavations and the cost of the retaining works which would make the development unviable.

No other alterations are proposed to the previous application and so it remains to consider the impact that the loss of the proposed footpath widening would have on highway safety conditions, having particular regard to Policy EV1 of the City and County of Swansea Unitary Development Plan 2008.

In terms of visual and residential amenity, the footpath is to remain as has historically been in existence and there are no other alterations proposed to the previously approved scheme. Therefore, there are no visual or residential amenity issues to consider in this respect.

Turning now to the highway safety implications, and whilst the footpath widening cannot be completed as per the original consent it would be possible to provide localised widening and it should be noted that at no location is any footway width being reduced or lost. Accordingly, the Head of Transportation and Engineering has raised no objection to the variation of condition 4 subject to the existing footpath being resurfaced and satisfactory boundary treatments being erected. However as no details of the aforementioned boundary treatments have been submitted as part of this current application, a condition is recommended that details are to be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority prior the dwellings being brought into beneficial use. AREA 1 DEVELOPMENT CONTROL COMMITTEE – 16TH FEBRUARY 2010

ITEM 6 (CONT’D) APPLICATION NO. 2009/1614

With regard to the issues raised in the letter of objection, points 1 and 2 have been addressed above. Point 3 relates to the potential for non-residential use at the site which would require a further grant of planning permission for the change of use of the properties from the lawful residential use. This is not, therefore, a matter for consideration as part of the current application.

In conclusion therefore and having regard to all material planning considerations including the Human Rights Act, the proposal is considered to represent an acceptable form of development having particular regard to Policy EV1 and HC2 of the City and County of Swansea Unitary Development Plan 2008.

RECOMMENDATION

APPROVE, subject to the following condition(s):

1 Prior to the occupation of the dwellings, the footpath along the site boundary with Pen-Y-Graig Road shall be resurfaced to Highway Authority specification in accordance with details to be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. Reason: In the interest of highway safety.

2 Prior to the occupation of the dwellings, all boundary and footpath works at the site shall be completed in accordance with details to be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. Reason: In the interest of highway safety.

3 Prior to the occupation of the dwellings, vehicular footway crossings and footway renewal shall be completed along Fairfield Terrace in accordance with details which shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. Reason: In the interest of highway safety.

INFORMATIVES

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

2 The development plan covering the City and County of Swansea is the City and County of Swansea Unitary Development Plan. The following policies were relevant to the consideration of the application: Policies EV1 and HC2 of the City and County of Swansea Unitary Development Plan 2008.

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

PLANS Design and access statement, site location plan received 30th October 2009

AREA 1 DEVELOPMENT CONTROL COMMITTEE – 16TH FEBRUARY 2010

ITEM 7 APPLICATION NO. 2009/1728 WARD: Area 1 Cwmbwrla

Location: 23 Highbury Close Cwmbwrla Swansea SA5 8BJ Proposal: Retention of first floor rear balcony Applicant: Mr John Cornelius

BACKGROUND INFORMATION

This application was DEFERRED FOR A SITE VISIT at the Area 1 Development Control Committee on the 26th January 2010 to assess the impact of the balcony.

POLICIES

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

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

SITE HISTORY

App No. Proposal 2009/1255 Retention of first floor rear balcony (application for a Certificate of Lawfulness) Decision: Withdrawn Decision Date: 13/11/2009

2004/0422 Single storey rear extension Decision: Grant Permission Conditional Decision Date: 21/04/2004

2008/0107 First floor rear extension and extension to existing balcony Decision: Refuse Decision Date: 14/02/2008

2009/0234 Rear dormer Decision: Refuse Decision Date: 14/04/2009

AREA 1 DEVELOPMENT CONTROL COMMITTEE – 16TH FEBRUARY 2010

ITEM 7 (CONT’D) APPLICATION NO. 2009/1728

77/1461/03 ERECTION OF 12 NO 2 STOREY HOUSES AND 10 NO BUNGALOWS Decision: *HGPC - GRANT PERMISSION CONDITIONAL Decision Date: 30/01/1978

RESPONSE TO CONSULTATIONS

THREE neighbouring properties were individually consulted. No response to consultation exercise but see summarised letters of support submitted with agent’s supporting statement. Any late representations will be reported verbally to Committee.

APPRAISAL

This application is called to Committee for decision at the request of Councillor Peter Black A.M.

Full planning permission is sought for the retention of a balcony affixed to the rear of No.23 Highbury Close, Cwmbwrla, Swansea, which is an end property in a modern terrace of five houses.

Relevant History

2004/0422 – a disabled facilities grant approved scheme for a single storey rear extension (to house a disabled bedroom at ground floor) on 21st April 2004 and proposed windows only in the rear elevation of the extension, and no mention was made of the balcony subsequently installed at first floor or the French window installed in the western side elevation.

2008/0107 – sought consent for a first floor rear extension and an extension to the unauthorised balcony, so that it would extend almost the entire depth of the proposed first floor rear extension. That application was refused permission on 14th February 2008 and it was advised that enforcement action be taken in respect of the unauthorised balcony and non-compliance with the earlier approved plans.

2009/0234 – this application sought consent for a rear dormer to be inserted into the rear roof plane of the property. The dormer proposed would, by virtue of its scale and unsympathetic design, result in the introduction of a discordant and visually intrusive structure which failed to respect the character and appearance of the terraced dwelling and the surrounding streetscene, contrary to Development Policies and the adopted SPG. Approving such a proposal was also considered likely to set an unwanted precedent in the area and the proposal was refused consent for these reasons on 14th April 2009. Following this refusal it was again advised that enforcement action be taken in respect of the unauthorised balcony and non-compliance with the earlier approved plans.

An Enforcement Notice was served in respect of the balcony on 27th July 2009, taking effect on 28th August 2009, and giving the applicants two months from the date on which the notice takes effect to comply with its requirements. An appeal and the following application were submitted prior to the latter date, and the appeal is currently held in abeyance pending the outcome of this application. AREA 1 DEVELOPMENT CONTROL COMMITTEE – 16TH FEBRUARY 2010

ITEM 7 (CONT’D) APPLICATION NO. 2009/1728

2009/1255 – an application was submitted for a Certificate of Proposed Lawful Development for the balcony at the property, with evidence which purported to demonstrate that the balcony had existed at the property for more than 4 years before the date of the application. Following extensive discussions and negotiation between the agent and Local Authority Planning and Legal Officers regarding the ambiguity of some of the evidence submitted, this application was formally withdrawn by the agent on 13th November 2009.

Agent’s Supporting Statement

In support of the current application the agent has submitted a report, a version of which also accompanied the appeal against the enforcement notice and Certificate of Proposed Lawful Development referred to above, and is reproduced here in full: “The property at No.23 Highbury Court (should be Close) is currently occupied as an end of terrace residential dwelling house. The dwelling has been previously extended with a single storey rear extension which was completed in December 2004.

The balcony was constructed in early 2005 and is a prefabricated structure with a floor area of 1.7m by 1.7m and it is 3.9m above the ground level immediately to the rear of the existing dwelling.

The balcony is required to allow the applicants’ disabled daughter to sit outside when the weather permits. Access to the balcony is gained directly from a bedroom (see plans). There is also a stair-lift for the use of the daughter to gain access to her bedroom and then via the bedroom to the balcony. As such the balcony is primarily required for use by a disabled person and the personal circumstances of the family, together with the suggested conditions outlined below, should outweigh any concerns the Local Planning Authority might have regarding the retention of the balcony.

It is acknowledged that the dwelling at No.23 Highbury Close is elevated above the dwellings in Stepney Street and Lynn Street. The property on the application site is also set at an angle to the properties in Stepney Street, thereby restricting views in a southerly direction. The rear of the properties in Stepney Street have high walls along their rear boundaries and the majority of the windows in the rear elevations of those dwellings are obscure glazed. Consequently, due to the angle between the balcony and the dwellings in Stepney Street and the intervening open space between the rear of the application site and Stepney Street, there would be no significant overlooking of the small rear amenity spaces.

The views from the balcony will be not significantly greater than if a `Juliet’ balcony was constructed. The restricted size of the current structure only allows one person to sit out on it and then only for a limited time.

It is considered that the retention of the balcony will not significantly detract from the residential amenities of the occupiers of the properties in both Stepney Street and Lynn Street. The balcony, when viewed from the south and south east, will be viewed against the backdrop of the existing dwelling and will not be a prominent feature in the street scene. AREA 1 DEVELOPMENT CONTROL COMMITTEE – 16TH FEBRUARY 2010

ITEM 7 (CONT’D) APPLICATION NO. 2009/1728

The balcony measures 1.7m by 1.7m and is big enough to allow one person to sit out in a chair. Should the Local Planning Authority consider its retention appropriate the applicant would accept a condition requiring the erection of opaque screens to the eastern and western sides of the balcony.

Furthermore the applicant would be prepared to accept a condition requiring the removal of the balcony if it was no longer appropriate for use by his disabled daughter. Such a condition could be imposed in this instance as the balcony is a prefabricated structure which is bolted to its supports and to the dwelling.

It is considered that the scale of the balcony will not detract from the visual amenity of the area and neither will there be significant overlooking of neighbouring properties, as the majority of the rear amenity spaces of neighbouring properties, particularly those at a lower level in Stepney Street, are screened from views from the balcony by walls, fences and hedges.

Five letters of support including three from neighbouring residents have been submitted by the applicant in support of the application.

Those letters of support can be summarised as follows:

• removal of the balcony would be a big disappointment to the applicants family as this is the only place that the disabled daughter can go when she is house bound • since the extension/balcony have been built there is very little garden for the daughter to get out of the house as the extension takes up most of the very small garden that was there in the first place. • We have no problems with the balcony on the applicant’s house and cannot see how it has a bad impact on the neighbours as all the gardens overlook each other with very low walls or fences. The balcony has no more intrusion on the neighbours than if they were to stand in their garden. • Neighbours opposite and in front of out house and behind us who have dormers built onto their houses would more likely be classed as intrusive yet we have no complaints against any of them either. • Neighbours family members have sat on the balcony with the applicant’s daughter, keeping her company and passing the day with her.

Proposal

The balcony itself comprises a steel constructed platform, measuring 1.7m square, supported by a steel joist cantilever system, and is painted brown. It sits just above the pitched roof of the rear extension approved under application reference number 2004/0422.

In terms of visual amenity, the balcony is considered to relate satisfactorily to the application property. Its limited dimensions; siting behind the roof plane of the existing single storey rear extension; and the topography of the immediately surrounding area ensure that it is barely visible when travelling along the nearby highway network. In the circumstances, the balcony proposed to be retained is not considered to result in an unacceptable visual impact upon the character and appearance of the surrounding area generally. AREA 1 DEVELOPMENT CONTROL COMMITTEE – 16TH FEBRUARY 2010

ITEM 7 (CONT’D) APPLICATION NO. 2009/1728

However, the balcony is sited in front of the only bedroom of the property, and adjacent to the western side of the application property, where it abuts the property at No.22 Highbury Close. The five properties in this row are set in relatively small plots and are staggered so that those to the west (No’s 19 and 20) have their front building line some 2.5m forward of that of No’s 22/23. Because of this `staggered’ layout, the siting of the balcony means that unrestricted and direct views are available across the rear amenity spaces of all of these properties, along with longer views over those properties fronting Stepney Street to the south and west.

Whilst the personal circumstances of the applicants family have been outlined in support of this application, as detailed above, and in response to decisions relating to previous applications relating to this property, it is not considered that these outweigh the unacceptable overlooking impact which results from the siting of the balcony at this location.

In this respect it should be recognised that Paragraph 4.1.6 of Planning Policy Wales advises that the personal circumstances of occupiers or personal hardship will rarely outweigh more general planning considerations and that personal permissions will hardly ever be justified for works or uses that will remain long after the personal circumstances of the applicant have changed. Whilst the personal circumstances of the applicant are recognised, it is not considered that these represent exceptional circumstances which would justify the unacceptable impact upon the residential amenities of the occupiers of neighbouring dwellings.

Moreover, it should be noted that the ground floor extension at the property to house a disabled bedroom, was completed on 17th September 2004 (Building Regulations documented). As a result of this construction, the private amenity space associated with this property has been totally removed and, in support of the current application, it is noted that the balcony is required to allow the applicants disabled daughter to sit out of doors. It should also be noted, however, that this extension is now illustrated on the plans submitted as part of this application to be a dining room.

Having regard to all material considerations, including the Human Rights Act, the retention of the balcony at this location is considered to represent an unacceptable form of development, conflicting with the criteria of Policies EV1 and HC7 of the adopted City & County of Swansea Unitary Development Plan (2008) and the guidance contained in the recently published Supplementary Planning Guidance document `A Design Guide for Householder Development' (2008).

RECOMMENDATION

REFUSE, for the following reason:

1 The balcony proposed to be retained, by virtue of its siting and close proximity to adjacent properties, results in unacceptable overlooking of the private amenity space of neighbouring properties to the detriment of the residential amenities of the occupiers of those properties. The proposal is therefore contrary to the requirements of Policies EV1 and HC7 of the adopted City & County of Swansea Unitary Development Plan (2008); and the recently published guidance document `A Design Guide for Householder Development' (2008).

AREA 1 DEVELOPMENT CONTROL COMMITTEE – 16TH FEBRUARY 2010

ITEM 7 (CONT’D) APPLICATION NO. 2009/1728

INFORMATIVES

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

PLANS

Site location plan, block plan, existing elevations, existing floor plans received 19th November 2009

AREA 1 DEVELOPMENT CONTROL COMMITTEE – 16TH FEBRUARY 2010

ITEM 8 APPLICATION NO. 2009/1300 WARD: Area 1 Penderry

Location: Land at Portmead Avenue Blaenymaes Swansea Proposal: Supported residential housing accommodation with associated parking (Class C3) Applicant: Mr Paul Bevan

BACKGROUND INFORMATION

This application was DEFERRED FOR A SITE VISIT at the Area 1 Development Control Committee on the 26th January 2010 to assess the impact upon the footpath running through the site.

POLICIES

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

Policy AS2 Accessibility - Criteria for assessing design and layout of new development. (City & County of Swansea Unitary Development Plan 2008)

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

AREA 1 DEVELOPMENT CONTROL COMMITTEE – 16TH FEBRUARY 2010

ITEM 8 (CONT’D) APPLICATION NO. 2009/1300

SITE HISTORY

App No. Proposal 94/1447 RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT (APPLICATION FOR A CERTIFICATE OF APPROPRIATE ALTERNATIVE DEVELOPMENT) Decision: *HCIA - CERTIFICATE ISSUED (APA) Decision Date: 08/02/1995

93/0561 RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT (OUTLINE) Decision: *HRP - REFUSE PERMISSION Decision Date: 14/07/1993

84/0689/11 PROPOSED B.M.X. TRACK. Decision: *HGPCU - GRANT PERMISSION UNCONDITIONAL Decision Date: 28/06/1984

RESPONSE TO CONSULTATIONS

TWO neighbouring properties were consulted and the proposal was advertised on site. no response.

Highway Observation – The application is for supported accommodation with associated car parking and landscaping.

The layout comprises four bedrooms for clients with an additional bedroom for staff use. There are also communal lounge areas and garden areas.

Access to the site is directly off Portmead Avenue and leads to a car park for 6 spaces (including two for disabled use) and also a covered bike stand for cycle storage. This is an appropriate level of provision given the nature of the usage.

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

1. The disabled parking spaces being laid out in accordance with the relevant British Standard.

2. The car parking to remain for sole use by the development in perpetuity.

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

APPRAISAL

This application is reported to Committee for decision at the request of Councillor Grenville Phillips.

This application seeks full planning permission for one detached dwelling on land at Portmead Avenue, Blaenymaes. The dwelling is to provide supported residential accommodation with associated parking (Class C3). AREA 1 DEVELOPMENT CONTROL COMMITTEE – 16TH FEBRUARY 2010

ITEM 8 (CONT’D) APPLICATION NO. 2009/1300

An application at this site (Ref: 93/0561) was refused in July 1993 due to the unacceptable loss of public open space that would have ‘seriously prejudiced the implementation of the programme of environmental improvements included in the Blaenymaes Community Renewal Strategy’. This strategy has been implemented and the current adopted Unitary Development Plan does not identify this plot as an area which should be protected as open space. In light of the fact that the former Blaenymaes Community Renewal Strategy is now no longer relevant and the current scheme is to be assessed on its merits in light of prevailing Development Plans.

The site is irregular in shape, with a maximum depth of approx. 60m and a frontage of approx. 44m. To the north and west of the site lie residential dwellings and to the south is a community/youth centre. To the east and across a green area lies a police station and primary school.

Amendments have been sought and gained to relocate the proposed boundary treatment approx. 3.8m back from the front of the site. Furthermore, the previously proposed bin storage area has been relocated from the front to the side of the proposed building.

In terms of impact upon visual amenity, the single storey building incorporates is a rectangular ‘horseshoe’ type footprint, enveloping a central courtyard area in which the main entrance is located and is set back from the highway to pick up the building line established by the adjacent properties. The building’s footprint stands at approx. 400m2 which is considered to satisfactorily relate to the plot size and would appear, it is considered, as a well portioned single storey building within the street scene and of similar scale and proportions to the youth centre located on the adjacent plot to the south. The bin storage area has been relocated to the side, out of significant view from the highway to the front, and now sits adjacent to the cycle storage area, both to be constructions clad in timber, to match the proposed side and rear boundary treatment.

The proposed accommodation is contemporary in design, utilising smooth render and brickwork. The use of such materials, particularly the pale /yellow brickwork is considered acceptable and in keeping with the surrounding dwellings, which primarily utilise brickwork of similar texture and colour. The proposed roof will incorporate a mono-pitch design using a low-profile aluminium sheet system. Whilst this roofing material is not evident within the street scene, it is considered that the design of the roof reflects that of the roofs of the neighbouring properties, presenting a pitch toward to the street as found in the surrounding rows of terraced dwellings and adjacent community centre. In this respect, the choice of roofing material is not considered to have a detrimental visual impact upon the character of the building to which is relates or the wider street scene and its design would minimise the roof’s visual prominence.

With regard to the proposed boundary fence and railing, concern was raised with regard to the original proposal and continuation of the proposed timber boundary fence along the northern and southern boundaries to the highway, thereby providing a visual barrier in front of the building line. The siting of the bin storage area was also in front of the building line. This was considered unacceptable and detrimental to the character of the area. However, amendments have been sought and gained with the timber fence now terminating at the building line and the proposed railing to the front being set back approx. 3.2m. AREA 1 DEVELOPMENT CONTROL COMMITTEE – 16TH FEBRUARY 2010

ITEM 8 (CONT’D) APPLICATION NO. 2009/1300

The bin storage area has also been relocated to the side of the proposed building. A landscaped area is to be provided to the front of the railing, thereby softening the impact of the boundary treatment with a smaller railing approx. 0.6m in height running along the boundary to provide protection and defining the boundary of the site. This element of the scheme is now considered acceptable, providing views through the site without compromising security and would have no significantly adverse impact upon the character and appearance of the building to which it relates nor the wider street scene.

Therefore it is not considered that the proposal would result in any significant visual harm to this mixed area and would therefore be in accordance with prevailing Development Plan policies.

Turning now to residential amenity, the proposal seeks to erect a four bedroom supported accommodation unit (plus one staff bedroom) with associated parking to the south side. The unit is sited centrally within the plot and provides a minimum distance of approx. 8m to the site boundary and a separation distance of approx. 19m to the nearest adjacent dwelling (to the north). To the south lies a community/youth centre which lies approx. 12m from the proposal dwelling. Whilst there are windows proposed on the northern and southern elevations of the building it is considered that the separation distance combined with the provision of a 1.8m high boundary fence, and the single storey nature of the proposal, is sufficient to prevent any unacceptable levels of overlooking and would therefore not result in loss of privacy of the occupiers of adjacent properties.

In terms of potential overbearing or overshadowing impact, the proposed building is a single storey structure with eaves at approx. 2.6m in height and a ridge at 4.7m. The dwelling has been designed to pitch the roof away from the neighbouring dwellings. It is therefore considered that given the modest height of the property, combined with the separation distances stated above the proposal would have no adverse impact in terms of overbearing or overshadowing and would not therefore result in unacceptable impact upon the occupiers of neighbouring properties in this respect. Furthermore, the properties located opposite the site are approx. 30 m to the west and across a highway. Therefore, it is not considered that the proposed scheme would have any adverse impact upon the occupiers of these properties.

The parking area and bin/cycle storage areas are sited away from residential properties, located to the south adjacent to the community/youth centre, providing a separation distance of approx. 3m from the gable end of the adjacent building. A landscaped buffer zone of 1m in depth is also proposed. In light of the above, it is considered that the proposed parking area and storage areas would not result in any adverse impact upon the use of the community/youth centre.

With regard to highway implications, it is proposed to provide a total of 6 parking spaces within the site, along the southern boundary, with bin storage and cycle storage located immediately to the east of this. The Head of Transportation and Engineering has raised no objection to the scheme and this element of the scheme is considered acceptable in this respect.

In conclusion and having regard to all material planning considerations, including the provisions of the Human Rights Act, the application is considered to be an appropriate form of residential development that would not result in significant harm to the visual amenities of the area or the residential amenities of neighbouring occupiers. AREA 1 DEVELOPMENT CONTROL COMMITTEE – 16TH FEBRUARY 2010

ITEM 8 (CONT’D) APPLICATION NO. 2009/1300

Furthermore the application is considered to be satisfactory in terms of access, parking and highway safety, in accordance with development plan policies EV1, EV2, AS2, AS6 and HC2 of the City and County of Swansea Unitary Development Plan.

RECOMMENDATION

APPROVE, subject to the following conditions:

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

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

4 Prior to the development being brought into beneficial use, the disabled parking spaces, as indicated in drawing no. 3008/PA/003 Rev. shall be laid out in accordance with details to be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. Reason: In the interest of highway safety.

5 The car parking provision, as indicated on drawing no. 3008/PA/003 Rev.A shall remain for sole use by the development and permanently retained as such thereafter. Reason: In the interest of highway safety.

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

AREA 1 DEVELOPMENT CONTROL COMMITTEE – 16TH FEBRUARY 2010

ITEM 8 (CONT’D) APPLICATION NO. 2009/1300

INFORMATIVES

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

2 The development plan covering the City and County of Swansea is the City and County of Swansea Unitary Development Plan. The following policies were relevant to the consideration of the application: Policies EV1, EV2, EV3, HC2, AS2, AS6 of the City and County of Swansea Unitary Development Plan 2008.

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

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

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

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

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

PLANS

3008/PA/001 site location plan, S.6857-02 A proposed site layout, 3008/PA/004 proposed floor plan, 3008/PA/005 proposed elevations, S.6857-01 site survey, 3008/PA/002 site survey, S.6857-03 A site sections, S.6857-04 A off site drainage plan, 3008/PA/006 existing and proposed site sections, 3008/PA/008 cycle store, design and access statement, habitat assessment, desk study report, received 4th November 2009; 3008/PA/003 proposed site plan,3 008/PA/007 Rev. A external details dated 11th January 2010.

AREA 1 DEVELOPMENT CONTROL COMMITTEE – 16TH FEBRUARY 2010

ITEM 9 APPLICATION NO. 2009/1474 WARD: Area 1 Morriston

Location: Land between 60 Martin Street and Old Police Station Morriston Swansea Proposal: One pair of semi-detached dwellings Applicant: Mr S Hill

BACKGROUND INFORMATION

This application was DEFERRED FOR A SITE VISIT at the Area 1 Development Control Committee on the 26th January 2010 to assess the context of the area.

POLICIES

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

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

Policy EV7 Extensions or alterations to a Listed Building will only be approved where they safeguard the character and historic form of the building. (City & County of Swansea Unitary Development Plan 2008)

SITE HISTORY

App No. Proposal 2009/1165 One pair of semi-detached dwellings Decision: Withdrawn Decision Date: 15/09/2009

AREA 1 DEVELOPMENT CONTROL COMMITTEE – 16TH FEBRUARY 2010

ITEM 9 (CONT’D) APPLICATION NO. 2009/1474

2004/2294 Detached dwelling Decision: Appeal Dismissed Decision Date: 20/12/2005

2008/2124 One pair of semi-detached dwellings Decision: Refuse Decision Date: 15/12/2008

RESPONSES TO CONSULTATIONS

ONE LETTER OF OBJECTION has been received from No 12 Market Street:

• The developer has put a fence up behind my house which now has blocked out the light. • I agree with the comments of the Inspector where she says “there are compelling grounds to dismiss the appeal.”

Highway Observations

The application is for one pair of semi detached dwellings on land which is currently disused although on a site visit it was seen to be being used to sell cars.

The site is well served by public transport and is within walking distance of the local shopping centre of Morriston.

A number of previous applications for residential development have been considered at this site which have been refused on planning grounds and subsequently dismissed at appeal.

According to our adopted parking guidelines the proposed dwellings would normally require a total of 2 car parking spaces as the houses have now been reduced to a single bedroom each. However due to the site being very restricted in size it will not accommodate any off street parking (also there would be safety concerns if there was an increase in reversing movements out onto Martin Street). This is the situation with the adjoining row of terrace properties who also have no off street parking, and hence the rationale behind residents parking bays being implemented along the frontage outside these properties. The area of highway fronting the site is currently unrestricted and the permit bay Traffic Regulation Orders (TRO's) will need to be amended at the applicant's expense to allow for the bay to be extended to provide parking provision for the new dwellings. However this will be open to all permit holders and not just residents of the new dwellings.

There is no highway objection to this application subject to-:

1/ The extension of the residents parking bays to cover the site frontage (and amendment of the relevant TRO's) at the applicants expense. 2/ The existing vehicle crossover is to be reinstated to Highway Authority Standards and Specification. 3/ All works to be completed prior to beneficial occupation of either of the dwellings, and are funded by the applicant. AREA 1 DEVELOPMENT CONTROL COMMITTEE – 16TH FEBRUARY 2010

ITEM 9 (CONT’D) APPLICATION NO. 2009/1474

APPRAISAL

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

The application site currently comprises a vacant site which has been roughly surfaced with hard-core, and is located between the former Morriston Police Station, a Grade II listed building, and 60 Martin Street, an end of terrace residential property. The site is roughly rectangular in shape with a frontage onto the eastern side of Martin Street measuring 13m in width and a maximum depth of approximately 10.5m - 12.5m. The site backs onto the rear amenity space of No. 12 Market Street, where the level of land drops sharply by approximately 2.75m.

The site is situated towards the southern end of the Morriston Conservation Area. Prior to the submission of the previous application, a front boundary wall at the site was demolished. The character of this part of Morriston Conservation Area is predominantly two storey residential terraces laid out on a gridiron pattern with pitched roofs running parallel with the road. The listed building to the north of the site was formally used as a police station and is now in use as a veterinary practice. It is an imposing two storey property finished in pennant stone and fronts the street with a series of steep gables. Despite being only two storeys, this building is significantly taller than the neighbouring residential properties. A modern primary school is located on the opposite site of Martin Street.

The application is for the construction of a pair of semi-detached houses fronting Martin Street. The properties would appear as two storeys from the front and single storey from the rear.

There have been two previous refusals and an appeal dismissed on the site – the full details area below.

2004/0477 – One pair of Semi-Detached Houses refused on 24/07/04 for the following reasons:

1) The proposed semi-detached dwellings by virtue of their close proximity to and elevated siting above the rear elevation of No 12 Market Street, will seriously detract from the residential amenity of this property’s occupiers in terms of an unacceptable level of overshadowing, overlooking and physical overbearance and as such the proposal is contrary to the provisions of Policies BE1, BE2 and H2 of the Swansea Local Plan Review No 1.

2) The proposed development by virtue of its bland and uninteresting frontage and insensitive use of external materials will have an unacceptable harmful impact upon, and will fail to preserve, the existing character and appearance of the Morriston Conservation Area, whilst also materially affecting the setting of the adjacent grade II listed building. As such, the proposal is contrary to Policies BE1, BE2, BE15, BE17 and H2 of the Swansea Local Plan Review No 1. AREA 1 DEVELOPMENT CONTROL COMMITTEE – 16TH FEBRUARY 2010

ITEM 9 (CONT’D) APPLICATION NO. 2009/1474

2004/2294 – Detached Dwelling was refused on 05/04/05 for the following reasons:

1) The proposed dwelling by virtue of its close proximity to and elevated siting above the rear elevation of No 12 Market Street, will seriously detract from the residential amenity of the occupiers of this property in terms of unacceptable level of overshadowing and physical overbearance and as such the proposal is contrary to the provisions of Policies BE1, BE2 and H2 of the Swansea Local Plan Review No 1.

2) The proposed development, by virtue of the restricted size of the site, will result in an unacceptable cramped form of infill development, that would fail to provide adequate amenity space to service further residential occupiers of the proposed dwelling. As such the proposal is considered contrary to Policies BE1, BE2 and H2 of the Swansea Local Plan Review No 1.

3) The appellant has failed to submit sufficient information to demonstrate that the proposal would not have an unacceptable impact upon the character and appearance of the Morriston Conservation Area and the setting of the adjacent listed building.

An appeal against the above refusal was dismissed by the Planning Inspectorate on the 20th December 2005.

2008/2124 – One pair of semi-detached dwellings was refused on 15/12/08 for the following reasons:

1) The proposed semi-detached dwellings by virtue of their close proximity to and elevated siting above the rear elevation of No. 12 Market Street, will seriously detract from the residential amenities of the occupiers of this property in terms of an unacceptable level of over-shadowing and physical overbearance and as such the proposal is contrary to the provisions of Policies EV1, EV2 and HC2 of the Swansea Unitary Development Plan

2) The proposed development, by virtue of the restricted site size, will result in an unacceptable cramped form of infill development , that would fail to provide adequate amenity space to service future residential occupiers of the proposed dwelling. As such the proposal is considered contrary to Policies EV1, EV2 and HC2 of the Swansea Unitary Development Plan.

An appeal against the above refusal was dismissed by the Planning Inspectorate on the 16 June 2009.

In the above appeal decision, it was noted by the Inspector that:- Character & appearance of the CA - “The council considers that the proposal would visually enhance the character and quality of the Conservation Area from the perspective of the Martin Street elevation and I find no reason to disagree” AREA 1 DEVELOPMENT CONTROL COMMITTEE – 16TH FEBRUARY 2010

ITEM 9 (CONT’D) APPLICATION NO. 2009/1474

Amenity space “I accept that the amenity space proposed for each dwelling is modest. However in considering the size of the dwellings proposed and their proximity close to Morriston Centre, I find that significant on-site amenity space is not necessarily a high priority. Furthermore, the appellant’s context appraisal illustrates that the proposed amenity space is consistent with its immediate environment and I am satisfied that it would be appropriate”

The appeal was solely dismissed on the grounds of the impact upon the residential amenity of No 12 Market Street. The Inspector made the following comments : The scale and siting of the proposed two storey dwellings, so close to the boundary with No 12 would have an overbearing effect on the occupiers of this property. The height and width of the development, together with the marked changes in level between No 12 and the appeal site over a short distance, would give rise to an obtrusive form of development and lead to an increased sense of enclosure for the occupiers….At present the gap between the listed building and the two storey terraced housing allows some daylight to reach the rear of no 12. The width and height of the proposed dwelling would effectively close this gap and therefore reduce the amount of daylight received….. The angle of the proposed cat slide roof would not sufficiently mitigate the harmful effects and I find that by virtue of its height and mass, the proposal would result in a material loss of daylight to the rear habitable room windows and amenity area of No 12……The Council says that the proposal would fail the application of the 25 degree test as set out in the BRE Site Layout Planning for Daylight and Sunlight : A Guide to Good Practice. This guidance is not planning policy and its numerical guidelines should be interpreted flexibly. I note that it says that in a historic city centre, a higher degree of obstruction may be unavoidable if new developments are to match the height and proportions of existing buildings. However, from my observations on site, the proposal would result in a material reduction in the amount of light entering the rear habitable room window of No 12 and therefore cause unacceptable harm to the living conditions of the occupiers.”

The main issues for consideration is whether the current application has overcome the previous reasons for refusal, having regard to the visual impact of the proposed development on the character and appearance of the Conservation Area, the setting of the adjacent Listed Building, the impact of the dwelling on residential amenity and parking and highway safety with regard to Policies HC2, EV1, EV2, EV7 and EV9 of the City & County of Swansea Unitary Development Plan. There are no overriding issues regarding the Human Rights Act.

With regard to the above policies, it is noted that the site lies within the urban area, and given the vacant use of the site, there are no fundamental land use policy objections to the proposal.

The site is located in the Morriston Conservation Area and is adjacent to a listed building – the former police station.

The proposed dwellings would be located on the back edge of the pavement fronting Martin Street. The siting of the new dwellings would follow the established building line of the street, dictated by the residential terrace adjacent to the site.

The front elevation would appear as two storeys and would incorporate 3 gables within the roof plane. The first floor fenestration would be 2 narrow vertically orientated timber framed traditional sash windows to each dwelling. AREA 1 DEVELOPMENT CONTROL COMMITTEE – 16TH FEBRUARY 2010

ITEM 9 (CONT’D) APPLICATION NO. 2009/1474

The ground floor fenestration would be 1 square timber framed traditional sash window to each property. The materials would consist of natural pennant stone to all elevations, although the plans indicated that the upper front elevation would be render, preference would be for the use of stone and the precise materials can be secured via a condition.

Due to the constraints of the site, (the position of 12 Market St to the rear), the rear elevation appears as single storey with a long sloping pitched roof which incorporates the first floor bedroom. There are no roof lights proposed in the rear roof slope.

The design of the dwellings is similar to that previously refused and dismissed at appeal – however, it is noted that in the appeal, the design of the properties was considered to be acceptable and was not one of the reasons for refusal.

The design provides a contextual response to the site which combines elements of the differing styles of buildings to either side and provides a good visual progression between these. It is considered that the design is appropriate to the site and would protect the setting of the adjacent listed building and would enhance the character and appearance of the Morriston Conservation Area. In this regard, the application is considered to comply with policies EV1, EV2, EV7, EV9 and HC2 of the UDP.

The three previous applications were refused on the basis that the proposed houses would have an adverse impact on the amenity of No 12 Market Street to the rear of the site, on the basis of over-shadowing, physical overbearance and loss of daylight and sunlight.

The current application has attempted to overcome the previous concerns by reducing the overall height of the ridge line and eaves, and by positioning the ridge line further away from 12 Market Street. (N.B. the rear boundary is at an angle so the measurements taken for the average distance to the rear boundary have been taken from the mid-point of the width of the proposed building).

2004/0477 2004/2294 2008/2124 Current Application Depth / footprint 7.7m 5.9m 6.7m ground 6.7m (front to rear) floor / 5.4m first floor level Height to ridge 7.7m 7.5m 8m 5.8m Height to eaves 5m 5m 4.3m 3m (rear elevation) Angle of roof 32 degrees 33 degrees 46 degrees 25 degrees pitch Average 4.5m 6.5m 4.5m 4.5m distance from rear boundary to rear elevation Average 8m 8m 9m 10m position of ridge line from rear boundary

AREA 1 DEVELOPMENT CONTROL COMMITTEE – 16TH FEBRUARY 2010

ITEM 9 (CONT’D) APPLICATION NO. 2009/1474

Number 12 Market Street is located approximately 2.75m lower than the application site, and contains a small rear yard measuring between 2.2m & 4.2m in depth. The rear yard contains a raised area immediately to the rear of one of the ground floor habitable rooms. The boundary between the application site and No 12 has a 2m high close boarded fence which obscures the view of the site from the rear habitable ground floor rooms of No. 12.

The applicant has submitted 2 cross sections with the BRE guideline 25 degree line – this line dictates the angle of the roof of the proposed houses.

Within Section B-B the 25 degree line is not subtended by the proposed house (however the line is sub-tended by the existing boundary fence). As such it is considered that the habitable room of 12 Market Street shown in Section B-B would not suffer light loss to an unacceptable level.

It is noted that in section A-A, the 25 degree line has been drawn from the ground floor habitable room, and is subtended by the existing raised boundary structure within the back garden of No 12 Market Street. The proposed roof line of the houses also subtends this line. As such, the applicant has submitted a Vertical Sky Component (VSC) test (BRE guidelines) which has percentage of 31.86%. The BRE guidelines state that a VSC should be more than 27% to ensure adequate sky-light. As the VSC for this application exceeds the 27% as recommended by the BRE Guidelines, is considered that although there may be some loss of daylight to the rear ground floor rooms of No 12, it is not sufficient to warrant a refusal of permission on these grounds.

With regarding overshadowing and overbearing impacts, it is noted that the rear elevations of the proposed houses are lower than that previously refused and both the ridge line and eaves are significantly lower. Therefore due to the reduction in height, and the proposed ridge line is further away from No 12, it is considered that no unacceptable overbearing or overshadowing impacts would occur.

Officers noted when visiting No 12 Market St, that the proposed houses would not be prominently visible from the ground floor rooms within No 12 due to the height of the existing fence and the difference in levels between the site and No 12.

With regard to privacy, it is noted that the proposed houses would be 10.3m from the rear elevation of No 12. There would be no windows serving the upper floor bedroom within the roof facing No 12. The ground floor of the proposed houses would be approximately at the same level as the upper floor windows of No 12. As there is an existing 2m high fence along the rear boundary, the rear windows of the proposed houses at ground floor level would not result in an undue level of overlooking. It is also noted that within the previous refusal, (Ref. 2008/2124) privacy levels were considered to be acceptable.

With regard to levels of amenity space, the proposed dwellings would each have rear gardens measuring approximately 6.67sq.m. It is noted that the previous refusal cited this reason as part of the refusal, as follows:-

“The proposed development, by virtue of the restricted site size, will result in an unacceptable cramped form of infill development, that would fail to provide adequate amenity space to service future residential occupiers of the proposed dwelling” AREA 1 DEVELOPMENT CONTROL COMMITTEE – 16TH FEBRUARY 2010

ITEM 9 (CONT’D) APPLICATION NO. 2009/1474

However, the Inspector, in this respect, commented as follows: “I accept that the amenity space proposed for each dwelling is modest. However in considering the size of the dwellings proposed and their proximity close to Morriston Centre, I find that significant on- site amenity space is not necessarily a high priority. Furthermore, the appellant’s context appraisal illustrates that the proposed amenity space is consistent with its immediate environment and I am satisfied that it would be appropriate.

Within the previous refusal, the proposed dwellings were 2 bedroom houses. The current application shows each house to be 1 bedroom, and as such the level of amenity space provided, is considered to be acceptable in this instance.

With regard to the first point raised by the objector, the rear boundary fence is 2m in height, and as such does not require planning permission.

With regard to residential amenity, the application is considered to overcome the previous reasons for refusal and as such is considered to comply with Policies EV1, EV2 and HC2 of the UDP.

Highway Officers raise no objections to the application provided that conditions are added to extend the existing residents parking bays to cover the site frontage and that the existing vehicle crossover is reinstated.

Conclusions

In conclusion, having regard to all material planning considerations, including the provision of the Human Rights Act, the application is considered to be acceptable in terms of its design, and impact upon the Conservation Area and the setting of the adjacent Listed Building and has satisfactorily addressed the previous reasons for refusal with regard to loss of light, overbearing and overshadowing impacts. The level of amenity space is considered to be acceptable, and the proposed houses would not result in a loss of privacy to the occupiers of No 12 Market Street. As such the application is considered to comply with Policies EV1, EV2, EV7, EV9 and HC2 of the City & County of Swansea Unitary Development Plan.

RECOMMENDATION

APPROVE, subject to the following conditions:

AREA 1 DEVELOPMENT CONTROL COMMITTEE – 16TH FEBRUARY 2010

ITEM 9 (CONT’D) APPLICATION NO. 2009/1474

2 Following the implementation of this consent, notwithstanding the provisions of the Town and Country Planning (General Permitted Development) Order 1995 (or any order revoking and re-enacting that order with or without modification) no buildings, extensions, windows, dormers shall be erected or installed or any alterations permitted by Classes A, B, C, D, E & F of Part 1 of the Second Schedule of the 1995 Order shall be carried out without the prior written approval of the Local Planning Authority Reason: To safeguard the character and amenities of the premises and adjoining properties.

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

4 The proposed building heights and surface level heights shall be built to the ground levels and heights as shown on the approved plans unless otherwise agreed in writing by the Local Planning Authority. Reason: To define the terms of the permission granted and to safeguard the amenities of adjacent occupiers

5 Notwithstanding the details shown on the approved plans, the first floor front elevation shall be faced in natural stone to match that of the ground floor elevation, and all windows and doors shall be timber framed. Samples of ALL external finishes (including windows) shall be submitted to and approved by the Local Planning Authority in writing before the development is commenced. The scheme shall be completed in accordance with the approved details. Reason: In the interests of visual amenity.

6 Prior to the occupation of the dwellings hereby approved, the existing Traffic Regulation Order (TRO) and Residents Parking bays shall be extended to cover the site frontage in accordance with details to be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. Reason: To provide adequate parking provision for the occupants of the dwellings hereby approved and in the interests of highway safety.

7 Prior to the occupation of the dwellings hereby approved, the existing vehicle crossover shall be reinstated in accordance with details which shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. Reason: In the interests of highway safety.

INFORMATIVES

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

AREA 1 DEVELOPMENT CONTROL COMMITTEE – 16TH FEBRUARY 2010

ITEM 9 (CONT’D) APPLICATION NO. 2009/1474

2 With regard to conditions 6 and 7 the amendments to the TRO and all works to the cross-over shall be carried out at the applicants / developers expense

3 The applicant is advised that the development must be carried out in accordance with the approved plans. If, prior to or during the implementation of this permission, any particulars are found to be inaccurate then the Local Planning Authority must be informed and works shall not commence or be continued until the matter has been resolved. Failure to do so could lead to the serving of an enforcement or stop notice.

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

5 The proposed development lies within a coal mining area. In the circumstances Applicants should take account of any coal mining related hazards to stability in their proposals. Developers must also seek permission from the Authority before undertaking any operations that involves entry into any coal or mines of coal, including coal mine shafts and adits and the implementation of site investigations or other works. Property specific summary information on any past, current and proposed surface and underground coal mining activity to affect the development can be obtained from the Coal Authority. The Coal Authority Mining Reports Service can be contacted on 0845 762 6848 or at www.coal.gov.uk.

6 The development plan covering the City and County of Swansea is the City and County of Swansea Unitary Development Plan. The following policies were relevant to the consideration of the application: EV1, EV2, EV7, EV9 and HC2.

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

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

9 Please note that this consent is specific to the plans and particulars approved as part of the application. Any departure from the approved plans will constitute unauthorised development and may be liable to enforcement action. You (or any subsequent developer) should advise the Council of any actual or proposed variations from the approved plans immediately so that you can be advised how to best resolve the matter. In addition, any conditions that the Council has imposed on this consent will be listed above and should be read carefully. It is your (or any subsequent developers) responsibility to ensure that the terms of all conditions are met in full at the appropriate time (as outlined in the specific condition). AREA 1 DEVELOPMENT CONTROL COMMITTEE – 16TH FEBRUARY 2010

ITEM 9 (CONT’D) APPLICATION NO. 2009/1474

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

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

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

PLANS

Site location plan, design and access statement received 1st October 2009. Amended plans 420.P.01A block plan, proposed floor plans and elevations, 420.P.02A street scene and site sections received 16th December 2009

AREA 1 DEVELOPMENT CONTROL COMMITTEE – 16TH FEBRUARY 2010

ITEM 10 APPLICATION NO. 2009/1315 WARD: Morriston Area 1

Location: Ynysforgan Farm Ynysforgan Swansea SA6 6QL Proposal: Variation of condition 3 of planning permission 89/1917 and part iii of the Section 106 agreement granted on 27th September 1991 to allow for 12 months holiday accommodation Applicant: Mr Brian Parker

BACKGROUND INFORMATION

POLICIES

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

Policy EV36 New development, where considered appropriate, within flood risk areas will only be permitted where developers can demonstrate to the satisfaction of the Council that its location is justified and the consequences associated with flooding are acceptable. (City & County of Swansea Unitary Development Plan 2008)

SITE HISTORY

App No. Proposal 2009/1316 Variation of condition (c) of planning permission 85/0840 granted on 31st October 1995 to allow for 12 months holiday accommodation Decision: CALLED IN Application (Swansea) Decision Date: 22/12/2009

93/1502 Variation of conditions 4 and 5 of planning permission 91/1217 dated 19th December 1991 Decision: Appeal Allowed Decision Date: 31/10/1994

84/1599/03 TOURIST CARAVAN SITE FOR MAXIMUM OF 120 CARAVANS, AND ANCILLARY BUILDING. Decision: *HRP - REFUSE PERMISSION Decision Date: 14/05/1985

AREA 1 DEVELOPMENT CONTROL COMMITTEE – 16TH FEBRUARY 2010

ITEM 10 (CONT’D) APPLICATION NO. 2009/1315

89/1917/03 CARAVAN PARK. Decision: *HPS106 - PERMISSION SUBJ - S106 AGREEM. Decision Date: 27/09/1991

95/1160 SINGLE STOREY FRONT AND SIDE EXTENSIONS TO PROVIDE OFFICE, SHOP AND GAMES ROOM Decision: *HGPC - GRANT PERMISSION CONDITIONAL Decision Date: 28/11/1995

95/1199 VARIATION OF CONDITION 01 OF PLANNING PERMISSION 87/0657 GRANTED ON 9TH JUNE 1987 TO ALLOW 10 MONTH SITING OF TOURING CARAVANS FROM MARCH TO DECEMBER (INCLUSIVE) Decision: *HGPC - GRANT PERMISSION CONDITIONAL Decision Date: 28/11/1995

2001/1754 Variation of condition 01 of planning permission 95/1200 dated the 28/11/95 which states ''any touring caravan subject of this permission shall not be occupied by any person or persons as their main or sole place of residence. No caravans shall occupy the site between 1st January and 1st March in any one year'' - to allow for the permanent siting of touring caravans. Decision: Approve Conditional (S73) Decision Date: 11/12/2001

2007/0752 Variation of condition 3 of planning permission 89/1917 dated the 27th September 1991 to allow for the site to be occupied for 12 months of the year for holiday accommodation Decision: Withdrawn Decision Date: 04/02/2010

95/1200 VARIATION OF CONDITION 03 AND CONDITION (iii) OF SCHEDULE 3 OF THE SECTION 106 AGREEMENT TO PLANNING PERMISSION 89/1917 GRANTED ON 27TH SEPTEMBER 1991 TO ALLOW 10 MONTH OCCUPANCY OF CARAVANS FROM MARCH TO DECEMBER (INCLUSIVE) Decision: *HGPC - GRANT PERMISSION CONDITIONAL Decision Date: 28/11/1995

85/0840/03 PROVISION OF SEASONAL (SUMMER) TOURING CARAVAN SITE FOR MAXIMUM OF 120 CARAVANS AND ANCILLIARY FACILITIES. Decision: *HGPC - GRANT PERMISSION CONDITIONAL Decision Date: 31/10/1985

AREA 1 DEVELOPMENT CONTROL COMMITTEE – 16TH FEBRUARY 2010

ITEM 10 (CONT’D) APPLICATION NO. 2009/1315

86/1434/03 CHANGE OF USE OF EXISTING CLUB ROOM TO CLUB ROOM BAR FOR RESIDING CARAVANNERS. Decision: *HGPC - GRANT PERMISSION CONDITIONAL Decision Date: 10/03/1987

87/0657/12 RELAXATION OF CONDITION C ON 2/1/85/0840/03 CONSENT TO EXTEND THE SEASONAL PERIOD TO 1ST APRIL-31ST OCTOBER EVERY YEAR INCLD. BANK HOLIDAYS. Decision: *HGPC - GRANT PERMISSION CONDITIONAL Decision Date: 09/06/1987

87/1241/12 RELAXATION OF COND. C ON CONSENT 2/1/77/1257/03 TO ERECT A BUNGALOW ON EXISTING FARMHOUSE. Decision: *HPS106 - PERMISSION SUBJ - S106 AGREEM. Decision Date: 13/10/1987

89/1483/04 USE OF AREA FOR TOURING CARAVANS (NO.15) FOR TWELVE MONTHS PER YEAR. Decision: *HGPC - GRANT PERMISSION CONDITIONAL Decision Date: 01/05/1990

89/1918/03 FILLING IN OF LAND WITH SUBSEQUENT AFTER USE AS A CARAVAN PARK Decision: *HPS106 - PERMISSION SUBJ - S106 AGREEM. Decision Date: 27/09/1991

91/1217 CONSTRUCTION OF SWIMMING POOL, GAMES ROOM AND PROVISION OF A DISABLED TOILET Decision: *HGPC - GRANT PERMISSION CONDITIONAL Decision Date: 19/12/1991

94/1236 ERECTION OF NEW CLUBHOUSE Decision: *HGPC - GRANT PERMISSION CONDITIONAL Decision Date: 28/02/1995

RESPONSE TO CONSULTATIONS

The application was advertised by way of a site notice. No responses have been received.

Highways Observations – I recommend that no highway objections are raised to this proposal.

Pollution Control Division – No observations. AREA 1 DEVELOPMENT CONTROL COMMITTEE – 16TH FEBRUARY 2010

ITEM 10 (CONT’D) APPLICATION NO. 2009/1315

Environment Agency - The application site is located within zone C1 as defined by the development advice map (dam) referred to under TAN 15 Development and Flood Risk. By extending the period of time for occupancy to 12 months, this in effect makes this an area of permanent residency. Given the flood risk at this location the Environment Agency would recommend refusal of the application.

However, should the Authority be minded to approve the application, the Environment Agency would request that the applicant is made aware, acknowledges and accepts the risk of flooding and associated risk at this location. A condition regarding flooding signage should also be included if the application is granted planning permission.

APPRAISAL

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

This application seeks planning permission for the variation of condition 3 of planning permission 89/1917 and part iii of the Section 106 agreement granted on 27th September 1991 to allow touring and static caravans to be occupied for 12 months of the year for holiday accommodation at Riverside Caravan Park, Ynysforgan Farm, Ynysforgan.

It should be noted that a concurrent application (2009/1316 refers) is also under consideration for the variation of condition (c) of planning permission 85/0840 granted on 31st October 1995 to allow for 12 months holiday occupancy. Application 85/0840 relates to the original touring caravan site approved in 1985.

The application site was originally granted approval in 1991 (89/1917) with the description of ‘Caravan Park’. Condition 3 of that permission reads:

Any caravan subject of this permission shall only be occupied between 1st April (or Good Friday if earlier) and 31st October in any calendar year.

Since the original permission a number of planning applications have been granted, which have allowed for variations to this condition. Critically, planning permission (Ref: 2001/1754) was granted for a variation of condition to allow for the permanent siting of touring caravans on part of the site. However, a condition was placed on the permission to ensure that the caravans shall be used as holiday accommodation only and shall not be used as a main or sole place of residence. Furthermore all touring caravans should remain vacant between 1st January and 1st March in any one year.

The variations to the original permission have allowed touring caravans to be sited permanently on part of the site but have restricted their use to holiday occupancy to 10 months of the year. Similarly application 95/1200 extended the period of holiday occupancy to allow static caravans on the site to be occupied for 10 months of the year.

The current application essentially seeks to vary condition 3 and the Section 106 agreement of the 1991 permission to allow touring and static caravans to be occupied for 12 months of the year for holiday accommodation. AREA 1 DEVELOPMENT CONTROL COMMITTEE – 16TH FEBRUARY 2010

ITEM 10 (CONT’D) APPLICATION NO. 2009/1315

Riverside caravan park is accessed directly off the Ynysforgan roundabout (Junction 45) and is situated on the western bank of the River Tawe on an area of land between the A4067 to the west, and the main line railway to the north. The application site is broadly flat but rises to the south east. It is irregular in shape and located on the eastern side of the caravan park. The caravans in this location are separated and generally enclosed by low timber fencing.

Main Issues

The main considerations with regard to this application are the acceptability of the submitted proposals having regard to National Planning Guidance and Development Plan Policies EC21 (Existing Static Caravan, Touring Unit and Camping Sites) and EV36 (Flooding).

In this case, the issues to be considered are: whether the replacement of the seasonal occupancy condition with holiday occupancy conditions will be satisfactory at this location, having specific regard to the above criteria and National Guidance; the impact of the proposal on local infrastructure/services; the residential amenity of neighbouring residents; the character and environment of this location; and the consideration of flooding issues at the site. It is not considered that the provisions of the Human Rights Act raise any other overriding considerations.

With regard to Welsh Assembly Government Advice, the extant guidance remains Planning Policy Wales: Technical Advice Note (Wales): 13 Tourism October 1997. A draft revision of TAN 13: Tourism, dated July 2006, has been subject to consultation but, as yet, has not been adopted.

With regard to the extant WAG guidance, Paragraph 15 of TAN 13 (1997) discusses the use of seasonal and holiday occupancy conditions, and explains that holiday occupancy conditions are more appropriate than seasonal conditions where there is a need to reduce pressure on local services. However, this guidance also advises the use of seasonal conditions in the following circumstances, ‘Authorities should continue to use seasonal occupancy conditions to prevent the permanent residential use of accommodation which, by the character of its construction or design, is unsuitable for continuous occupation especially in the winter months. Seasonal occupancy conditions may also be appropriate to protect the local environment, for example where the site is near a habitat which requires protection at particular times of the year’.

The following City and County of Swansea Unitary Development Plan Policies are also relevant to the determination of this application.

EC21 (Existing Static Caravan, Touring Unit and Camping Sites) seeks to encourage improvements to the quality of existing sites for the benefit of visitors and to reduce their visual impact on the landscape. In appropriate cases there may also be opportunities to extend the holiday season.

EV36 (Development and Flood Risk) states that new development, where considered appropriate within flood risk areas, will only be permitted where developers can demonstrate that its location is justified and the consequences of flooding are acceptable. AREA 1 DEVELOPMENT CONTROL COMMITTEE – 16TH FEBRUARY 2010

ITEM 10 (CONT’D) APPLICATION NO. 2009/1315

Use of Seasonal Occupancy or Holiday Occupancy Conditions

Seasonal occupancy conditions have traditionally been used to ensure that caravan sites or chalet parks are only used for holiday occupation. The Council has consistently contended that such caravan parks are unsuitable for continuous occupation and the non- occupancy condition has been strictly enforced and generally upheld at Appeal. As discussed above, in this particular case, the seasonal occupancy condition has been extended from the original permission to restrict holiday accommodation to the extent that touring and static caravans should remain vacant between 1st January and 1st March in any one year.

The purpose of this condition, in prohibiting occupation during the winter months of January and February was clearly to discourage permanent occupation and to promote the use as holiday accommodation. This type of seasonal condition is also easily enforceable as the Local Planning Authority has only to check that the seasonal break is adhered to, and usually would only require one site visit by monitoring officers.

However, it is evident that the nature of holidays in this country has become increasingly diverse, in location, season and duration, and there are increasing demands for short breaks not exclusively limited to the traditional summer season. Moreover, it is also clear from emerging National Planning Policy Guidance in Wales, already established in England, and supported by case law, that holiday occupancy conditions can be applied to sites where caravans are stationed on site all year, provided that there is no adverse effect on local services, or result in harm to protected environments.

The caravan site is located within the urban area and there are no known ecological reasons why seasonal occupancy conditions would be required at this site. Given the enclosed nature of the site and its proximity to major transport routes, it is not considered that the proposal would result in any significant impact upon local infrastructure/services and would not harm the residential amenities of nearby dwellings on Clydach Road to the west.

In terms of the construction of the caravans, whilst this would vary considerably throughout the site, given the construction and heating available in modern touring caravans it can not be argued that the caravans are not suitable for winter use by virtue of their construction, particularly given that caravans can already be lawfully occupied at the site during the winter month of December.

Importantly, this site benefits from planning permission which allows the touring caravans to be sited for 12 months of the year, therefore the touring site has the appearance of a static site. It can not therefore be argued that the extension of the holiday occupancy period would have a detrimental impact on the landscape character of the site which is generally well screened from surrounding views by mature trees.

In view of the above the proposal is considered to be acceptable in principle, however, it is necessary to consider some form of condition or obligation to restrict the occupation of the caravans to ensure that the development does not become used for permanent residential use, which would be inappropriate at this location by virtue of the layout and infrastructure at the site and that it is located within a flood zone. AREA 1 DEVELOPMENT CONTROL COMMITTEE – 16TH FEBRUARY 2010

ITEM 10 (CONT’D) APPLICATION NO. 2009/1315

The current view as presaged in England by PPG21:Tourism, and proposed in emerging TAN guidance in Wales, is that the planning system can reconcile any conflict between the above objectives through the use of occupancy conditions designed to ensure that holiday accommodation is used for its intended purpose. Holiday occupancy conditions can not only ensure that policy objectives are not compromised, but can avoid occupation by permanent households in unsustainable or unsuitable locations.

Proposed Holiday Occupancy Conditions

Conditions may only be imposed where they satisfy the tests outlined in Welsh Office Circular 35/95, (i.e. In line with the six-fold test that they should be necessary, relevant to planning, relevant to the development to be permitted, enforceable, precise, and reasonable in all other respects). Planning Authorities need to frame conditions according to local circumstances, in accordance with the above Government guidance to ensure that conditions are reasonable and fair. In addition it is necessary to frame the conditions so that they are readily enforceable by the authority but in a way that is not unduly intrusive for either owners or occupants.

It is proposed that the following conditions should replace Condition (c) and would meet the above necessary Circular tests:

1. The caravans shall be occupied for holiday purposes only and shall not be occupied as a person's sole or main place of residence.

2 The owners/operators shall maintain an up to date register of the names of all owners/occupiers of individual caravans on the site, and of their main home addresses. This register shall be submitted to the Local Planning Authority on an annual basis (on a date to be agreed in writing with the Local Planning Authority prior to the occupation of any caravan on the application site for 12 months of the year), and shall also be made available at all reasonable times for inspection by the Local Planning Authority.

The reason for these conditions is to ensure that the holiday accommodation is not used for unauthorised permanent residential accommodation.

Flooding

On this matter the Environment Agency has advised that the application site lies within Zone C1 as defined by the development advice maps (dam) referred to under Technical Advice Note 15: Development and Flood Risk (July 2004) (TAN 15). Given the flood risk at this location and the highly vulnerable risk of caravans the Environment Agency would recommend refusal of the application.

Zone C1 is defined as areas of the floodplain which are developed and served by significant infrastructure, including flood defences. TAN 15 states that development should only be permitted within Zones C1 and C2 if determined by the planning authority to be justified in that location.

AREA 1 DEVELOPMENT CONTROL COMMITTEE – 16TH FEBRUARY 2010

ITEM 10 (CONT’D) APPLICATION NO. 2009/1315

Caravan sites give rise to special problems in relation to flooding. The instability of caravans places their occupants, and others, at special risk and it may be difficult to operate an effective flood warning system. TAN 15 recommends that caravan sites should only be considered in zone C1 following the application of relevant tests.

Development will only be justified if it can be demonstrated that:

I. Its location in zone C is necessary to assist, or be part of, a local authority regeneration initiative or a local authority strategy required to sustain an existing settlement; or,

II. Its location in zone C is necessary to contribute to key employment objectives supported by the local authority, and other key partners, to sustain an existing settlement or region;

and,

III. It concurs with the aims of Planning Policy Wales (PPW) and meets the definition of previously developed land; and,

IV. The potential consequences of a flooding event for the particular type of development have been considered, and in terms of the criteria contained in within the TAN, found to be acceptable.

In consideration of the above, as the proposal is to extend the holiday accommodation use for 12 months, the proposal would not fall under criteria I. or II. as the location of the site has already been established under previous permissions, therefore it is not considered necessary that the location of the proposal must be justified in this instance. With reference to criteria III. the principle of the proposal is discussed above in relation to PPW and the site is clearly previously developed land. Turning to IV. this criteria requires the potential consequences of a flooding event to have been considered, and in terms of the criteria contained within TAN 15, found to be acceptable.

In this respect, caravan parks are defined as highly vulnerable development. According to TAN 15 highly vulnerable development describes development where the ability of occupants to decide on whether they wish to accept the risks to life and property associated with flooding, or be able to manage the consequences of such risk is limited. Environment Agency has suggested that by extending the period of occupancy to 12 months, an approval of the application would, in effect, make the site an area of permanent residency. This is not accepted, as the condition outlined above would ensure that the site would be used for holiday accommodation and not as a permanent residential accommodation.

With regard to assessing flooding consequences the applicant has completed a limited flood consequences assessment which confirms that the developers and/or occupiers acknowledge the risk of flooding and accept the associated risk. The applicant has confirmed his intention to register on the Environment Agency Flood Line Direct service and to provide appropriate signage/flood notices. AREA 1 DEVELOPMENT CONTROL COMMITTEE – 16TH FEBRUARY 2010

ITEM 10 (CONT’D) APPLICATION NO. 2009/1315

The Environment Agency have stated that should the Authority be minded to approve this application then, as a minimum, an appropriate planning condition should be included to ensure the applicant complies with aspect A1.12 of TAN 15 which provides acceptability criteria for flooding consequences. An appropriate condition has been provided by the Environment Agency and is recommended regarding the provision of appropriate flood signage.

In considering this application, regard must be had to the neighbouring site to the south which was recently refused planning permission for a temporary gypsy site at the Swansea Vale park and ride site (2009/1249). The application was refused on the basis that the site has been identified as being at a at significant risk of flooding and having regard to the highly vulnerable nature of the development, its lack of justification against the criteria of TAN 15 and the potential risk to life as a consequence of a flood event, the proposal was considered to amount to development that would be contrary to national planning policy set out in TAN 15 and UDP Policies EV2(ix) and EV36.

This application is relevant to the current application under consideration by virtue of its proximity to the site and its use as a gypsy site, which often accommodate caravans. Notwithstanding this the planning history of the caravan site demonstrates the material differences between the two sites. In considering the consequences of flooding at this caravan site significant weight must be given to the fact that planning permission has been granted to allow the touring caravans to occupy the site on a permanent basis for 12 months of the year, as such there would be no additional risk to property. Unlike the proposed gypsy site the touring caravans and statics at the application site can already be lawfully occupied for holiday purposes for 10 months of the year and, on balance, it is not considered that allowing holiday occupancy for an additional 2 months of the year would result in a significant increase in the consequences of flooding over and above the existing situation. Whilst it is acknowledged that all the acceptability criteria for flooding consequences listed in TAN15 have not been satisfied, for the reasons set out above the proposal is considered to be satisfactory, subject to conditions, having regard to the provisions of TAN15 and Policy EV36.

Access and Highway Safety

The application is for variation of a condition to allow the caravan site to be occupied for 12 months of the year for holiday accommodation. Access to and from the site is established and will continue as is currently used. It is not consider that there will be any highway safety implications as a result of this variation of condition.

Conclusions

In conclusion, having regard to the above considerations, it is considered that there are sufficient grounds in this particular case to allow for the removal of the original condition and a variation of the Section 106 Agreement to allow for holiday accommodation throughout the year, provided it is replaced by suitable holiday occupancy conditions and the conditions suggested by the Environment Agency. This is required to ensure that the development does not become used for permanent residential accommodation, which would be considered inappropriate at this caravan site which is located within a flood zone. On this basis, approval is recommended. AREA 1 DEVELOPMENT CONTROL COMMITTEE – 16TH FEBRUARY 2010

ITEM 10 (CONT’D) APPLICATION NO. 2009/1315

RECOMMENDATION

APPROVE, part iii of the Section 106 agreement to be varied and condition 3 to be removed and replaced with the following conditions:

1 The caravans shall be occupied for holiday purposes only and shall not be occupied as a person's sole or main place of residence. Reason: To ensure that the holiday accommodation is not used for unauthorised permanent residential accommodation.

2 The owners/operators shall maintain an up to date register of the names of all owners/occupiers of individual caravans on the site, and of their main home addresses. This register shall be submitted to the Local Planning Authority on an annual basis (on a date to be agreed in writing with the Local Planning Authority prior to the occupancy of any caravan on the application site for 12 months of the year), and shall also be made available at all reasonable times for inspection by the Local Planning Authority. Reason: To ensure that the holiday accommodation is not used for unauthorised permanent residential accommodation.

3 Prior to the commencement of holiday occupancy of the site for 12 months of the year, a fixed flood warning notice shall be erected at the entrance to the site, advising users of the flood risk at this location. Further fixed notices shall be erected at appropriate points throughout the site. The wording and location of such notices shall be in accordance with details to be submitted to and agreed in writing by the Local Planning Authority. These signs shall be retained on site in accordance with the approved details unless otherwise agreed in writing to the Local Planning Authority. Reason: To advise current and future users of the site of the flood risk and in the interest of public safety.

INFORMATIVES

1 With regard to the provisions of Condition 3 of the planning permission the applicant should be aware that a grant of Express Advertisement Consent may also be required prior to the erection of any signage and is advised to contact the Local Planning Authority for advice prior to the submission of details.

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

PLANS

Site location plan, design & access statement received 28th September 2009

AREA 1 DEVELOPMENT CONTROL COMMITTEE – 16TH FEBRUARY 2010

ITEM 11 APPLICATION NO. 2009/1316 WARD: Morriston Area 1

Location: Ynysforgan Farm Ynysforgan Swansea SA6 6QL Proposal: Variation of condition (c) of planning permission 85/0840 granted on 31st October 1995 to allow for 12 months holiday accommodation Applicant: Mr Brian Parker

BACKGROUND INFORMATION

POLICIES

SITE HISTORY

App No. Proposal 2009/1315 Variation of condition 3 of planning permission 89/1917 and part iii of the Section 106 agreement granted on 27th September 1991 to allow for 12 months holiday accommodation Decision: CALLED IN Application (Swansea) Decision Date: 22/12/2009

75/1278/03 TWO STOREY DWELLING HOUSE FOR FARM WORKER Decision: *HGPC - GRANT PERMISSION CONDITIONAL Decision Date: 29/01/1976

76/0943/02 ERECTION OF A DWELLING HOUSE FOR FARM WORKER Decision: *HGPC - GRANT PERMISSION CONDITIONAL Decision Date: 30/09/1976

AREA 1 DEVELOPMENT CONTROL COMMITTEE – 16TH FEBRUARY 2010

ITEM 11 (CONT’D) APPLICATION NO. 2009/1316

77/1257/03 ERECTION OF A NEW BUNGALOW Decision: *HGPC - GRANT PERMISSION CONDITIONAL Decision Date: 26/01/1978

80/0660/03 EXTENSION TO DWELLING Decision: *HGPC - GRANT PERMISSION CONDITIONAL Decision Date: 26/06/1980

84/1599/03 TOURIST CARAVAN SITE FOR MAXIMUM OF 120 CARAVANS, AND ANCILLARY BUILDING. Decision: *HRP - REFUSE PERMISSION Decision Date: 14/05/1985

85/0840/03 PROVISION OF SEASONAL (SUMMER) TOURING CARAVAN SITE FOR MAXIMUM OF 120 CARAVANS AND ANCILLIARY FACILITIES. Decision: *HGPC - GRANT PERMISSION CONDITIONAL Decision Date: 31/10/1985

86/1434/03 CHANGE OF USE OF EXISTING CLUB ROOM TO CLUB ROOM BAR FOR RESIDING CARAVANNERS. Decision: *HGPC - GRANT PERMISSION CONDITIONAL Decision Date: 10/03/1987

87/1319/06 1 N0. DOUBLE SIDED FREE STANDING PAINTED BOARD SIGN (8' X 8'). Decision: *HRC - REFUSE CONSENT Decision Date: 12/01/1988

89/1483/04 USE OF AREA FOR TOURING CARAVANS (NO.15) FOR TWELVE MONTHS PER YEAR. Decision: *HGPC - GRANT PERMISSION CONDITIONAL Decision Date: 01/05/1990

89/1916/01 LEISURE COMPLEX, BOAT HOUSE, RESTAURANT/PAVILION. Decision: *HRP - REFUSE PERMISSION Decision Date: 13/11/1990

AREA 1 DEVELOPMENT CONTROL COMMITTEE – 16TH FEBRUARY 2010

ITEM 11 (CONT’D) APPLICATION NO. 2009/1316

89/1917/03 CARAVAN PARK. Decision: *HPS106 - PERMISSION SUBJ - S106 AGREEM. Decision Date: 27/09/1991

89/1918/03 FILLING IN OF LAND WITH SUBSEQUENT AFTER USE AS A CARAVAN PARK Decision: *HPS106 - PERMISSION SUBJ - S106 AGREEM. Decision Date: 27/09/1991

91/1217 CONSTRUCTION OF SWIMMING POOL, GAMES ROOM AND PROVISION OF A DISABLED TOILET Decision: *HGPC - GRANT PERMISSION CONDITIONAL Decision Date: 19/12/1991

93/1502 Variation of conditions 4 and 5 of planning permission 91/1217 dated 19th December 1991 Decision: Appeal Allowed Decision Date: 31/10/1994

94/1236 ERECTION OF NEW CLUBHOUSE Decision: *HGPC - GRANT PERMISSION CONDITIONAL Decision Date: 28/02/1995

95/0912 ERECTION OF OVERHEAD LINE (CONSULTATION FROM SOUTH WALES ELECTRICITY BOARD) Decision: *HO - OBJECTIONS Decision Date: 26/09/1995

95/1160 SINGLE STOREY FRONT AND SIDE EXTENSIONS TO PROVIDE OFFICE, SHOP AND GAMES ROOM Decision: *HGPC - GRANT PERMISSION CONDITIONAL Decision Date: 28/11/1995

ITEM 11 (CONT’D) APPLICATION NO. 2009/1316

2001/1755 Variation of condition 1 of planning permission 95/1199 dated the 28/11/95, which states that ''any touring caravan subject of this permission shall be used for holiday accommodation only and shall not be occupied by any person or persons as their main or sole place of residence. No caravans shall occupy the site between 1st January and 1st March in any one year'' - to allow for the permanent siting of touring caravans Decision: Approve Conditional (S73) Decision Date: 11/12/2001

RESPONSE TO CONSULTATIONS

The application was advertised by way of a site notice. No responses have been received.

Highways Observations – I recommend that no highway objections are raised to this proposal.

Pollution Control Division – No observations.

APPRAISAL

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

This application seeks planning permission for the variation of condition (c) of planning permission 85/0840 granted on 31st October 1985 to allow touring caravans to be occupied for 12 months of the year for holiday accommodation at Riverside Caravan Park, Ynysforgan Farm, Ynysforgan. AREA 1 DEVELOPMENT CONTROL COMMITTEE – 16TH FEBRUARY 2010

ITEM 11 (CONT’D) APPLICATION NO. 2009/1316

It should be noted that a concurrent application (2009/1315 refers) is also under consideration for the variation of condition 3 of planning permission 89/1917 and part iii of the Section 106 agreement granted on 27th September 1991 to allow for 12 months holiday occupancy. Application 2009/1315 relates to the caravan site approved in 1989, which includes both static and touring caravans.

The application site was originally granted approval in 1985 (85/0840) with the following description ‘Provision of seasonal (summer) touring caravan site for a maximum of 120 caravans and ancillary facilities’. Condition (c) of that permission reads:

The use of the site shall be restricted to touring caravans only, between the months of May and October. No static caravans will be allowed on site.

The reason for this was ‘To ensure that the site is used for touring caravans only during the summer months’.

Since the original planning permission a number of planning applications have been granted, which have allowed for variations to this condition. Critically, planning permission (Ref: 2001/1755 and Ref: 2001/1754) was granted allowing for the permanent siting of touring caravans at the site. However, a condition was placed on these permissions to ensure that the caravans shall be used as holiday accommodation only and shall not be used as a main or sole place of residence. Furthermore all touring caravans should remain vacant between 1st January and 1st March in any one year.

These variations to the original permission have allowed touring caravans to be sited permanently in this part of the site but have restricted their use to holiday occupancy to 10 months of the year.

This application essentially seeks to vary condition (c) of the original permission to allow for 12 month holiday occupancy of the touring caravans in this part of the site.

Riverside caravan park is accessed directly off the Ynysforgan roundabout (Junction 45) and is situated on the western bank of the River Tawe on an area of land between the A4067 to the west, and the main line railway to the north. The application site is a flat irregular shaped area of land located on the western side of the caravan park. The majority of the touring caravans in this location are separated and enclosed by low timber fencing.

Main Issues

The main considerations with regard to this application are the acceptability of the submitted proposals having regard to National Planning Guidance and Development Plan policies EC21 (Existing Static Caravan, Touring Unit and Camping Sites) and EV36 (Flooding).

In this case, the issues to be considered are: whether the replacement of the seasonal occupancy condition with holiday occupancy conditions will be satisfactory at this location, having specific regard to the above criteria and National Guidance; the impact of the proposal on local infrastructure/services; the residential amenity of neighbouring residents; the character and environment of this location; and the consideration of flooding issues at the site. AREA 1 DEVELOPMENT CONTROL COMMITTEE – 16TH FEBRUARY 2010

ITEM 11 (CONT’D) APPLICATION NO. 2009/1316

It is not considered that the provisions of the Human Rights Act raise any other overriding considerations.

The following City and County of Swansea Unitary Development Plan Policies are also relevant to the determination of this application.

Use of Seasonal Occupancy or Holiday Occupancy Conditions

Seasonal occupancy conditions have traditionally been used to ensure that caravan sites or chalet parks are only used for holiday occupation. The Council has consistently contended that such caravan parks are unsuitable for continuous occupation and the non- occupancy condition has been strictly enforced and generally upheld at Appeal. As discussed above, in this particular case, the seasonal occupancy condition has been extended from the original permission to restrict holiday accommodation to the extent that touring caravans should remain vacant between 1st January and 1st March in any one year.

ITEM 11 (CONT’D) APPLICATION NO. 2009/1316

Moreover, it is also clear from emerging National Planning Policy Guidance in Wales, already established in England, and supported by case law, that holiday occupancy conditions can be applied to sites where caravans are stationed on site all year, provided that there is no adverse effect on local services, or result in harm to protected environments.

In view of the above the proposal is considered to be acceptable in principle, however, it is necessary to consider some form of condition or obligation to restrict the occupation of the caravans to ensure that the development does not become used for permanent residential use, which would be inappropriate at this location by virtue of the layout and amenity at the site and that it is located within a flood zone.

Proposed Holiday Occupancy Conditions

It is proposed that the following conditions should replace Condition (c) and would meet the above necessary Circular tests:

AREA 1 DEVELOPMENT CONTROL COMMITTEE – 16TH FEBRUARY 2010

ITEM 11 (CONT’D) APPLICATION NO. 2009/1316

1. The caravans shall be occupied for holiday purposes only and shall not be occupied as a person's sole or main place of residence.

The reason for these conditions is to ensure that the holiday accommodation is not used for unauthorised permanent residential accommodation.

Flooding

In this respect, development will only be justified if it can be demonstrated that:

V. Its location in zone C is necessary to assist, or be part of, a local authority regeneration initiative or a local authority strategy required to sustain an existing settlement; or,

VI. Its location in zone C is necessary to contribute to key employment objectives supported by the local authority, and other key partners, to sustain an existing settlement or region;

and,

VII. It concurs with the aims of Planning Policy Wales (PPW) and meets the definition of previously developed land; and,

VIII. The potential consequences of a flooding event for the particular type of development have been considered, and in terms of the criteria contained in within the TAN, found to be acceptable. AREA 1 DEVELOPMENT CONTROL COMMITTEE – 16TH FEBRUARY 2010

ITEM 11 (CONT’D) APPLICATION NO. 2009/1316

Unlike the proposed gypsy site the touring caravans at the application site can already be lawfully occupied for holiday purposes for 10 months of the year and, on balance, it is not considered that allowing holiday occupancy for an additional 2 months of the year would result in a significant increase in the consequences of flooding over and above the existing situation. Whilst it is acknowledged that all the acceptability criteria for flooding consequences have not been satisfied for the reasons set out above the proposal is considered to be satisfactory, subject to conditions, having regard to the provisions of TAN15 and Policy EV36.

Access and Highway Safety

Conclusion

In conclusion, having regard to the above considerations, it is considered that there are sufficient grounds in this particular case to allow for the removal of the original condition to allow for holiday accommodation throughout the year, provided it is replaced by suitable holiday occupancy conditions and the conditions suggested by the Environment Agency. This is required to ensure that the development does not become used for permanent residential accommodation, which would be considered inappropriate at this caravan site which is located within a flood zone. On this basis, approval is recommended.

RECOMMENDATION

APPROVE, condition (c) to be removed and replaced with the following conditions:

AREA 1 DEVELOPMENT CONTROL COMMITTEE – 16TH FEBRUARY 2010

ITEM 11 (CONT’D) APPLICATION NO. 2009/1316

3 Prior to the commencement of holiday occupancy of the site for 12 months of the year, a fixed flood warning notice shall be erected at the entrance to the site, advising users of the flood risk at this location. Further fixed notices shall be erected at appropriate points throughout the site. The wording and location of such notices shall be in accordance with details to be submitted to and agreed in writing by the Local Planning Authority. These signs shall be retained on site in accordance with the approved details unless otherwise agreed in writing by the Local Planning Authority. Reason: To advise current and future users of the site of the flood risk and in the interest of public safety.

INFORMATIVES

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

PLANS

Site location plan, design & access statement received 28th September 2009

AREA 1 DEVELOPMENT CONTROL COMMITTEE – 16TH FEBRUARY 2010

ITEM 12 APPLICATION NO. 2009/1071 WARD: Landore Area 1

Location: Exall and Jones Pipehouse Wharf Morfa Road Swansea SA1 2EN Proposal: Retention of the siting of a mobile catering unit Applicant: Mr Brian West

BACKGROUND INFORMATION

POLICIES

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

SITE HISTORY

App No. Proposal 87/1639/03 EXTENSION OF BUILDERS MERCHANTS PREMISES AND STORAGE COMPOUND. Decision: *HGPC - GRANT PERMISSION CONDITIONAL Decision Date: 08/12/1987

74/1248/02 CONSTRUCTION OF TWO WAREHOUSES / FACTORY UNITS Decision: *HRP - REFUSE PERMISSION Decision Date: 31/07/1975

78/0547/03 ERECTION OF A WAREHOUSE Decision: *HGPC - GRANT PERMISSION CONDITIONAL Decision Date: 29/06/1978

77/0069/07 ESTABLISHED USE CERTIFICATE FOR VEHICLE GARAGE AND REPAIR MAINTENANCE AND SERVICING SHOP Decision: *HGPCU - GRANT PERMISSION UNCONDITIONAL Decision Date: 30/03/1977

77/0279/11 MOTOR VEHICLE TESTING AND TUNNING ETC Decision: *HGPC - GRANT PERMISSION CONDITIONAL Decision Date: 28/04/1977

77/1026/03 NEW VEHICLE TESTING BAY Decision: *HGPC - GRANT PERMISSION CONDITIONAL Decision Date: 27/10/1977

85/0591/03 ENCLOSURE OF THE ABOVE SITE WITH FENCING AND WALLS. Decision: *HGPCU - GRANT PERMISSION UNCONDITIONAL Decision Date: 14/05/1985 AREA 1 DEVELOPMENT CONTROL COMMITTEE – 16TH FEBRUARY 2010

ITEM 12 (CONT’D) APPLICATION NO. 2009/1071

RESPONSE TO CONSULTATIONS

The application was advertised on site. No response.

Pollution Control – No observations.

The Food and Safety section of the Environment Department has offered no objection to the application.

The Health and Safety section of the Environment Department has offered no objection to the application.

Trading Standards Division – No objection.

Food and Safety section – No objection.

Environment Agency Wales – The application site lies within zone C2 as defined by the development advice map referred to under TAN15: Development and Flood Risk (July 2004). However, given the nature and scale of the proposed development, we do not consider a FCA is required in this instance. The developer should be made aware of the potential flood risks at this location.

We question why a septic tank has been stated as the means of foul water disposal. If the unit is to be more of a permanent structure, then we would seek connection to the main public sewerage system.

Highway Observations – The application is for the siting of a mobile catering unit in a car park off Morfa Road. The unit occupies approximately one car park and there remains ample parking within the site to accommodate visitors to both the catering unit and the adjacent shop unit. The supporting statement says that the unit has been in-situ for the past three years by the applicant and the four years previous by his sister. There have not been any complaints received relating to traffic or parking.

I recommend that no highway objections are raised to the proposal.

APPRAISAL

This application is reported to Committee for determination at the request of Councillor R Speht.

This application seeks retrospective planning permission for the retention of a mobile catering unit located on land which serves as a car park outside of Exall and Jones, Pipehouse Wharf, Morfa Road, Swansea. The catering unit is sited on the western boundary of the car park.

The main issues for consideration relate to the impact of the catering unit upon the amenities of the area in addition to highway safety and the free flow of traffic in the locality. There are in this case considered to be no additional considerations arising from the Human Rights Act. AREA 1 DEVELOPMENT CONTROL COMMITTEE – 16TH FEBRUARY 2010

ITEM 12 (CONT’D) APPLICATION NO. 2009/1071

With regard to visual amenity, the sale of hot foods and beverages from this site is not considered to represent a major change of use at this location and is not significant enough to affect the main use of the site as a retail outlet. The application site is set at lower land level than that of the Morfa Road and is sporadically screened by landscaping/fencing from the public highway. However, the unit is not excessive in height and has been sited at this location of some time.

With regard to residential amenity, there are no residential properties to consider and the siting of this unit does not adversely impact on the neighbouring industrial/commercial units.

The Head of Highways and Transportation has raised no objection as there remains ample car parking within the site to accommodate visitors to both the catering unit and the builders merchant.

The Food and Safety Section of the Environment Department has offered no objection to the application. Whilst the Trading Standards Section supports this application and has no objection.

Environment Agency Wales were consulted on this application because the site area falls within an area defined as Zones C1 and C2. With regard to the comments made by the Environment Agency Wales, a letter has been received from the applicant stating that there is no sewage waste. This matter has been clarified with the Environment Agency which has no objection subject to the developer being made aware of the potential flood risks at this location. An informative is therefore recommended in this respect.

It is considered therefore that the temporary siting of a mobile catering unit at this location is an acceptable use, particularly as its customers are mainly the ones using the unit, with occasional customers driving to the site. The very nature of the fast food outlet means that customers using the facility will not remain for any length of time at the site.

In conclusion, and having regard to all material considerations including the Human Rights Act, it is considered that the siting, scale and design of the proposal is acceptable and as such complies with Policy EV1 of the City & County of Swansea Unitary Development Plan. It is suggested to limit the duration of the permission for three years temporary period due to the temporary nature of the unit and allow further consideration in the light of circumstances then prevailing.

RECOMMENDATION

APPROVE, subject to the following conditions:

1 Notwithstanding the provisions of Section 91 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 and the Town and Country Planning (General Permitted Development) Order 1995, this permission is for a limited period of 3 years only, expiring on 16th February 2013 when the use shall cease and any works carried out under this permission shall be removed and the land reinstated in accordance with a scheme to be agreed in writing with the Local Planning Authority. Reason: To permit reconsideration in the light of circumstances then prevailing.

AREA 1 DEVELOPMENT CONTROL COMMITTEE – 16TH FEBRUARY 2010

ITEM 12 (CONT’D) APPLICATION NO. 2009/1071

INFORMATIVES

1 The application site lies within Zone C2 as defined by the development adviser map referred to under TAN15: Development and Flood Risk (July 2004), it is also shown on the Flood Map as being within Zone 2 and 3 (the 0.1% and 1% outline respectively).

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

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

PLANS

Site location plan, block plans, layout details, photographs received 11th August 2009

AREA 1 DEVELOPMENT CONTROL COMMITTEE – 16TH FEBRUARY 2010

ITEM 13 APPLICATION NO. 2009/1611 WARD: Area 1 Landore

Location: Ospreys Public House, 376 Neath Road, Plasmarl, Swansea, SA6 8JN Proposal: Change of use of ground floor public house (Class A3) to two self contained flats (Class C3) and conversion of former first floor function room to domestic storage only. Applicant: Mr Mark Flynn

BACKGROUND INFORMATION

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

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

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

SITE HISTORY App No. Proposal 2009/1138 Conversion of ground floor public house (Class A3) into two self contained flats (Class C3) Decision: Refuse Decision Date: 01/10/2009

82/0409/03 ADDITIONAL BEDROOM EXTENSION OVER ALREADY APPROVED GROUND FLOOR EXTENSION Decision: *HGPC - GRANT PERMISSION CONDITIONAL Decision Date: 11/05/1982

81/1134/03 BEER STORE Decision: *HGPC - GRANT PERMISSION CONDITIONAL Decision Date: 27/08/1981

2008/0125 Conversion of first floor function room into two self contained flats and provision of metal platform access at first floor level Decision: Grant Permission Conditional Decision Date: 09/06/2008 AREA 1 DEVELOPMENT CONTROL COMMITTEE – 16TH FEBRUARY 2010

ITEM 13 (CONT’D) APPLICATION NO. 2009/1611

RESPONSE TO CONSULTATIONS

Original Plans

Two neighbouring properties were consulted and a site notice was placed close to the site.

NO RESPONSE

Amended Plans Amended plans have been received to include the conversion of the former function room on the 1st floor to storage (Class B8)

Both neighbouring properties were re-consulted.

NO RESPONSE

Highway Observations

Change of use of ground floor public house (Class A3) to two self contained flats (Class C3) and conversion of former first floor function room to storage only (Class B8).

The description has been amended to convert the first floor function room to storage and to change the ground floor pub into two flats. There was a previous application at the site ref 2008/0125 to change the first floor function room to two flats which was approved.

This application now seeks to retain the first floor element as storage whilst converting the ground floor to two flats. As the 2008 permission has not been implemented then the net result is now the same as previous, that is an additional two flats to replace the pub, whereas it was previously two flats to replace the function room with the pub remaining.

In terms of car parking whilst there is none available off street there is likely to be less parking and traffic associated with two flats than with the use as a pub, taking into consideration the scheme already consented.

On balance I recommend that no highway objections are raised to the proposal subject to the first floor function room to be retained for storage purposes only and not to be converted to living accommodation at any time.

Note: Please advise that parking permits will not be made available for any of the residents of the conversion.

APPRAISAL

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

Full planning permission is sought to change the use of the ground floor of the former Osprey’s Public House to 2 x one bedroom flats, and the conversion of the former 1st floor function room into storage. AREA 1 DEVELOPMENT CONTROL COMMITTEE – 16TH FEBRUARY 2010

ITEM 13 (CONT’D) APPLICATION NO. 2009/1611

It should be noted that planning permission was granted on 9th June 2008 for the conversion of the 1st floor function room into two flats. (ref: 2008/0125)

Planning permission was refused on the 1st October 2009 for the conversion of the ground floor of the public house to two self contained flats for the following reason:

The application for the conversion of the ground floor of the public house to 2 flats is unacceptable by virtue of the lack of any off street car parking which would result in additional on-street parking to the detriment of existing residents, and the proposal would place increased pressure on the residents parking scheme in operation to the detriment of existing users, contrary to Policies HC6 and AS6 of the City & County of Swansea Unitary Development Plan 2008.

The refusal was based on the rationale that if the approved permission for 2 flats in the former function room was implemented, the additional 2 flats in the ground floor would place undue pressure on the parking situation.

In order to overcome the refusal, the applicant has stated that he would not implement the original permission for the 2 flats in the former 1st floor function room, and therefore the current application has been amended to convert the former function room into a domestic storage area.

The existing first floor flat (formally the landlord’s residence) is to be retained. As such the total number of flats within the building would be 3 units.

The application site relates to the former bar & lounge area of the Osprey’s Public House in Neath Road. The pub is an end of terrace traditional two storey building which has ceased trading as a pub. To the rear of the site is Dinas Street, which is at a higher level than the application site which contains 2 storey houses on the opposite site of the road from the application site. To the north of the site on Neath Road is a terrace of 2 storey houses and to the south is a detached block of purpose built flats which are 2 storey’s in height.

The main issues for consideration are the principle of the change of use of the building to residential and storage use, the impact on neighbours amenity and the impact upon highway safety and parking having regard to Policies EV1, HC6 and AS6 of the City & County of Swansea Unitary Development Plan 2008. There are no overriding issues regarding the provisions of the Human Rights Act.

With regard to the principle of the change of use to residential, Policy HC6 – Flat Conversions states that proposal for the conversion of larger dwellings and vacant or underutilised commercial and industrial buildings to flats or other self contained units of accommodation will be permitted subject to the satisfaction of a number of criterion, including:

a) demonstrating that the former use is no longer viable; b) no detrimental impacts upon residential amenity in terms of noise and disturbance; c) that it would not be an over-intensive use of the building d) no adverse impacts on the external appearance or on the character of the locality e) no significant adverse effect on local car parking and highway safety f) appropriate refuse storage provision. AREA 1 DEVELOPMENT CONTROL COMMITTEE – 16TH FEBRUARY 2010

ITEM 13 (CONT’D) APPLICATION NO. 2009/1611

With regard to criteria (a), it is noted that the public house has closed down due to lack of custom and is no longer a viable business. The applicant has stated that the pub ceased trading approx 9 months ago, and was actively marketed for approx 3-4years. It is also noted that the 1st floor function room was granted permission for use as two flats in 2008 as the function room was no longer viable and had become vacant. It is considered that the use of the vacant ground floor of the pub for residential purposes is an appropriate use for the property and will bring the vacant building back in to beneficial use. The use of the former function room as storage is also considered to be an acceptable use for this part of the building

With regard to criteria (b) it is considered that the use of the ground floor as flats would have a less intrusive impact upon the amenity of the adjoining residential uses that that of a public house in terms of noise and disturbance. The use of the former function room as storage is also considered to be acceptable, as any noise and disturbance would be far less than that of a function room. It is also noted that there have been no objections from local residents.

With regard to criteria (c), the proposal is to provide 2 x one bed flats which is considered to be an appropriate level of residential accommodation for the ground floor. Each flat would have a separate lounge, kitchen, bedroom and bathroom, and all rooms are of a sufficient size. Each flat would also have its own entrance from the front of the building. However, it noted that the kitchen in flat 1 would not have an external window due to change in land levels on the site. The proposed kitchen in flat 1 would replace part of the rear bar area and the entrance to the cellar, and due to the land level it is not possible to insert an external window. Although this is not ideal, and if the unit was a new-build this element would be considered unacceptable, given the constraints of the site due to the land levels, and the limited scale of the kitchen, it is considered that the kitchen, on balance, is acceptable and it is not considered that in this instance a recommendation for refusal on this basis could be justified.

With regard to criteria (d), there are no external alterations proposed. The pub has two existing entrance doors facing Neath Road which would remain in situ as the new entrance doors to each of the flats. As such the application would not have a detrimental impact on the visual appearance of the building or on the character of the local area.

With regard to criteria (e) the Head of Transportation and Engineering have raised no objection to the scheme, as the former function room would not be converted into flats (as per the previous permission), and would now be used as storage only.

With regard to criteria (f), no details of the refuse / recycling storage area have been submitted. However it is noted that the existing pub has a small front terrace which is elevated above the road, which would become usable for both flats. It is also noted that the kitchens are a sufficient size to allow for the internal of refuse / recycling which can then be placed outside on the day of the refuse collection. Furthermore, the former cellar of the public house is to be used for general storage and cycle storage, and as such can be used to store refuse / recycling bins. The cellar is accessed from an independent side door which is accessible to both units. As such it is considered that there is sufficient space for each flat to allow for the storage of refuse / recycling. AREA 1 DEVELOPMENT CONTROL COMMITTEE – 16TH FEBRUARY 2010

ITEM 13 (CONT’D) APPLICATION NO. 2009/1611

In conclusion, and having regards to all material planning considerations, including the provisions of the Human Rights Act, the application considered to be acceptable in terms of its use, visual amenity, residential amenity and impact upon parking and highway safety. The application is therefore considered to comply with policies EV1, AS6 and HC6 of the City & County of Swansea Unitary Development Plan 2008.

RECOMMENDATION

APPROVE, subject to the following conditions:

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

3 The first floor former function room shall be solely used for domestic storage purposes only, and shall not be used in connection with any trade or commercial use, and shall not be converted into residential use. Reason: To define the terms under which planning permission is granted and in the interests of parking and highway safety.

INFORMATIVES

1 The applicant is advised that the development must be carried out in accordance with the approved plans. If, prior to or during the implementation of this permission, any particulars are found to be inaccurate then the Local Planning Authority must be informed and works shall not commence or be continued until the matter has been resolved. Failure to do so could lead to the serving of an enforcement or stop notice.

2 Birds may be present in the roof of this building please note it is an offence under the Wildlife & Countryside Act 1981 (as amended) to intentionally (intentionally or recklessly for Schedule 1 birds) to: - Kill, injure or take any wild bird - Take, damage or destroy the nest of any wild bird while that nest in use or being built - Take or destroy an egg of any wild bird Care should be taken when working on buildings particularly during the bird nesting season March-August. AREA 1 DEVELOPMENT CONTROL COMMITTEE – 16TH FEBRUARY 2010

ITEM 13 (CONT’D) APPLICATION NO. 2009/1611

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

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

5 The development plan covering the City and County of Swansea is the City and County of Swansea Unitary Development Plan. The following policies were relevant to the consideration of the application: EV1, AS6 and HC6

PLANS

Site location plan, 09/1145/1 existing ground floor, 09/1145/2 existing first floor, 09/1145/3 existing front and side elevations, 09/1145/4 rear and side elevations, 09/1145/5 proposed ground floor, 09/1145/7 site plan, 09/1145/8 rear and side elevation, access statement received 6th November 2009. Amended plan 09/1145/6 Rev A- proposed first floor plan received 8th December 2009

AREA 1 DEVELOPMENT CONTROL COMMITTEE – 16TH FEBRUARY 2010

ITEM 14 APPLICATION NO. 2009/1814 WARD: Landore Area 1

Location: Pic Up Spares 243 Viaduct House Neath Road Landore Swansea SA1 2JG Proposal: Use of car parking area for the storage and sale of motor vehicles and parking of customer vehicles in association with existing business Applicant: B Somerville

BACKGROUND INFORMATION

POLICIES

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

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

SITE HISTORY

App No. Proposal 2001/1368 Replacement of fire damaged building Decision: Grant Permission Conditional Decision Date: 18/09/2001

2007/2185 Siting of a mobile catering unit Decision: Grant Permission Conditional Decision Date: 19/11/2007

81/1173/03 DEMOLITION OF OLD HOUSE TO PROVIDE PARKING ERECTION OF A NEW LINK TRADE COUNTER BUILDING, PROVISION OF NEW TOILETS AND GENERAL AND EXTERNAL DECORATIONS, ALL IN CONNECTION WITH EXISTING ENGINEERING Decision: *HGPC - GRANT PERMISSION CONDITIONAL Decision Date: 29/10/1981

77/0537/03 IMPROVING ACCESS INTO NEATH ROAD BY WIDENING NORTH OPENING AND ERECTING A GATE ON THE SOUTH OPENING Decision: *HGPC - GRANT PERMISSION CONDITIONAL Decision Date: 30/06/1977

AREA 1 DEVELOPMENT CONTROL COMMITTEE – 16TH FEBRUARY 2010

ITEM 14 (CONT’D) APPLICATION NO. 2009/1814

95/0280 EXTENSION OF EXISTING STEEL PORTAL FRAMED INDUSTRIAL UNIT Decision: *HGPC - GRANT PERMISSION CONDITIONAL Decision Date: 24/05/1995

83/1704/03 CHANGE OF USE TO CAR SALES MECHANICAL REPAIRS AND PAINT SPRAYING. Decision: *HRP - REFUSE PERMISSION Decision Date: 26/04/1984

85/0315/03 DEMOLITION OF EXISTING BUILDINGS AND ERECTION OF NEW WAREHOUSE AND OFFICES. PHASE 1 + 2 . Decision: *HGPC - GRANT PERMISSION CONDITIONAL Decision Date: 25/04/1985

74/0956/03 ERECTION OF STEEL FABRICATING WORKSHOP Decision: *HGPC - GRANT PERMISSION CONDITIONAL Decision Date: 25/09/1975

RESPONSE TO CONSULTATIONS

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

Highway Safety The application is for the change of use of part of the car park for pic-up-spares to car sales.

The car sales are will take up approx half the spaces in the existing car park with the remainder being for visitors to Pic Up Spares and also visitors to the car sales. The layout of two rows of cars does not accord with our adopted guidelines and it would be difficult for vehicles to safely access/egress the spaces given the layout.

There has also been a consent at the site for a mobile catering unit which again displaces existing parking provision and generates additional visitors.

Overall it has not been demonstrated that parking for all the uses can be accommodated within the site, parking for car sales often overspills onto the adjacent highway/footway and this could cause detriment to the freeflow of vehicles and pedestrians particularly as the ftr metro bus runs alongside the site.

I recommend that the application be refused on the grounds that the applicant has failed to demonstrate that parking for all the uses can be accommodated within the site.

APPRAISAL

This application is reported to Committee for decision at the request of Councillor R Speht. AREA 1 DEVELOPMENT CONTROL COMMITTEE – 16TH FEBRUARY 2010

ITEM 14 (CONT’D) APPLICATION NO. 2009/1814

Full planning permission is sought to use a car parking area for the storage and sale of motor vehicles and parking of customer vehicles in association with existing business, at Pic Up Spares, 243 Viaduct House, Neath Road, Landore, Swansea.

The application site is adjacent to the old Neath Road and below the railway bridge on the main Swansea-Paddington line. The site is located within an established industrial area.

The main issues for consideration relate to the acceptability of the use at this location, the impact upon the general amenity levels of the area and highway safety. There are no additional considerations arising from the provisions of the Human Rights Act.

Given the nature of the immediate vicinity, it is not considered that the proposal would result in any adverse impact on the visual appearance and character of the street scene or surrounding area. Similarly, due to its location it is not considered that the proposed use will have an unacceptable impact on the amenities of the occupiers of any residential properties.

The Head of Transportation and Engineering however has advised that refusal is recommended on the grounds that the applicant has failed to demonstrate that parking for all the uses can be accommodated within the site. The layout of two rows of cars does not accord with adopted guidelines and it would be difficult for vehicles to safely access/egress the spaces given the layout. Parking for car sales often overspills onto the adjacent highway/footway and this could cause detriment to the freeflow of vehicles and pedestrians particularly as the metro bus runs alongside the site.

In conclusion, it is considered that the proposed change of use represents an unacceptable form of development that would have a significant adverse impact on highway safety, contrary to Policies AS6, EV1 and EV3 of the City and County of Swansea Unitary Development Plan. Refusal is therefore recommended.

RECOMMENDATION

REFUSE, for the following reason:

1 It has not been demonstrated that parking for all the existing and proposed uses can be accommodated within the site and the proposal would be likely to lead to additional on-street parking that would create congestion and disruption to the safe and free flow of traffic in the vicinity to the detriment of highway safety contrary to the provisions of Policies EV1, AS6 and EV3 of the City and County of Swansea Unitary Development Plan.

INFORMATIVES

PLANS Site location plan, access statement received 8th December 2009. Additional plans existing block plan, proposed block plan received 30th December 2009.

AREA 1 DEVELOPMENT CONTROL COMMITTEE – 16TH FEBRUARY 2010

ITEM 15 APPLICATION NO. 2008/0919 WARD: Landore Area 1

Location: Land south of Morfa, Neath Road, Swansea Proposal: Construction of Morfa distributor road and widening of existing express bus route (Council Development Regulation 3) Applicant: Director of Regeneration

BACKGROUND INFORMATION a. Relevant Planning Policies

Swansea Unitary Development Plan

Policy HC19 The Tawe Riverside Park will be completed so as to enhance its ecology and appearance, improve its role as an attractive recreation area and complete the pedestrian and cycle network.

Policy AS11 Road construction and/or improvement schemes are proposed at locations, identified on the Proposals Map and include the Morfa Distributor Road.

Policy EV1 New development shall accord with a defined set of criteria of good design and shall have regard to the desirability of preserving the setting of any listed building.

Policy EV2 The siting of new development shall give preference to the use of previously developed land and have regard to the physical character and topography of the site and its surroundings.

Policy EV6 The Council will seek to protect, preserve and enhance Scheduled Ancient Monuments

Policy EV24 Within the greenspace system, consisting of wildlife reservoirs, green corridors, pocket sites and riparian corridors, the natural heritage and historic environment will be conserved and enhanced. The Tawe Corridor is included as a riparian corridor.

Policy EV32 Environmental improvement schemes will be implemented at a number of locations shown on the Proposals Map. These are intended to: (i) Improve visual appearance, natural heritage value and recreation potential, (ii) Improve the setting of industrial, commercial and residential developments and transport corridors, and (iii) Maintain, extend and improve the quality of the urban greenspace network in line with the aims of the ‘Greening the City’ strategy. AREA 1 DEVELOPMENT CONTROL COMMITTEE – 16TH FEBRUARY 2010

ITEM 15 (CONT’D) APPLICATION NO. 2008/0919 b. Relevant Planning History

2002/0026 Construction of a dedicated bus route for park and ride buses (Council Development Regulation 3) at Former Yorkshire Imperial Metals Site Planning Permission Sept. 2003

2008/1615 Redevelopment of site with construction of up to 52 houses (3 storey) and 84 apartments (5 storey) together with phase 2 Morfa Distributor Road, new access road, car parking, landscaping, infrastructure, re- profiling and engineering works (outline) Currently being considered c. Response to Consultations

The application was advertised on site and in the local press as a development which might materially affect the setting of a listed building i.e. Boundary wall of former Hafod Copper Works, Hafod lime kiln and canteen building. 6 LETTERS OF OBJECTION have been received making the following points:

1. Will have a detrimental and irreparable damage to Grade II Listed Structures which are of national importance regarding Swansea’s Industrial history and heritage, namely the former Hafod copper works, Hafod lime kiln and the canteen building.

2. It will undermine the objectives in the Tawe Riverside Corridor Strategy which strive to protect the heritage of the precious Copperworks sites.

3. The construction of the park and ride has disrupted the deliveries and trading capabilities of the Landore Social Club.

Swansea Community Boat Trust –

Initial response – 24 June 2008 The Trust would like to make the following observations regarding the application and its impact on heritage structures at the Hafod Copperworks site.

It is regrettable that restoring the Swansea Canal above the Hafod Copperworks engine houses will be impossible if this application is approved. The opportunity to recreate an important historic landscape will be lost.

The Trust recognises the constraints on developing the Hafod Copperworks site, not least the limited space and need to protect the historic structures.

The Trust agrees that construction of the Morfa Distributor Road is fundamental to the delivery of the Taw Riverside Strategy, which commits the City and County of Swansea to safeguarding the heritage structures of the copperworks sites.

Of the options for the route of the Morfa Distributor Road, the present proposal is preferred to either destroying a much longer length of the Swansea Canal route and putting at risk the listed structures alongside, or building a new river crossing that destroys part of the White Rock Copperworks site. AREA 1 DEVELOPMENT CONTROL COMMITTEE – 16TH FEBRUARY 2010

ITEM 15 (CONT’D) APPLICATION NO. 2008/0919

Having considered the above, the Trust has no objection to the application, subject to the following:

1. The drawing indicates the widening of the carriageway and the level of the footpath being raised. Are these within the existing footpath? If not, what will be the effect on the adjacent listed lime kiln? 2. Has consideration been given to recovering the fabric of the buried canal bridge, for re-erection elsewhere? Otherwise, it will be destroyed after being recorded. 3. Will the new pedestrian crossing near the lime kiln have a [pedestrian phase in the proposed traffic light system? Will the line of the Swansea Canal to the north be cleared soon for pedestrian use, as detailed in the Tawe Riverside Strategy?

Further response – 7 July 2008 Since my previous comment, I have visited the site again to inspect the Hafod Canal Boundary Wall (Listed Building). This is referred to in the application as being in “poor condition” and that the impact of the proposed development would be “high”.

Having inspected the boundary wall, I cannot agree with the assessment of condition. The wall requires repointing, but appears to be stable. It is not leaning or showing any collapsed sections. The only significant damage – a hole through the structure – appears to have been done deliberately, probably with a machine.

The Trust is very concerned that this Grade II listed structure may be damaged further during the construction of the Morfa Distributor Road. The Hafod boundary wall has considerable heritage interest. The archway that is part of the structure formerly gave access to the Hafod Canal Dock and is a rare survivor in the Swansea area. The fabric of the wall – copper slag blocks, dressed stone, rubble brick – tells the story of the site. You can see the hinges of the main gate to the Hafod Works still in position. The Hafod boundary wall gives context to the listed Copperworks buildings nearby, including the nationally-important engine houses.

The Trust requests confirmation that the Hafod Canal Boundary Wall will not be damaged if the application is approved, as the Trust would object to any development work that threatens this listed structure.

Swansea Canal Society –

13 June 2008 - The Canal Society has concerns about the planning application for the developments along the former Swansea Canal at the Hafod in Swansea.

The canal corridor contains a number of listed structures that reflects the important heritage value of the canal and the industries that were so important to the development and prosperity of Swansea during the 19th and 20th centuries.

These include the limekiln, canal retaining walls, copper slag walls, bridge abutments and canal overbridges. AREA 1 DEVELOPMENT CONTROL COMMITTEE – 16TH FEBRUARY 2010

ITEM 15 (CONT’D) APPLICATION NO. 2008/0919

The City and County of Swansea has policies to protect such important structures. The Swansea Canal Society wishes the City Council to take recognisance of those in determining any proposals that may adversely affect those important heritage monuments.

6 July 2008 We wrote to you on the 13 June 2008 with regard to the above planning proposal. We have re-examined the road route proposed and have further observations to make that we hope you will consider.

The Society does not wish to hinder the road improvements or the regeneration of the Hafod. We consider that incorporating the heritage monuments into the overall project will greatly enhance the attractiveness and tourism potential of the area.

I understand the proposed road will follow the former course of the Swansea Canal from the present bus lane near the limekiln and head southward onto Morfa Road.

Along that section of the former canal are important heritage features, which the Society would want the City and County of Swansea to improve and protect. We have enclosed a copy of the Ordnance Survey map 1879 that identifies the heritage features in the Hafod that are under discussion.

At the southern end of the proposed road at the junction with Maliphant Street are the remains of the Hafod Isha canal bridge and the infilled lock number 4. These were among the first structures built on the canal in 1794/95 by Mar Maliphant. The proposal for the lock is to leave it buried intact for future archaeological interest. The bridge should be recorded and studied to ascertain if there are any features or items worthy of salvaging for possible use by the Swansea museums.

Near the limekiln and slightly to the south are two structures of historical interest. The Hafod Ucha Bridge and the Hafod dock. An image of the Hafod canal bridge dated 1923 is included for your information as are plans of the canal bridges in that area. The bridge has scant remains surviving but the Society suggests salvaging the stonework such as the bridge arch, deck, and abutments and using the materials to rebuild the demolished Morfa canal bridge located slightly to the north of the Hafod bridge.

The Hafod canal dock entrance to the Hafod copperworks is still extant. This consists of an archway set into the copperworks boundary wall. The entrance arch is a very rare example of a canal dock entrance and every effort should be made to preserve it. Retaining this feature and incorporating it with the Hafod works rolling mill remains will enhance the heritage value of that location. The mill is out of context isolated where it is, retaining additional heritage features nearby will increase the historic value of the whole area.

Alongside the Morfa copperworks site are very important industrial archaeology structures. These include the Vivians tramway bridges, which are possibly the largest structures built using copper slag blocks. This whole area should be designated as a Hafod heritage trail and including the former canal route, bridges, copper works buildings, copper works canteen and laboratory. AREA 1 DEVELOPMENT CONTROL COMMITTEE – 16TH FEBRUARY 2010

ITEM 15 (CONT’D) APPLICATION NO. 2008/0919

The City and County of Swansea has carried out excellent landscaping works of part of the area of the former canal bed. This can be improved upon by extending the landscaping to the south following the canal route as far as the limekiln. This will create a heritage park to help future generations understand the development of the Hafod and the copper industry in Swansea during the 19th century.

Swansea Civic Society – wish to support the letters from Swansea Community Boat Trust and Swansea Canal Society in their concerns about the possible damage which may be incurred during the construction of the Morfa Distributor Road.

The Society requests confirmation that the Hafod Canal Boundary Wall will not be damaged if the application is approved.

D.R.Lloyd AM – As Regional Member, I have received further representations regarding plans which appear to endanger heritage sites of significance in Landore, namely the canal, Hafod Copperworks and Lime Kilns.

You will recall previous correspondence in this matter, and the issue appears under Planning Application 2008/0919 – the construction of the Morfa Distributor Road and widening of existing express bus routes. On the face of it this proposal contravenes the UDP, as well as generating much local concern.

CADW – thank you for your letter regarding the proposal to construct a main service road into the north end of the Taw Riverside Corridor in Swansea.

The advice set out below relates only to those aspects of the proposal, which fall within Cadw’s remit as a consultee on planning applications – the impact of development on scheduled monuments or Registered Historic Landscapes, Parks and Gardens. Our comments do not address any potential impact on the setting of any listed building, which is properly a matter for your authority. These views are provided without prejudice to the Welsh Assembly Government’s consideration of the matter, should it come before it formally for determination.

The documents submitted following Cadw’s request to be consulted on this development consist of the Supporting Statement, an Archaeological Desk-Based Assessment, and a number of plans and sections including the preferred Option C overlain on the first edition OS map. The Supporting Statement summarises the potential archaeological impacts of three options and uses small-scale overlays of the three routes on a base map showing the different classes of archaeological / historic building assets. However, these maps are not as detailed as the area maps included in the Archaeological Desk-Based Assessment and, in our opinion, are too small scale to make proper judgements.

Cadw’s remit is to assess the potential impact on the setting of the scheduled ancient monument known as Hafod Copper Works Musgrave Engine and Rolls (GM483), and if relevant, the nearby scheduled monument White Rock Copper Works (GM481) and, the more distant, Morfa Bridge and Quays (GM392). AREA 1 DEVELOPMENT CONTROL COMMITTEE – 16TH FEBRUARY 2010

ITEM 15 (CONT’D) APPLICATION NO. 2008/0919

Option C has been submitted for planning consent, and, in our opinion, will affect the setting of the monument particularly from the widening of the current bus route towards the scheduled site and in re-opening the land to the rear of the engine house. Cadw considers, however, that the site is in poor condition and is in need of some investment to maintain its condition. If this were to follow from the regeneration of the surrounding area, then this would in our opinion balance the change in setting of the monument.

Cadw considers option A would have had a lesser impact on the scheduled ancient monument but much greater effect upon the listed structures on the site. Option B would also have had a significant effect on GM483 from the new bridge, which would also have impacts upon GM481.

Whilst it’s not Cadw’s role to comment on the impact of this proposal; on unscheduled sites, it is of concern that this has been treated superficially in the documents submitted with the planning application. We consider that the proposal needs to be mapped against the more detailed plans included within the Desk- Based Assessment, and the impacts along each part of the proposed route identified and a mitigation strategy proposed. Therefore, Cadw recommends that your authority takes the advice of the Glamorgan-Gwent Archaeological Trust Curatorial Division.

Glamorgan Gwent Archaeological Trust –

The application area and its environs contains the largest collection of surviving Swansea’s industrial heritage and buried archaeological features of national importance. Any development in this area will therefore have a significant impact on the archaeological resource and it is surprising that the application has been submitted without the appropriate level of information on the archaeological resource, the impact of the proposed development on the scheduled ancient monuments and their setting or any meaningful proposals to mitigate these impacts. We note that the application is accompanied by a supporting statement but this document’s analysis of the impact of the development on the archaeological resource has clearly been not been prepared by an archaeologist or historic environment specialist. The statement has used basic information from the Historic Environment Record and National Mounments Record which does not differentiate between a single wall and a whole industrial complex and also also does not give the boundaries of these sites or their importance. Hence the analysis given in 4.7 of the document that option C will only have an impact on two archaeological sites is completely wrong, given that the route crosses the Hafod Copperworks, and similar information is missed from the analysis of all of the routes on their impact on the archaeological resource. Consequently the evaluations conclusions given in section 5.1 are wrong and so therefore is the final conclusion in 5.2.

In its current form the application does not present the required information on the impact of the development on the scheduled ancient monuments and their settings; the settings of the listed buildings; or the buried archaeological features, so that any meaningful determination of the impact of the development on the archaeological resource can be made. AREA 1 DEVELOPMENT CONTROL COMMITTEE – 16TH FEBRUARY 2010

ITEM 15 (CONT’D) APPLICATION NO. 2008/0919

This information is required not only to determine the direct impact but also potential impacts such as the effect that vibration (both during construction and when the road is in use) will have on the standing historic remains.

It is therefore our opinion that the determination of the current applications should be deferred until a detailed study of the archaeological resource has been complied for all of the options put forward in the Supporting Statement. This will then allow a proper analysis of the impact of the proposed road routes on the archaeological and historic resource to be made, suggest appropriate designs for road and any landscaping to be formulated that will take into account the important archaeological resource and the future development of the site, and provide a cost for the archaeological mitigation measures that will need to be undertaken, a factor that does not appear to have been considered so far but could be significant and alter the financial appraisals of the three routes.

The documentation accompanying this application is inadequate for the impact of the development on the archaeological resource to be determined. Government advice given in Planning Policy Wales 2002 section 5.1 to 5.3; Welsh Office Circular 60/96 sections 11 to 14 is reinforced in Planning Policy EV6 of the City and County of Swansea Unitary Development Plan which clearly state that applications for development that will have an impact on the sites or areas of archaeological potential should include

i. an assessment or evaluation of the archaeological or historic importance of the site or structure ii. the likely impact of development on the archaeological site and iii. the measures proposed to preserve, enhance and record features of archaeological interest.

The lack of any appropriate documentation meeting the three requirements above clearly show that the application, in its current form, cannot be determined at present and given that the justification for the choice of route leading to the submission of the current route is flawed we would recommend that the applicant is asked to withdraw the current application until the required documentation and analysis has been prepared and a proper evaluation of the route of the Morfa Distributor Road can be made. If however, the applicant does not withdraw the application then they should be formally requested to provide the above information and the determination of the current application should be deferred until appropriate documents have been submitted.

In conclusion, the proposed development will have an impact on the archaeological resource but the applicant has provided insufficient information on the matter for the significance of this impact to be determined. The applicant will need to provide adequate information on this aspect of the development and therefore until appropriate documents have been submitted the determination of this application should be deferred. Until the applicant submits appropriate information on the impact of the development on the archaeological resource and we have been able to consider this information we will formally object to any positive determination of this application. AREA 1 DEVELOPMENT CONTROL COMMITTEE – 16TH FEBRUARY 2010

ITEM 15 (CONT’D) APPLICATION NO. 2008/0919

Note: GGAT have been formally consulted on the Supplementary Archaeological Impact Assessment information submitted but no response has been received to date. Any further response will be reported to Committee.

Environment Agency – Initial response The information provided with the application is limited. We do not feel that sufficient information has been submitted to clearly demonstrate that the risk of flooding, or the risk of pollution to controlled waters is acceptable.

The proposed development is within zone C1, as defined by development advice maps (dam) referred to under TAN15, Development ad Flood Risk (July 2004). Our Flood Map Information, updated on a quarterly basis, confirms the site to be at risk of flooding.

In consideration of the flood risk at this location, a full Flood Consequences Assessment (FCA) will be required, which will need to be accompanied by a hydraulic model for development. The FCA must be undertaken by a suitably qualified person carrying an appropriate professional indemnity.

This assessment must be submitted prior to determination and forwarded by your Authority to us for detailed advice on flooding.

With regard to surface water disposal, we note that the surface water drains are proposed. To accord with TAN15, the development should be designed around a suitable sustainable drainage (SUDS) system. If any other form of surface water disposal is proposed, then evidence of why SUDS cannot be implemented must be provided. If a conventional system is utilised, then this must improve on the status quo.

In addition to the required FCA, further information is required in order to satisfy our concerns with regard to the risk to controlled waters (River Tawe). We consider the controlled waters at this location to be of high environmental sensitivity and due to the previous industrial use of the surrounding area, contamination is strongly suspected at the site.

The application as submitted, fails to provide assurance that the risks of pollution are understood. Under Planning Policy for Wales (PPW), the application should not be determined until information has been provided to the satisfaction of the Local Planning Authority, that the risk to controlled waters has been fully understood and can be addressed through appropriate measures. We do not feel that this is currently the case, as a preliminary risk assessment (including a desk study, conceptual model and initial assessment of risk) has not been provided.

PPW takes a precautionary approach. It requires a proper assessment whenever there might be a risk, not only where the risk is known.

We therefore require as a minimum, the submission of a preliminary risk assessment to address our concerns. This should be submitted prior to determination. AREA 1 DEVELOPMENT CONTROL COMMITTEE – 16TH FEBRUARY 2010

ITEM 15 (CONT’D) APPLICATION NO. 2008/0919

In consideration of the above, the Environment Agency would request that determination of the application be deferred until we receive the information as requested. If however your Authority are unable to deter determination, or the requested information is not forthcoming, then we would recommend that the application be refused.

Further response Following a meeting with officers of the City and County Council, additional information has been provided relating to site levels (DRG. NO. g212_003A).

The levels indicated on the drawing are well in excess of the nearest flood levels available for the site and although these are not recently modelled, the difference is substantial enough to be confident that the site is not at risk.

In this instance we are therefore prepared to accept the submitted level survey as sufficient evidence that the site is outside of the extreme flood outline of the River Tawe.

With regard to surface water drainage, we would again ask that the development be designed around an appropriate sustainable drainage system (SUDS). Surface water should be kept separate from the main sewerage system to avoid overloading and subsequent pollution problems.

Highway Observations –

This application is for the construction of part of the Morfa Distributor Road. Morfa Road itself is to be improved however a link is necessary to connect Morfa Road to the north near White Rock. A number of options have been studied and the preferred option is to construct the link from the Park and Ride site linking the A4067 to Morfa Road. The Distributor road is to be constructed through the Hastie site and this forms part of a separate application for redevelopment at the Hastie site.

The proposed link will follow the existing express bus route from the park and ride site with improvements to provide additional lanes for traffic keeping bus lanes intact. The new link road will then deviate at the old Hafod Copper Works and follow the line of the old Swansea Canal down to the Hastie site to connect with the new distributor road to be constructed as part of the Hastie redevelopment and then on to Morfa Road itself.

This option is considered to have the least affect on listed buildings and features in the area and is therefore recommended as the preferred option. Detailed design is yet to be undertaken however all design and construction will be undertaken to current standards and I recommend that approval be granted.

APPRAISAL

The application has been called to Committee at the request of the Ward Member, Councillor Robert Speht. AREA 1 DEVELOPMENT CONTROL COMMITTEE – 16TH FEBRUARY 2010

ITEM 15 (CONT’D) APPLICATION NO. 2008/0919

The proposal for the Morfa Distributor Road involves the widening / improvement of the existing Landore Park and Ride link road and the construction of a new section of roadway with the intention of ultimately linking onto the end of the existing Morfa Road to form the Distributor Road. The proposal is intrinsically linked to planning application ref: 2008/1615 for the proposed residential re-development of the Hasties site situated at the end of the Morfa Industrial Estate. That proposal involves the construction of an extension of Morfa Road which would link into this current proposal and thus ultimately linking New Cut Road with the A4067 forming the Morfa Distributor Road.

The link would run within an area with a high concentration of listed buildings and Scheduled Ancient Monuments relating to the industrial heritage of the Lower Swansea Valley. These include the canteen and laboratory buildings of the former Yorkshire Imperial Metals (YIM) works; the copper slag abutment and pier; the Hafod lime kiln, all to the west and the Musgrave engine house and adjoining chimney stack and Vivian Works engine house to the east.

The new two lane carriageway would be measure 8 metres in width, with a 2 metre wide footpath along the eastern side of the link with a grassed verge on the opposite side. The junction with the park and ride bus link will require the installation of traffic lights to control access and street lighting columns are also proposed along its length. Due to the significant changes in levels between the eastern and western side of the site the proposal involves significant cut and fill engineering works to accommodate the route.

The Tawe Riverside Corridor Study (TRCS) was adopted by the City and County of Swansea in 2006, and one of the key aspirations of the TRCS is the delivery of the ‘Morfa Distributor Road’, which would require the upgrading of the existing Morfa Road from its junction on New Cut Road and then providing a new road link via the existing Landore park and ride access onto the A4067 to enable to have a distributor road function. The distributor road would serve development within the area and moreover would relieve traffic congestion elsewhere on the highway network by providing a direct corridor to the city centre from the north and in doing so would help improve air quality in a failing Air Quality Management Area.

The TRCS masterplan originally envisaged the construction of a river bridge to facilitate the Morfa Road distributor road. However, the alignment of the road has now been reconsidered with 2 alternative options due to concerns with cost and deliverability, whilst having regard to minimising environmental impact, particularly on industrial heritage, and safeguarding further development opportunities. All 3 options involve an extension of Morfa Road, north, through the former Hasties site, and an upgrading of Morfa Road from the Hasties site southwards.

Option A – Original Hafod By-pass proposal This is a through route from Morfa Road direct to the A4067 / B4603 roundabout (original Hafod Bypass). This option follows exactly the line of the Swansea Canal through the former Hafod Copperworks site before joining Neath Road. The proposed route will impact on the canal itself and four listed buildings, which lie alongside the canal to form its boundary. The proposed route between the northern end of Morfa Road and the express bus route follows the line of the Swansea Canal. The majority of the canal in this area has been infilled. AREA 1 DEVELOPMENT CONTROL COMMITTEE – 16TH FEBRUARY 2010

ITEM 15 (CONT’D) APPLICATION NO. 2008/0919

Much of the land in this area is eroded down the steep slope to the Tawe, which means that the available area between the slope and the railway sidings is restricted and will impact on the canal itself and the Hafod Canal Boundary Wall (which is a Listed Building). Option A is considered expensive, with a high impact on the line of the Swansea Canal and on a number of listed structures.

Option B – White Rock Option The White Rock Option route comprises a roadway leading northwards from Morfa Road, along the Swansea Canal, turning northeast towards a new roundabout with a bridge over the Tawe to the existing White Rock roundabout. The route lies outside the White Rock scheduled area, but would impact on the archaeology and on the present landscaped park. The route would cross part of the site of the Middle Bank Copperworks , which mainly lies beneath the White Rock roundabout, but the site has no statutory designation. The route does not directly impact on the White Rock Copperworks site, and lies outside the White Rock scheduled area, but would impact on the present landscaped park and the archaeology of the Middle Bank Works. Option B is considered the most expensive, visually obtrusive with significant impact on the setting of a number of the key listed structures.

Option C – Swansea Canal / Bus Priority Route This Option is similar to Option A initially with the proposed route between Morfa Road and the express bus route mainly following the line of the Swansea Canal. Therafter it would follow a widened express bus route before joining the A4067. This Option will miss the majority of the listed features with the exception of a small section of the listed (Grade 2) canal walling. Option C will run adjacent to the Grade II listed Hafod Canal Boundary Wall, which is constructed of copper slag, sandstone and brick and extends for some 80 metres and 3.5 metres in height. The condition of this walling is poor. Near to the intersection with the express bus route, it crosses the line of what once was the main bridge entrance into the Hafod works. This option involves covering the southern half of the Swansea Canal with a new bypass, although trial pits / archaeological investigation will enable any finds to be recorded before being covered. Option C is the most cost effective due to maximising the use of existing roads and would result in the least disturbance to listed buildings and the site archaeology. Option C is therefore the applicant’s preferred option and is therefore the subject of this planning application.

Main Issues

There are no residential properties within the vicinity of the proposal and therefore the main issues for consideration with regard to this application are as follows:

• Compliance with development plan policy regarding transportation and reclamation; • Impact on highway conditions and traffic issues; • Townscape and visual impact including impact upon Listed Buildings and Scheduled Ancient Monuments and their settings; • Physical and archaeological implications; • Any other issues arising from the representations received.

There are considered to be no additional issues arising from the provisions of the Human Rights Act. AREA 1 DEVELOPMENT CONTROL COMMITTEE – 16TH FEBRUARY 2010

ITEM 15 (CONT’D) APPLICATION NO. 2008/0919

Transportation and Reclamation – Development Plan Policy

The amplification to Policy AS11 indicates that whilst the main thrust of the access policies are toward supporting public transport developments and improved provision for pedestrians and cyclists, limited road construction is still necessary to:

(i) Complete missing links in the primary route network, particularly the core M4 / Swansea Valley/City Centre regeneration corridor, (ii) Facilitate effective distribution and management of traffic around the City Centre, (iii) Enable developments to proceed, and (iv) Minimise the impact on residential and other environmentally sensitive areas.

Within this context the Morfa Distributor Road is identified on the UDP Proposals Map. It is indicated that the Morfa Distributor Road would link the A4067/A4217 junction at White Rock with the Morfa Road/ New Cut Road (A483) junction and facilitate the development of opportunities along Morfa Road. The Tawe Riverside Corridor Study (TRCS) describes the design concept for the road, which could involve the provision of a gyratory carriageway layout at New Cut Road. The TRCS states that developer contributions will be sought from sites along the riverside corridor as part of the efforts to secure the necessary funding package to implement the Distributor Road scheme.

Impact on Highway Conditions and Traffic Issues

As indicated this preferred option is to construct the link from the Park and Ride site linking the A4067 to Morfa Road. The Distributor road is to be constructed through the Hastie site and this forms part of a separate application for redevelopment at the Hastie site (Ref:2008/1615). The proposed link will follow the existing express bus route from the park and ride site with improvements to provide additional lanes for traffic keeping bus lanes intact. The new link road will then deviate at the old Hafod Copper Works and follow the line of the old Swansea Canal down to the Hastie site.

This option is considered to have the least effect on listed buildings and features in the area and has been determined to be the preferred option. Detailed design is yet to be undertaken however all design and construction will be undertaken to current standards and the Head of Transportation raises no highway objection. The construction of the Morfa Distributor Road is therefore in accordance with Policy AS11 and the aspirations of the TRCS.

Townscape and Visual Impact and Impact On listed Buildings/Ancient Monuments and Their Settings

The application area and its environs are recognised as containing the largest collection of surviving buildings relating to Swansea’s industrial heritage along with containing other important features buried in the area. The buildings within this area are generally in a poor state of repair and any attempts by the Council to secure them in the short term have been met with a serious level of vandalism. The site for the most part is also heavily overgrown. AREA 1 DEVELOPMENT CONTROL COMMITTEE – 16TH FEBRUARY 2010

ITEM 15 (CONT’D) APPLICATION NO. 2008/0919

General development policy EV1 of the UDP indicates that new development should sensitively relate to existing development pattern and seek to protect natural heritage on the historic and cultural environment and have regard to the desirability of preserving the setting of any listed building. Moreover, regard must be had to UDP Policies EV6 and EV1 which seeks to protect, preserve and enhance Scheduled Ancient Monuments and their settings and safeguard listed buildings. Where proposals affect sites and areas of archaeological potential, a planning application should be accompanied by an assessment or evaluation of the archaeological or historic importance of the site or structure, the likely impact of development on the archaeological site, and the measures proposed to preserve, enhance and record features of archaeological interest. The Glamorgan Gwent Archaeological Trust (GGAT) has identified five Archeologically Sensitive Areas (ASAs) within the County, and the site is included in the Lower Swansea Valley ASA. The designation does not confer any extra planning controls on the ASA and is not intended to restrict development, but indicates areas where the effect of proposed development on the archaeological resource may become an issue during the determination of a planning application. The ASA do not indicate every area where archaeology will be a factor in the determination of planning applications, but will show the likely areas where this will occur.

There are no Scheduled Ancient Monuments within the proposed road development area, although one (SAM GM483) lies in the vicinity, approx. 40 metres to the east around the Musgrave Engine House and Chimney. There are two Listed Buildings that may be directly affected by the proposed development: the Quayside wall of the former Hafod Copperworks and the Hafod Canal Boundary Wall. Other listed buildings lie in the vicinity: the Vivian Chimney, Vivian Engine House and the Musgrave Engine House and Chimney. These may be indirectly affected by the proposed works.

The application is accompanied by an Archaeological Desk-Based Assessment for the Hafod Copperworks prepared by Cambria Archaeology. This describes how the Swansea Canal was established on the western bank of the Tawe between 1794 and 1798 to open up the coal trade from the Swansea Valley. Its presence encouraged the establishment of other industries, such as the Hafod and Morfa Copperworks. The canal was no longer profitable by the early 20th century and it became disused and finally closed and infilled in 1931. Hafod Coppeworks was established in 1809, with the adjoining Morfa Works opening in 1828. At its peak in the mid 19th century, Hafod was the largest copperworks in the world and between them, the copperworks of the Lower Swansea Valley accounted for 90% of the world’s copper production. The two works merged in 1924 and were acquired as YoRkshire Imperial Metals (YIM) in 1957. Copperworking finally ceased in 1980. The site was acquired by the Swansea City Council and much of it cleared. The A4067 / A4217 Cross Valley Link Road was constructed through the centre of the site in the early 1990’s and more recently the car park for the Landore Park-and-ride scheme has also constructed. The structural remains within the study area are not limited to the listed buildings and Scheduled Ancient Monuments. There are also extensive remains of many former structures which increase the group value of the site and together represent one of the few assemblages of surviving 19th century industrial buildings left in Swansea.

Any development within this area will therefore have a significant impact on the archaeological resource and Glamorgan Gwent Archaeological Trust (GGAT) indicated that the submitted Archaeological Desk-Based Assessment did not include the appropriate level of information on the archaeological resource, the impact of the proposed development on the scheduled ancient monuments and their setting or any meaningful proposals to mitigate these impacts. AREA 1 DEVELOPMENT CONTROL COMMITTEE – 16TH FEBRUARY 2010

ITEM 15 (CONT’D) APPLICATION NO. 2008/0919

Consequently the ‘Morfa Road, Hafod Coppeworks Site, Swansea: Environmental Impact Assessment’ document prepared by Dyfed Archaeological Trust has been submitted to evaluate the impact of the proposed development on the archaeological and cultural heritage resource within the site and also to assess the visual effects upon the setting of scheduled and listed buildings within the vicinity of the proposal.

This Assessment uses accepted methodology for assessing the impact of the development on the cultural heritage resource.

The significance of physical effects is measured as from substantial to neutral with major, moderate and minor impacts in between. The significance of an impact is a function of the sensitivity of the receptor (high, medium, low, negligible, unknown) and the magnitude of effect (high, medium, low or negligible). It then goes on to recommend mitigation measures to mitigate the impacts which again range from substantial to neutral, with major, moderate and minor in between. Impacts are assessed for the construction and operational phases of the development and consider not just the direct and visual effect but also the cumulative impacts. The Assessment identifies the following key impacts and mitigation measures:

IDENTIFICATION AND EVALUATION OF KEY IMPACTS

Construction Phase

The enlarged embankment and road-widening scheme will overlay some sites. Although no ground-penetrating works are planned and therefore the sites will not be directly affected, visible elements will be buried and may suffer from compression as well as site clearance works and the general movement of heavy machinery across the site. This will affect the following sites:

YIM 5 Building – Site of Stores and office (corner of) YIM 16 Building – Site of machine shop/casemakers shop (corner of) YIM 41 Building – Site of offices YIM 43 Revetment Wall and possible furnace YIM 44 Revetment Wall and site of Cold Rolls Sett surface surrounding these sites.

Lowering current levels where the proposed new and existing roads meet will involve ground-penetrating works that will, or are likely to, damage or destroy parts of the following sites:

NPRN 35504 Swansea Canal YIM 1 Wall(the upstanding remains of this wall will be removed from the line of the widened roadway) YIM 38 Bridge (the visible cobbled/stone surface will be removed from the line of the new road) YIM 41 Site of offices

The movement of heavy plant and machinery across the site could cause damage to features either on the ground surface or close to the surface across the entire site, but of particular concern along the proposed new route are upstanding wall remains of: AREA 1 DEVELOPMENT CONTROL COMMITTEE – 16TH FEBRUARY 2010

ITEM 15 (CONT’D) APPLICATION NO. 2008/0919

YIM 2 / Building 6.0 (Cadw ref. 16881) Canal boundary wall

The cutting of a drainage channel from the proposed new road down to the river is likely to disturb both upstanding and below-ground remains (if any exist) of the following sites:

Cadw Ref: 16879 Former Quayside wall YIM 2 / Building 6.0 (Cadw ref: 16881) Canal boundary wall (the unlisted and mostly tumbled continuation of the wall labelled as YIM 2/Building 6.0) Unnumbered building

Operational Phase

It is currently uncertain exactly what effect the new road layout along the line of the Swansea Canal (NPRN 35504) will have on underlying canal deposits in terms of compression and vibration, but it is believed that the made up ground should provide some protection to underlying deposits.

It is also unclear what effect the passage of traffic will have on the upstanding remains of the boundary wall (YIM 2 / Building 6 / Cadw ref: 16881) in terms of vibration. There is also the risk of road traffic accidents resulting in damage to the structure.

Visual effects

The presence of the distributor road will have a visual effect upon the setting of nearby listed buildings and structures, namely Building 7.0 (Vivian Chimney), Building 8.0 (Vivian Engine Work s), Building 9.0 (Musgrave Engine House and Chimney) and Canal Wall YIM 2 / Building 6 (Cadw ref: 16881). The road will to some extent act as a backdrop to this group of features when viewed from a variety of directions.

The potential need for raised street-lights along this stretch of the road may also compromise the dominance the chimneys currently have on the skyline, an aspect that has been recognised as an important visual element of Swansea’s industrial heritage (Wyn Thomas Gordon Lewis 2004, p29).

The extended and raised embankment that carries the widened road up the valley side will increase the visual separation and isolation of this group of listed buildings from the other major area of listed buildings bordering the Landore Park & Ride car park to the north.

The separation of the two groups of listed buildings by the distributor road may also affect the possibility of visualising the two groups as being part of a single industrial complex.

Building part of the road over and along the route of the former canal will have a detrimental affect on the visual appreciation of the significance of this cultural heritage feature, both to the understanding of the Hafod Copperworks site and the cultural heritage of Swansea generally. It would further reduce and isolate potentially undamaged sections of the canal, and would preclude the possibility of its restoration as a public amenity, presentation as a feature of Swansea’s Industrial heritage and a means of linking the interpretation and appreciation of the Hafod Copperworks site as a whole. AREA 1 DEVELOPMENT CONTROL COMMITTEE – 16TH FEBRUARY 2010

ITEM 15 (CONT’D) APPLICATION NO. 2008/0919

The presence of the road would compromise the setting and ‘readability’ of the Listed Canal-side wall.

Cumulative Impacts

The focus of this assessment is limited to the effects of the distributor road construction only. This construction, however, is likely to be the first stage in the development of the surrounding area.

As a result, while the physical and visual impacts of the distributor road are perhaps limited, the cumulative impact of the road and the subsequent development of the surrounding area may be considerable.

The construction of the road prior to development of the rest of the site may restrict options for the character of the future development, and limit options for the sensitive and creative conservation, enhancement and presentation of the industrial heritage of the area.

MITIGATION

Specific recommended works

In the absence of an overall development plan for the former copperworks site, it is difficult to anticipate how mitigation of the affects of the construction of the distributor road upon the cultural heritage resource would tie in with mitigation for the subsequent development of the area.

Mitigation in advance of the redevelopment of the Upper and Middle Bank Copperworks sites involved large-scale exposure, excavation and detailed recording of the industrial complex. Were such a programme of works envisaged for the Morfa Copperworks site as a whole, archaeological mitigation requirements for the road might be substantially different than for the road alone, potentially requiring full excavation of the road area, regardless of whether archaeological deposits will be directly or indirectly affected by the construction.

Consultation with specialists in the history and archaeology of the Swansea copper industry is recommended to ascertain the need or otherwise of total excavation. It may be that following the Upper and Middle Bank excavations, specific research questions can be identified that could be the focus of the Morfa Works site. They might also inform the viability of options for preservation in-situ, consolidation and display of parts of the site within the subsequent development.

The archaeological mitigation works outlined below are therefore suggestions only, decisions regarding the scope and extent of any further works will be taken by the Local Planning Authority’s archaeological advisor.

The Canal (NPRN 34504) As already stated, previous archaeological assessments of this area have suggested that ‘a comprehensive programme of evaluation will be required along the length of the canal before the determination of any development’. However, the Council engineers state that for both archaeological and engineering reasons the development intends to disturb underlying canal deposits and structures as little as possible. AREA 1 DEVELOPMENT CONTROL COMMITTEE – 16TH FEBRUARY 2010

ITEM 15 (CONT’D) APPLICATION NO. 2008/0919

Prior to the drawing up of final plans for the road it is anticipated that test pits will be dug along the route to establish underlying grounds conditions. This work should be undertaken under archaeological watching brief conditions, so that underlying deposits and features can be archaeologically assessed and recorded. Depending on the results of the test pitting, and the finalised construction plans, more extensive evaluation or excavation or other mitigation may or may not be appropriate.

It is anticipated that underlying canal deposits and structures will be affected by proposed ground-works at the northern end of the proposed new road. As a result archaeological excavation and recording may be required on the canal bridge (YIM 38) and surrounding features, as groundworks here are likely to cause the destruction of deposits on the ground surface or immediately below it.

Building recording should be undertaken on the section of upstanding wall (YIM 1) that will be removed during the proposed works.

A structural survey may be required for the section of canal boundary wall (YIM 2/Building 6/Cadw ref 16881) to determine whether the construction works and subsequent operation of the road would be detrimental to the structure.

An evaluation excavation of a section across the entire canal width and elsewhere along the road corridor should be considered. Such an evaluation would record structures and deposits, inform engineering and heritage management decisions, provide information upon which to base the cost and logistics of later stages of archaeological mitigation, and provide information for public presentation and interpretation of the site as part of a mitigation package. Such an excavation would also provide information to inform possible options for the conservation or restoration of parts of the canal or other features.

The Quayside wall (Cadw ref no. 16879) This feature may be affected by the proposed scheme for draining water from the road to the river. Archaeological recording of any part of the structure that may be damaged should be undertaken. Related groundworks should be undertaken under standard archaeological watching brief conditions, allowing sufficient time to undertake recording of structures revealed.

SAMs and Listed Buildings and structures The listed and scheduled buildings that are located close to the proposed road will not be directly affected by the construction. There may, however, be indirect effects, primarily on setting and context. Any effects on the setting and context of these buildings from the presence of the road could potentially be mitigated by sensitive design of subsequent development of the area.

The use of tall lighting columns along the proposed widened express bus route should be avoided if possible, to reduce the visual impact on existing 19th century industrial buildings in the area.

A protective barrier may be required along the route of the proposed new road to protect the upstanding remains of the canal boundary wall. Care should be taken in the positioning of such a barrier however, to avoid damage to underlying canal deposits and structures, and the visual context of the listed structure. AREA 1 DEVELOPMENT CONTROL COMMITTEE – 16TH FEBRUARY 2010

ITEM 15 (CONT’D) APPLICATION NO. 2008/0919

The rest of the road corridor If mitigation for the proposed road construction is seen as part of a more intensive mitigation for the redevelopment of the Morfa Copperworks site as a whole, full excavation of the route may be required.

As a minimum, groundworks along the road route and construction zone, including clearance works and topsoil stripping, should be undertaken under standard archaeological watching brief conditions, allowing sufficient time to undertake recording of structures revealed, including any walls and surfaces that may be encountered.

Other considerations

Any groundworks or archaeological excavation on this site is likely to be complicated by high levels of contaminants present within the soils. All groundbreaking operations, including archaeological investigations, could release those contaminants and be a potential risk to project personnel, members of the public and the environment. Therefore, a full Risk Assessment would need to be prepared, approved and in place before any trial areas were excavated.

Any archaeological excavations that may occur as part of a mitigation programme for the road construction and subsequent development may potentially offer good opportunities for presenting and explaining the cultural heritage of Swansea’s industrial past to the public.

Conclusions of the Archaeological Impact Assessment

The proposed road development involves the creation of an enlarged embankment, drainage works and the creating of a new road on the site of the former Hafod Copperworks site and adjacent Swansea canal. The Morfa Copperworks site is one of the last surviving remnants of Swansea’s industrial heritage. As such it is an important resource which still offers potential to provide access to, and appreciation of the city’s industrial heritage. The majority of the works will involve making up ground rather than ground penetrating works. This will help minimise the potential impact on the archaeological and cultural heritage resource but will still affect it in several ways. The following observations are made:

• Both visible and below-ground archaeological deposits and features remain under threat during ground clearance works and the movement of heavy plant and machinery.

• Some visible remnants of the industrial site will be buried beneath the proposed works. The route of the new roadway will involve the removal of upstanding wall remains and visible cobbled/stone surfaces. Drainage from the road to the river may impact upon currently buried building and other remains.

• The ground level will have to be lowered in an area that may cause damage to underlying canal and canal bridge remains.

• It is possible construction works and subsequent operational use may affect the upstanding remains of the canal boundary wall, a Grade II listed building. AREA 1 DEVELOPMENT CONTROL COMMITTEE – 16TH FEBRUARY 2010

ITEM 15 (CONT’D) APPLICATION NO. 2008/0919

• The creation of the enlarged embankment and new lighting columns may impact on the visibility, setting and context of the collection of building remains adjacent to the proposed development.

In order to mitigate against these effects it is recommended that as a minimum a series of archaeological investigations and recording be undertaken, these include:

• small-scale archaeological evaluation be undertaken in the area where the ground is to be lowered.

• building recording be undertaken on upstanding structures that will be removed or damaged during the construction works.

• a minimum of an archaeological watching brief be undertaken during initial ground investigation works, drainage channel works and site clearance works.

• appropriate street furniture be used to minimise the visual impact of the development.

It is strongly recommended that the mitigation measures that are devised for the proposed road development form part of a larger mitigation strategy for the Morfa Copperworks site as a whole. This may result in a greater degree of archaeological mitigation being required for the road development than the minimum suggested above.

Conclusion

The construction of the Morfa Distributor Road with the potential of linking with New Cut Road and the A4067 would be in accordance with UDP Policy AS11 and is a key development aspiration of the Tawe Riverside Corridor Study (TRCS). The TRCS identifies the distributor road to serve new developments in the area and also to alleviate traffic congestion and air quality issues in the adjacent Hafod area, providing an alternative route from the north into the City Centre. The identified alignment of the road maximises the use of existing roads and would result in the least disturbance to the listed buildings and the site’s archaeology.

The road will however have a significant impact on the cultural heritage resource. The submitted Archaeological Impact Assessment identifies the known and potential impacts and recommends general and specific mitigation measures. Critically it acknowledges the difficulty of recommending mitigation measures for the road alone in isolation from the larger Morfa Copperworks Site as a whole, particularly in relation to the extent of archaeological excavating which may be required. The redevelopment of the Morfa Copperworks Site is however unlikely in the immediate future and the construction of this new road is considered a critical part of the new highway infrastructure necessary to secure the redevelopment of the sites along Morfa Road which effectively is currently a cul de sac. It is also included in the Unitary Development Plan, albeit its route is, in part, different to the current application. In the circumstances therefore it is considered unreasonable to further delay the consideration of this application. AREA 1 DEVELOPMENT CONTROL COMMITTEE – 16TH FEBRUARY 2010

ITEM 15 (CONT’D) APPLICATION NO. 2008/0919

Subject to appropriate conditions to ensure that as part of the detailed design and construction of the road a more detailed archaeological assessment and evaluation is undertaken which will inform the design and the proposed mitigation measures including the preservation of archaeological remains in situ or by record. A grampion condition similar to the advice in Welsh Office Circular 60/96 is therefore recommended. This would also need to ensure that the proposed mitigation measures are devised so that they form part of a larger mitigation strategy for the Morfa Copperworks site as a whole, to be undertaken when the site id developed.

Separate Listed Building consents will be required for works if at detailed design stage they are shown to directly effect the two listed buildings on the route of the road – the quayside wall of the copperworks and the canal boundary wall. It is considered that the settings of the Listed Buildings and Scheduled Ancient Monuments can be adequately protected by careful mitigation, also controlled by condition. Subject to the conditions therefore approval is recommended.

RECOMMENDATION

APPROVE, subject to the following conditions:

2 The development shall be completed in accordance with a scheme for the landscaping of the site. The approved landscaping scheme shall be carried out within 12 months from the completion of the development. Any trees or shrubs planted in accordance with this condition which are removed, die, become seriously diseased within two years of planting shall be replaced by trees or shrubs of similar size and species to those originally required to be planted. Reason: To ensure that the site is satisfactorily landscaped having regard to its location and the nature of the proposed development, and to accord with Section 197 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990.

3 A detailed scheme for the eradication of Japanese Knotweed shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority, and shall be implemented in accordance with the approved scheme. Reason: In the interests of the ecology and amenity of the area.

AREA 1 DEVELOPMENT CONTROL COMMITTEE – 16TH FEBRUARY 2010

ITEM 15 (CONT’D) APPLICATION NO. 2008/0919

4 No development shall take place until the applicant, or their agents or successors in title, has secured the implementation of a programme of archaeological work in accordance with a written scheme of investigation which has been submitted by the applicant and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The scheme shall indicate how the work would be consistent with a wider investigation and mitigation strategy for the adjacent Morfa Copperworks site. Reason: To safeguard this area of archaeological interest.

5 Notwithstanding the details shown on the approved drawing numbers G212A002 rev A precise details and locations of signage, street lighting columns, traffic signals, and the colour and finishes of the surface materials shall be submitted and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority prior to development commencing. The scheme shall be completed in accordance with the agreed scheme. Reason: To protect the setting of the adjacent listed buildings.

6 Notwithstanding the provisions of the Town and Country Planning (General Permitted Development) Order 1995, (or any Order revoking or amending that Order), Class A or Part 2 of Schedule 2 (relating to means of enclosure) shall not apply. Reason: he development hereby approved is such that the Council wish to retain control over any future development being permitted in order to ensure that a satisfactory form of development is achieved at all times. To ensure that the proposed development will not cause pollution of controlled waters.

7 Prior to the commencement of development approved by this planning permission (or such other date or stage in development as may be agreed in writing with the Local Planning Authority), the following components of a scheme to deal with the risks associated with contamination of the site shall each be submitted to and approved, in writing, by the local planning authority: 1. A preliminary risk assessment which has identified: * all previous uses * potential contaminants associated with those uses * a conceptual model of the site indicating sources, pathways and receptors * potentially unacceptable risks arising from contamination at the site.

2. A site investigation scheme, based on (1) to provide information for a detailed assessment of the risk to all receptors that may be affected, including those off site. 3. The site investigation results and the detailed risk assessment (2) and, based on these, an options appraisal and remediation strategy giving full details of the remediation measures required and how they are to be undertaken. 4. A verification plan providing details of the data that will be collected in order to demonstrate that the works set out in (3) are complete and identifying any requirements for longer-term monitoring of pollutant linkages, maintenance and arrangements for contingency action. Any changes to these components require the express consent of the Local Planning Authority. The scheme shall be implemented as approved. AREA 1 DEVELOPMENT CONTROL COMMITTEE – 16TH FEBRUARY 2010

ITEM 15 (CONT’D) APPLICATION NO. 2008/0919

8 Prior to the commencement of development, a verification report demonstrating completion of the works set out in the approved remediation strategy and the effectiveness of the remediation shall be submitted to and approved, in writing, by the Local Planning Authority. The report shall include results of sampling and monitoring carried out in accordance with the approved verification plan to demonstrate that the site remediation criteria have been met. It shall also include any plan (a "long term monitoring and maintenance plan") for longer-term monitoring of pollutant linkages, maintenance and arrangements for contingency action, as identified in the verification plan, and for the reporting of this to the Local Planning Authority. Reason: To ensure that the proposed development will not cause pollution of controlled waters.

9 Reports on monitoring, maintenance and any contingency action carried out in accordance with a long-term monitoring and maintenance plan shall be submitted to the local planning authority as set out in that plan. On completion of the monitoring programme a final report demonstrating that all long-term site remediation criteria have been met and documenting the decision to cease monitoring shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. Reason: To ensure that the proposed development will not cause pollution of controlled waters.

10 If during development, contamination not previously identified is found to be present at the site, then no further development (unless otherwise agreed in writing with the Local Planning Authority) shall be carried out until the developer has submitted, and obtained written approval from the Local Planning Authority for, an amendment to the remediation strategy detailing how this unsuspected contamination shall be dealt with. Reason: To ensure that the proposed development will not cause pollution of controlled waters.

11 The development shall not be brought into beneficial use until a scheme for the disposal of surface water drainage has been submitted to and approved by the Local Planning Authority and shall be implemented in accordance with the approved scheme. Reason: To prevent pollution of the wider environment.

INFORMATIVES

AREA 1 DEVELOPMENT CONTROL COMMITTEE – 16TH FEBRUARY 2010

ITEM 15 (CONT’D) APPLICATION NO. 2008/0919

PLANS

G212_001 site location plan, G212_002 proposed road, G212_004 cross section, G212_005 cross sections received 1st May 2008. Additional plans G212A002A, G212A_004.2, G212A_004.1, G212A_005.2, G212A_004A, G212A_005.v received 14th May 2008, Archaeological Environmental Impact Assessment (Additional Information received 15 Dec. 2008).

AREA 1 DEVELOPMENT CONTROL COMMITTEE – 16TH FEBRUARY 2010

ITEM 16 APPLICATION NO. 2009/0472 WARD: Llansamlet Area 1

Location: Land at Phoenix Way Retail Park, Swansea Enterprise Park, Llansamlet, Swansea SA7 9EH Proposal: Reconfiguration of existing retail park with demolition of existing single detached retail unit and part demolition of further retail unit, construction of 3 no. attached retail units (Class A1) - 2,787 sq m gross floorspace, (resulting in 7 retail units overall), freestanding food and drink unit (Class A3) - 279 sq m gross floorspace together with new vehicular access onto Fendrod Way, car parking (299 spaces overall), infrastructure and landscaping works Applicant: Barberry Developments Ltd

BACKGROUND INFORMATION a. Relevant Planning Policies

Planning Policy Guidance

Planning Policy Wales (PPW) – March, 2002

Technical Advice Note (Wales) 4 – Retailing and Town Centres (1996)

Ministerial Interim Planning Policy Statement (MIPPS) 02/2005 “Planning for Retailing and Town Centres”

Technical Advice Note 12 – Design

Technical Advice Note 18 – Transport

Unitary Development Plan

UDP Strategic Policy

Policy SP5 Development the economy including the regeneration and improvement of links between the City Centre, Lower Swansea Valley and Swansea Waterfront

UDP Part 2 Policies

Policy EV1 New Development should be in accordance with the objectives of good design

Policy EV2 The siting of new development should give preference to the use of previously developed land over Greenfield sites and must have regard to the physical character and topography of the site and its surroundings

Policy EV3 Accessibility for new development AREA 1 DEVELOPMENT CONTROL COMMITTEE – 16TH FEBRUARY 2010

ITEM 16 (CONT’D) APPLICATION NO. 2009/0472

Policy EV4 Integration of development with the public realm

Policy EC4 The acceptability of all retail development proposals will be assessed against: (i) The need for the development, and provided need can be justified: (ii) A sequential assessment of the suitability of the site, (iii) Impact on vitality and viability of the City Centre and other established shopping centres, (iv) Compatibility with the function, scale and character of the centre within or adjacent to which the site is located, (v) Accessibility by foot, bicycle, public transport and car, and, (vi) Design, environmental and highway considerations.

Policy EC7 Retail development within the Enterprise Park retail zone will be restricted to the sale of bulky goods items that do not pose a threat to the vitality, attractiveness and viability of the City Centre and surrounding town, district and local shopping centres.

Policy EC8 The development of new retail warehouses will be directed to suitable locations firstly within and then on the edge of existing shopping centres. Where such sites are not available, suitable locations at established retail parks will be considered.

Policy EC9 Retail development at out-of-centre locations will be resisted, except for:

(ii) Retail warehouses engaged in the sale of bulky goods that do not pose a threat to the vitality, attractiveness and viability of the City Centre and surrounding town and district shopping centres (Policy EC8 refers)

Aside from the exceptions identified [above] new retail proposals at out-of centre locations will only be considered if it can be demonstrated in the first instance that a clear deficiency in shopping provision exists at that location, and that there are no sequentially preferable sites where the identified deficiency could be met.

Policy CC1 City Centre Mixed Use Development

Policy CC2 New retail development that maintains and enhances the vitality, attractiveness and viability of the City Centre as a regional shopping destination will be encouraged. Highest priority is placed on enhancing shopping facilities by means of the refurbishment and redevelopment of the City Centre retail core. Retail development proposals that would be detrimental to objectives for the enhancement of the retail core will not be permitted. AREA 1 DEVELOPMENT CONTROL COMMITTEE – 16TH FEBRUARY 2010

ITEM 16 (CONT’D) APPLICATION NO. 2009/0472

Policy CC3 St David’s/Quadrant is defined as the area of highest priority for redevelopment in the City Centre. A retail led regeneration scheme for this location is to be delivered in the short to medium term in order to deliver the necessary revitalisation of the retail core. Any other retail based development, either within or outside the City Centre, will be evaluated against this aim. Development proposals that would put at risk the retail led regeneration of St David’s/Quadrant, or would adversely affect the potential to enhance and redevelop shopping facilities elsewhere within the retail core, will not be supported.

Policy AS1 Sets out accessibility requirements for new development and promotes accessibility by a range of transport modes, in particular public transport, walking and cycling.

Policy AS2 Considers access, design and layout in relation to the promotion of public transport and the provision of sustainable transport choices.

Other Relevant Planning Guidance

Swansea City Centre Strategic Framework(SCCSF) – 2007 b. Relevant Planning History

The retail units were originally constructed under the Enterprise Zone scheme which allowed retail units to be constructed of up to 25,000 sq.ft.

2009/1744 Division of one unit into two separate retail units (Class A1), installation of two new shopfronts (former Richley’s Unit) Planning Permission February, 2010.

2009/1853 Refurbishment of existing retail units with installation of new glazed shopfronts and entrance/signage structures, re-cladding of roof and external works including re-modelling of car park, pedestrian pathway and new staff car parking Currently under consideration c. Response to Consultations

The application was advertised on site and in the local press.

A LETTER OF OBJECTION has been received by Cushman & Wakefield, Planning Consultants on behalf of their client, Hammerson plc.

Cushman & Wakefield has been instructed by our client, Hammerson plc, to lodge this letter of objection in relation to the above mixed use development submitted by Barberry Developments Ltd and Lambert Smith Hampton.

As you will be aware Hammerson has been appointed as preferred developers for the renewal of the City Centre. The 30-acre site in the City Centre will include a highly sustainable mix of uses including some 500,000 sq.ft. of additional retail space, up to 750 new homes and new leisure, office, student accommodation, hotel and conference facilities as part of a £1bn City Centre facelift. AREA 1 DEVELOPMENT CONTROL COMMITTEE – 16TH FEBRUARY 2010

ITEM 16 (CONT’D) APPLICATION NO. 2009/0472

This large scale, mixed use urban regeneration scheme will significantly reinvigorate the current retail, leisure and housing mix offer in Swansea, offering a high quality masterplan which has been developed with a well planned City Centre at the forefront of its vision. The recently adopted UDP will be supplemented further by detailed planning guidance for these sites which will have regard to the masterplan. Thus, having considered the scale, significance and progress of Hammerson plc’s investment in Swansea City Centre, we object to the retail proposals at Phoenix Retail Park.

Relevant Development Plan Policy The relevant elements of the recently adopted UDP are provided below. These policies are in accordance with national retail policy and provide the most up-to- date strategy for retailing in the Swansea area. The Strategy essentially recognises the fundamental importance of the City Centre and other centres in meeting identified retailing deficiencies. The role of the Enterprise Park is carefully clarified in the document in a way that recognises the retail floorspace that is there but seeks to restrict any further growth to that which is justifiable in terms of need, sequentially preferable sites, impact on existing centres and accessibility. The Enterprise Park is recognised as an out of centre location which is accessible primarily by car and therefore bulky goods sales floorspace should be the focus. Any proposals must be considered against this up-to-date policy.

Commentary on the Proposals Sales Areas The Planning Supporting and Design and Access Statements state that the reconfiguration of the buildings would maximise on the relationship with Tesco as one of the Park’s main anchor stores and provide a much improved internal (therefore retailing) environment. This improved environment will be achieved through entrances being provided at the corner of units to allow much greater floorspace efficiencies than presently exist.

In addition, the Design and Access Statement notes the potential for gallery space which will also clearly offer greater retailing floorspace. This additional mezzanine floorspace could be achieved without the need for planning permission once the proposed buildings have been granted consent. We therefore consider that the submitted detail on gross floorspace – and summarised above – is misleading and the actual potential increase in sales floorspace is much more significant. This should be clarified in detail by the applicant through a statement accompanied by existing and proposed floor plans. One would suggest that the proposed employee increase from 50 FTE to c.110 FTE on the application form suggests the likely extent of retail change on site.

A planning condition restriction the mezzanine floorspace potential should also be pursued by the Council if the application was considered to be acceptable in principle.

Potential Occupiers The document also states that the intention is to retain existing occupiers within the scheme (paragraph 2.7) and also meet current demand for out-of-centre retailers (paragraph 5.0). It is therefore likely that the provision of 4 new and reconfigured units of approximately 10,000 sq ft each are likely to be attractive to occupiers which could and should be accommodated on sequentially preferable sites. AREA 1 DEVELOPMENT CONTROL COMMITTEE – 16TH FEBRUARY 2010

ITEM 16 (CONT’D) APPLICATION NO. 2009/0472

This 40,000 sq ft of modern retailing space is equivalent to a substantial proportion of the retail floorspace at Parc Tawe. In a reduced occupier retail market the potential impact is obvious.

Furthermore, the applicant suggests that a planning condition would allow these four units to be further subdivided to provide 8 new units of approximately 5,000 sq ft. The likely impact on the City centre and other centres would be exacerbated in this scenario which is entirely inappropriate and not in accordance with national or local planning policy.

The suggestion that only a small proportion of the new retail sales floorspace created should be bulky goods is entirely inappropriate given the policy context. The ability for the applicant to have greater “flexibility on letting” would mean that potential impact on other centres would be more likely. All new floorspace should be restricted regardless of any previous permission given the current planning policy position.

It is assumed that the restriction for food sales floorspace relates to the space currently occupied by Richleys. Any new food sales floorspace is inappropriate in this out of centre location and therefore such restriction should apply to all floorspace given the current planning policy context.

Development Plan Justification – Retail Impact and Sequential Analysis We consider that that the proposals are inadequately justified. Although some relevant policies are identified there is limited reference to the acceptability of the above proposals in relation to the above UDP policies. Part of the policy justification relates to SPG for the Enterprise Park dated 1994. This document pre-dates all national policy and guidance on retailing policy. It is 14 years older than the most up-to-date strategy contained within the adopted UDP and therefore the policies which it was supplementing in 1994 are now out of date. We therefore consider that it has very little if any materiality to the determination of this planning application.

There is no justification provided for the retail need for the proposed scheme. More importantly the supporting information does not provide any assessment of sequentially preferable sites or impact on existing centres. Technical Advice Note 4 states that impact assessments may be necessary for some smaller developments (i.e. less than 2,500 sq m).

The sequential test requires developers to demonstrate that all potential town and district centre options, and then edge of centre sites, have been thoroughly assessed, before proposals at out-of-centre locations are considered. This has not been undertaken and we would argue that there are a number of opportunities in the City centre that would be appropriate for the retailing units being proposed by this planning application, including Parc Tawe.

The proposal will clearly be more attractive to potential retail occupiers given the reconfigured site layout; improved relationship to surrounding retailers including Tesco; the provision of modern flexibly-sized units with potential mezzanine expansion space; improved parking arrangements (including extra 44 spaces); limited goods sales restrictions; and a more ‘rounded offer’ including food and drink. Not only will this be more attractive to retailers but also to shoppers. This is an out of centre location that competes with trade in the City Centre. AREA 1 DEVELOPMENT CONTROL COMMITTEE – 16TH FEBRUARY 2010

ITEM 16 (CONT’D) APPLICATION NO. 2009/0472

UDP policy clearly prioritises the City Centre and is very clear about future retail growth in retail areas of the Enterprise Park (i.e. bulky goods only).

We firmly believe that the reconfiguration of retailing floorspace at Phoenix Retail Park – less than 10 minutes drive from the City Centre - would potentially undermine the commercial and financial viability of the City Centre regeneration proposals. Without sufficient justification of the proposals the planning application should be refused. d. Applicant’s Statement

In response to the above letter of objection, the agents (Lambert Smith Hampton) have submitted the following response:

Having reviewed the objection we feel it necessary to respond, irrespective of how you may be viewing it in your determination of the application.

The objection appears to be based around the following three main arguments, that the proposal:

• Will offer a flexibility of letting that will harm the town centre; • Is of a scale that will harm the town centre; • Is sequentially inappropriate.

We respond to the above in turn below.

Flexibility of Letting The objector raises the issue that the application will enable a flexibility of letting to a degree that it will pose a threat to the town centre. In doing so, the objector fails to appreciate two things:

1. That the existing retail park has an open A1 established use right and therefore has flexibility of letting. 2. The applicant’s offer to accept a bulky goods restriction on part of the proposed new floorspace will in fact have the effect of limiting the flexibility of over the existing position by reducing the amount of open A1 floorspace at the retail park.

The objector has failed to recognise the fallback position that the applicant has without the need for planning permission. To infer that the proposal affords a greater degree of flexibility over the existing position to the extent that it will be detrimental to the town centre is an exaggeration.

Scale The objector states that the application is misleading with respect to the scale of the floorspace and implies that the proposal is larger than submitted due to the creation of mezzanine space and the potential subdivision of units and that this additional; size poses a threat to the town centre.

The objector has again failed to recognise the fallback position in that the applicant already has the right to create mezzanine space within the existing units. AREA 1 DEVELOPMENT CONTROL COMMITTEE – 16TH FEBRUARY 2010

ITEM 16 (CONT’D) APPLICATION NO. 2009/0472

The objector has also misinterpreted the applicant’s offer to accept a planning condition to limit any future subdivision of the retail park to above 464.5 sqm (5,000 sqft). This, as we discussed at our meeting 6th August 2009, has been offered to ensure that units are restricted to a size commensurate with the out of town location and be unable to be broken down into smaller spaces that may prove attractive to town centre retailers.

The scale of the proposal is as submitted i.e. as illustrated on the application forms and drawings.

Sequential The objector implies that the application proposal is sequentially inappropriate.

The newly created retail space is inextricably linked to a refurbishment and reconfiguration of an existing facility and will only create an additional; 542 sqm – an immaterial increase in floorspace.

UDP Policy EC4 states that when looking sequentially at opportunities, that an innovative and genuinely flexible approach by developers to the format, design and scale of new retail schemes is required. This has been the approach in this case, where the design and format draws down an investment not only in buildings, but added value improvements in terms of highway and pedestrian safety and landscape quality with the most minimal of floorspaces increases.

Once again, the objector fails to consider the fallback position whereby the applicant could put into effect a refurbishment programme, together with mezzanine floorspace increases and offer that improved, expanded and unrestricted space to potential occupiers at a lower level rental level than would be needed to ensure the viability of the application proposal.

Highway Observations -

1. Site description and access

1.1 The proposed development is sited off Phoenix Way Retail Park and involves the reconfiguration of an existing site, new access and amended parking.

1.2 The existing site accesses off Phoenix Way and Nantyffin Road are being retained but a new access is being introduced off Fendrod Way in a left in- left out configuration. The Nantyffin Road access will continue to serve for servicing/deliveries only.

1.3 The site is served by public transport at a frequency of one bus every 30 minutes along Phoenix Way with buses at 10-15 minute frequency along Fendrod Way to the north of the development site. There is a bus shelter outside the site on Phoenix way.

2. Traffic Generation

3.1 A Transport Assessment was submitted in support of the application to quantify the effect of the development on the strategic Highway Network. AREA 1 DEVELOPMENT CONTROL COMMITTEE – 16TH FEBRUARY 2010

ITEM 16 (CONT’D) APPLICATION NO. 2009/0472

3.2 Trip rates

3.2.1 As is standard procedure the consultant has used TRICS to predict the likely traffic generation of the proposal. The trip rates used are acceptable and the following flows expected:

AM peak (0800-0900) 37 arrivals and 17 departures

PM peak (1700-1800) 67 arrivals and 72 departures

As the site already has a retail use, then the impact on the traffic in terms of additional movements generated by the A3 use (and extra g.f.a of the retail units) needs to be quantified.

3.2.2 The element of the above figures which is resulting from the increase in operations at the site generates the following trips:

AM peak (0800-0900) 11 arrivals and 10 departures

PM peak (1700-1800) 15 arrivals and 11 departures

3.2.3 Therefore the biggest increase in movements is in the PM Peak with an additional 26 movements. Given that the existing 2 way flows during the peak hour are 1370 vehicles then this equates to an increase of less than 2%.

3.3 The assessment also analysed 9 existing junctions in proximity to the site which showed that for an opening year of 2014 5 junctions are operating at or near capacity without the development traffic. However due to the marginal increase in traffic as a result of the proposals it is not felt that the development would have a significantly adverse effect on the local network.

3.4 For the size and development and anticipated staffing levels the Applicant will be required to submit a Travel plan within 12 months of consent or prior to beneficial occupation of the units.

4. Parking

4.1 Retail and restaurant element

There are seven retail units proposed varying in size from 556m2 to 1012 m2, (total 6226) and one restaurant with a gfa of 278m2.

A total of 18 staff spaces (three of these bays are designated disabled) have been shown to the rear of the units together with several commercial unloading/servicing spaces. There is also staff cycle parking at 6 stands.

For customer use there are 281 spaces available (including 18 designated disabled). Whilst in the main the disabled spaces are located nearest the entrances (which is advisable) there are none located near the restaurant and this should be addressed. AREA 1 DEVELOPMENT CONTROL COMMITTEE – 16TH FEBRUARY 2010

ITEM 16 (CONT’D) APPLICATION NO. 2009/0472

The provision of 299 spaces for employees and staff is within the range as outlined in our Parking Guidelines (which recommends parking between 174 and 330 spaces).

4.2 Cycle parking has been shown as being available for staff and customers, 10 spaces within the customer car parking area and 6 within the servicing area. Compared to the overall size of the development this provision is low and additional facilities should be provided in accordance with details to be agreed with the Highway Authority.

5. Layout in general

5.1 The layout of the car park in the main is acceptable although as above I would advocate some disabled parking adjacent to the restaurant. The bays and aisle widths area in accordance with our standards and should ensure safe access/egress into the spaces.

The delivery areas to the rear (as is the existing scenario) are adequate and are accessed as currently off the Phoenix Way and Nantyffin Road entrances.

5.2 The introduction of a new `left-in left-out¿ entrance off Fendrod Way for customer use will reduce movements at the existing access off Phoenix Way which is currently an all movement priority junction and allows for both left and right turning. This can lead to congestion at the junction due to traffic volumes on Phoenix Way. The introduction of the new access point will provide safer access to Fendrod Way, Valley Way and beyond and will avoid conflict and delays currently experienced turning right out of the existing Phoenix Way access. The layout of the internal car park is such that vehicles egressing from the site using the new access will be queuing within the site and thus will be minimizing the build up of traffic on the adjacent highway.

6. Conclusions

A Transport Assessment statement was submitted in support of this application and an increase of 2% in traffic over the afternoon peak hour is predicted compared to the current retail use. Whilst some of the tested junctions are at or near capacity for the opening year of 2014 it is felt that the small increase in traffic can be accommodated within the Strategic Highway Network without detriment to existing traffic.

7. Recommendation

I recommend that no Highway objections are raised to the proposal subject to:

i. All access works and alterations to Fendrod Way to be implemented under a section 278 Agreement with the Highway Authority.

ii. Suitable signage scheme be devised to control the flow of traffic into, around and out of the site. AREA 1 DEVELOPMENT CONTROL COMMITTEE – 16TH FEBRUARY 2010

ITEM 16 (CONT’D) APPLICATION NO. 2009/0472

iii. Introduction of the TRO’s at the applicants expense to enforce the `left in left out’ access arrangement.

iv. Disabled parking spaces be provided for the restaurant use laid out to the current British Standard.

v. Additional cycle storage facilities to be provided in accordance with details to be submitted to and agreed in writing with the Highway Authority.

vi. The applicant be required to submit a Travel Plan for approval within 12 months of consent and that the Travel Plan be implemented prior to the beneficial use of the building commencing.

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

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

APPRAISAL

The proposed development involves the reconfiguration of the existing retail park with the demolition of the former ‘Richleys’ detached retail unit to the east of the site, the part demolition of the existing ‘Halfords’ retail unit, and the construction of 3 no. new attached retail units (Class A1). The application form indicates an existing gross internal floorspace of 5,963 sq m with the demolition of an existing 2,524 sq m of floorspace. The proposed new retail units would provide a total gross internal floorspace of 2,787 sq m providing a net additional internal gross floorspace of 263 sq m. The existing retail units accommodating ‘Carpet Right’, ‘Halfords’, ’CCS Direct’ & ‘Sigma 3’ will be retained resulting in a single building incorporating 7 no. retail units overall.

It is also proposed to construct a freestanding food and drink unit (Class A3) – (279 sq m gross floorspace) located in the north western corner of the site at the junction of Phoenix Way and Fendrod Way. The total increase in gross internal floorspace is therefore 542m2 The existing car parking area will be enlarged to provide a total of 299 spaces overall (as opposed to the existing parking provision of 263 spaces), and to provide a new vehicular access onto Fendrod Way which would operate on a ‘left in and left out’ arrangement.

The planning application is accompanied by a Planning Supporting Statement, Design and Access Statement, Transportation Assessment, and Ecological and Tree Survey. The application has been subject to a Screening Opinion under the Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) Regulations, however, it was concluded that an EIA was not required.

The Material Planning Considerations

The principal issues to be considered in relation to this application are: AREA 1 DEVELOPMENT CONTROL COMMITTEE – 16TH FEBRUARY 2010

ITEM 16 (CONT’D) APPLICATION NO. 2009/0472

1. The retail impact of the proposal on the City Centre and other shopping centres in the area having regard to the prevailing Development Plan Policies.

2. The transport impact of the proposal in terms of traffic generation, public transport accessibility, accessibility for pedestrians and cyclists and car parking.

3. The impact of the proposal on the residential amenity of the occupants of neighbouring properties in Nant-y-Ffin Road and Midland Place.

4. Design, external appearance and visual amenity considerations.

1. Retail Impact

The policy context at the national level is provided by Planning Policy Wales, Technical Advice Notes, Ministerial Interim Planning Policy 02/2005 Statement (Planning for Retailing and Town Centres) and by the Wales Spatial Plan. The development plan for the area now comprises the City and County of Swansea Unitary Development Plan 2008.

The application is not supported by a retail assessment but the submitted Planning Supporting Statement refers to the planning policy context. UDP Policy EC7 guides that retail development at the Enterprise Park should be contained within the designated retail zone (Enterprise Park Planning Policies). The site is wholly within Zone A: retail and mixed uses. Policy EC7 indicates that retail development in the Enterprise Park Retail Zone will be restricted to bulky goods that do not pose a threat to the vitality and viability of the City Centre and district shopping centres.

Background Planning Context Following the designation of the Enterprise Zone at Llansamlet in 1981, development proposals within the Zone were effectively placed outside the remit of normal planning control for an ensuing 10 year period. The main aim of the Enterprise Zone initiative was to attract new industry and employment opportunities that had seriously declined in the Lower Swansea Valley area. This relaxed planning regime, coupled with tax and ratings advantages, facilitated a significant growth of new business activity at this location and brought a number of new employment opportunities to Swansea. It also led to a major un- planned, out-of-centre retail warehouse park becoming established. The special development provisions for Phase 1 of the Enterprise Zone initiative came to an end in 1991, after which time the area became known as the Enterprise Park (EP). Retailers continued to gain unrestricted Class A1 planning consent at this location and only in more recent years has there been far more tighter planning control on any further proliferation of retailing. As at May 2007 it was estimated that some 840,000 sq ft gross of retail floorspace had been created within the EP which, in terms of floorspace in the retail hierarchy, ranks it second in size to the City Centre. It is widely documented and accepted that the uncontrolled development of retailing at the EP has had an adverse impact on surrounding shopping centres, including the City Centre.

Current Planning Framework New development proposals at the EP will be considered with reference to the up to date planning policy framework, as set out at both national and local level. Of key significance is: the City and County of Swansea Unitary Development Plan (UDP); Supplementary Planning Guidance on Swansea Enterprise Park, Planning Policy Wales; the Ministerial Interim Planning Policy Statement ‘Planning for Retailing’; and The Wales Spatial Plan. AREA 1 DEVELOPMENT CONTROL COMMITTEE – 16TH FEBRUARY 2010

ITEM 16 (CONT’D) APPLICATION NO. 2009/0472

The Swansea UDP was formally adopted in November 2008 and provides the primary local planning policy context. Significantly, it does not define the EP as a district shopping centre. Policy EC4 sets out the main tests that applications in out-of-centre locations - such as the Enterprise Park (EP) - must meet. As well as standard tests of establishing need and demonstrating sequential suitability of the site proposed, the policy requires the developer to demonstrate the unit is in a highly accessible location and that the proposed scheme is unlikely to have any material adverse impact upon the vitality or viability of established shopping centres. Impact on the City Centre and the nearby district shopping centre of Morriston is of particular significance. In recognition of the unique set of circumstances that have prevailed at the EP, the UDP contains a site specific policy entitled ‘Enterprise Park Retailing’ (Policy EC7). The policy recognises the functional role that a section of the Enterprise Park has within the overall shopping hierarchy of the County and highlights its specialist role as an out-of-centre retail park on an industrial estate layout. The boundary of the EP retail zone is highlighted on the UDP Proposals Map, within which any future development will be restricted to bulky goods retail warehousing. The policy specifically states that retail development of any kind outside the designated retail zone will not be permitted at the EP.

In relation to retail policy, UDP Policies EC8 and EC9 are clear in their general presumption against further out of centre shopping development within the County boundary, with the exception of retail warehouses engaged in the sale of bulky goods not normally sold on the high street. The policies emphasise that further development of Class A1 retail floorspace at out-of-centre sites (including the areas outside the retail zone within the EP) will generally be resisted in the interests of sustaining and improving the vitality, viability and attractiveness of the City Centre and other established shopping centres. This echoes the overarching objective set out in UDP Strategic Policy SP6 that new retail development best located within the City Centre or district shopping centres will not be supported at out-of-centre sites.

Finally in relation to the UDP, the overall Spatial Strategy of the Plan emphasises that appropriate regeneration initiatives within the urban area will be supported. The Spatial Strategy focuses primarily on the reinvigoration of the City Centre and waterfront areas but also highlights the overarching objective to make the best use of all urban brownfield areas with good transport links and secure the most sustainable forms of new development at such locations. To this end, a comprehensive and transformational redevelopment scheme at the EP that safeguards an appropriate portfolio of sites for future employment uses, and at the same time brings forward a sustainable mix of uses as part of a coordinated planning strategy for the area, would be consistent with the UDP Spatial Strategy and regeneration objectives.

National planning guidance is set out in Planning Policy Wales (PPW), 2002. The guidance suggests that redevelopment proposals at appropriate, under-used brownfield sites (including commercial areas) should be supported where such proposals accord with sustainability principles and ensures: - a coherent approach to renewal; - economic growth and enterprise initiatives are supported; - the industrial land bank is not compromised; - the need to travel by private car is reduced; and - a sustainable settlement pattern is established AREA 1 DEVELOPMENT CONTROL COMMITTEE – 16TH FEBRUARY 2010

ITEM 16 (CONT’D) APPLICATION NO. 2009/0472

The Ministerial Interim Planning Policy Statement (MIPPS) 02/2005 provides the most up to date national guidance on retail planning, replacing Chapter 10 of PPW. The guidance makes clear that town and district centres are the most appropriate locations for new retail development, in the interests of sustaining communities, enhancing accessibility and safeguarding the vitality and viability of established shopping centres. The guidance states that when determining a planning application for a retail scheme outside a town/district centre, the developer will need to consider: the compatibility of the proposal with the UDP strategy, the need for the development, the sequential suitability of the site and the likely impact on existing centres. Most fundamentally, the MIPPS emphasises that the scale, type and siting of a proposed out-of-town retail development must not be likely to undermine the vitality, attractiveness and viability of those town centres that would otherwise serve the community well.

Whilst emphasizing the lawful A1 retail nature of the existing development on the site, the applicants are prepared to offer a bulky floorspace restriction on 1,858 sqm (20,000 sqft) within the development which would equate to the floorspace of two of the proposed new retail units. Their suggested condition would allow the sale of office furniture and home furniture, furnishings and textiles, homeware, carpets, electric goods, camping, boating and caravanning goods, motor vehicles and cycle goods, pets and pet supplies, DIY maintenance and home and garden goods. Additionally, the applicants are further prepared to restrict any food retailing to a maximum of 1,858 sqm gross (20,000 sqft) across the site and in the case of a unit being subdivided, that the resultant new units would be a minimum 464.5 sqm gross (5,000 sqft) each.

Whilst the ‘fallback position’ of the existing lawful use of the site is acknowledged, the application for new development should be determined in accordance with the relevant development plan unless material considerations outweigh the development plan. Policy EC4 requires all new retail development to comply with the sequential test and where there would be no material adverse impact on the attractiveness, vitality and viability of the City Centre and other established shopping centres. Policy EC7 indicates that within the Enterprise Park, proposals for new retail development within the retail zone will be restricted to the sale of bulky goods items that do not pose a threat to the vitality, attractiveness and viability of the City Centre and surrounding town, district and local shopping centres. Notwithstanding that the increase in gross internal floorspace is limited, it is considered that the redevelopment of the site, in particular as a result of the new access arrangements and reconfiguration of the units, will significantly add to the attractiveness of the site as a retail destination. It has not been demonstrated that this would not have material adverse impact on the vitality and viability of the City Centre or other defined District Shopping Centres. Given the primary objective of the Unitary Development Plan in respect of retailing which is to reinforce and improve the City Centre as a vibrant regional focus for business and administration, shopping, culture and leisure and the adopted City Centre Strategic Framework which aims to secure a step change in the retail performance and function of the City Centre, it is considered that the development poses an unacceptable risk to the achievement of these objectives, notwithstanding the acknowledged lawful use of the site.

2. Transport Impact

The existing site accesses off Phoenix Way and Nantyffin Road are being retained but the proposed development involves the construction of a new access is being introduced off Fendrod Way in a left in-left out configuration which would form the principal access. AREA 1 DEVELOPMENT CONTROL COMMITTEE – 16TH FEBRUARY 2010

ITEM 16 (CONT’D) APPLICATION NO. 2009/0472

The existing delivery / service areas to the rear of the retail units will continue to be used with vehicular access from the Phoenix Way and Nantyffin Road entrances. The site is served by public transport at a frequency of one bus every 30 minutes along Phoenix Way with buses at 10-15 minute frequency along Fendrod Way to the north of the development site. There is a bus shelter outside the site on Phoenix Way.

The new entrance off Fendrod Way will operate as a `left-in left-out’ entrance / exit off Fendrod Way. The existing access off Phoenix Way currently operates as an all movement priority junction, which allows for both left and right turning traffic manoeuvres and on occasions results in road congestion at the junction. The Head of Transportation considers that the introduction of the new access point will provide safer access to Fendrod Way, Valley Way and beyond and will avoid conflict and delays currently experienced turning right out of the existing Phoenix Way access. Additionally, vehicles exiting the site will be queuing within the site and thus will be minimizing the build up of traffic on the adjacent highway.

A Transport Assessment (TA) has been submitted in support of the application to quantify the effect of the development on the strategic Highway Network. The Head of Transportation indicates that based on the trip rates within the TA, that the additional traffic generation as a result of the development would equate to an increase of less than 2% in traffic over the afternoon peak hour is predicted compared to the current retail use. The TA also analysed the 9 existing junctions in proximity to the site which showed that for an opening year of 2014 5 junctions are operating at or near capacity without the development traffic. However, the Head of Transportation considers that due to the marginal increase in traffic as a result of the proposals it is not felt that the development would have a significantly adverse effect on the local network.

It is proposed to enlarge the existing car parking area to the front of the retail units providing a total 281 spaces (including disabled parking) with a further 18 staff spaces to the rear of the units together with several commercial unloading/servicing spaces. The provision of 299 spaces for employees and staff is within the range as outlined in the Council’s Parking Guidelines (which recommends parking between 174 and 330 spaces). It is also proposed to provide cycle parking for staff and customers.

In conclusion, the submitted TA indicates an increase in traffic of only 2% and the Head of Transportation considers that the small increase in traffic can be accommodated within the Strategic Highway Network without detriment to existing traffic. There are therefore no highway objections to the proposal subject to planning conditions in respect the access works and alterations to Fendrod Way being implemented under a section 278 Agreement with the Highway Authority (together with a Traffic Regulation Order), suitable internal signage scheme, the provision of disabled car parking spaces, cycle storage facilities and the implementation of a Travel Plan.

3. Impact on the residential amenity

The proposal would constitute a significant development within Swansea Enterprise Park, however, the nearest residential properties are located some distance away along Nantyffin Road and the main impacts on residential amenity associated with the proposed development are likely to be the potential increase in service deliveries and the traffic and activities generated by the retail development on the local area. However, whilst the retail park would be likely to generate additional traffic, it is not considered that the proposal would adversely effect the residential amenities of the area. AREA 1 DEVELOPMENT CONTROL COMMITTEE – 16TH FEBRUARY 2010

ITEM 16 (CONT’D) APPLICATION NO. 2009/0472

4. Design, external appearance and visual amenity considerations

A Design and Access Statement (DAS) has been submitted with the application to assess the architectural and urban design issues. As indicated above, it is proposed to demolish the existing freestanding retail unit to the east of the site (former Richley’s building), along with the portion of the ‘L’ shaped unit which projects to the north (Halfords) and would be replaced by 3 no. new retail units resulting in 7 units in lieu of the existing 5. The resultant 7 retail units would provide a retail frontage onto Fendrod Way in order to provide a visual legibility to the site. The DAS refers to the layout taking advantage of the contextual layout and the placing of Tesco which is accessed directly from Nantyffin Road. The new retail units would incorporate micro-rib cladding (white / grey finish) with each unit incorporating a uniform designed steel framed gateway to mark the entrances to the units, whilst also incorporating the tenants signage. The steel framed gateways are intended to provide vertical character to the horizontal nature of the scheme, providing relief to the building. The A3 unit situated in the north-western corner of the site would consist of a glazed single storey building consisting of similar materials as the retail units.

The original proposal intended to retain the existing façade of the retained units to the west of the site. This would have resulted in an uncomfortable relationship between old and new units which would been jarring and incongruous. The scheme has since been amended so that the existing units would be upgraded externally to match the proposed new units.

Overall, the reconfiguration of the retail units together with a new vehicular entrance from Fendrdod Way would transform the units into a legible retail park to the public whilst making the units more attractive to retail tenants resulting in a recognisable out-of-town retail centre.

5. Other Material Considerations

Ecological Impact The application is accompanied by an ecological and tree survey. As part of the development proposals to create a new vehicular access onto Fendrod Way, it is proposed to remove a section of the existing trees and vegetation along the northern boundary of the site together with a small area of amenity grassland. The ecological survey indicates that no protected species of wildlife were found at the site and the tree survey identified very few trees of landscape or conservation value. The survey recommends the implementation of a landscaping scheme together with the addition of bird and bat boxes in order benefit wildlife.

Ground Contamination The site is part of the wider reclaimed area of Swansea Enterprise Park and is therefore likely to have been used for industrial / waste tipping etc. Ground condition reports have not been submitted with the planning application, however, the site may have been remediated in the past. The Environment Agency and the Head of Environmental Management and Protection both advise that in order to ensure that there is continuing risk to the environment, the potential site contamination/ground conditions would need to be investigated by a phased scheme by three progressively detailed reports, detailing measures will need to be investigate the presence of land contamination including a desk top study, detailed investigation and remediation strategy. This may be controlled by planning conditions. AREA 1 DEVELOPMENT CONTROL COMMITTEE – 16TH FEBRUARY 2010

ITEM 16 (CONT’D) APPLICATION NO. 2009/0472

Drainage The Environment Agency (EA) have expressed concerns regarding the drainage at this location. The application states that surface water will be disposed of via the main public sewer. The EA believe the site to drain into the Fendrod Lake where there are known problems as a result of pollution incidents. The EA advises that the development should use sustainable drainage systems (SUDS) to control surface water run-off problems, as well as help to protect water quality in and around the site. In consideration of the above, they advise that a full drainage scheme is submitted for approval prior to determination, however, if determination is not deferred then a planning condition should be imposed requiring a scheme of surface water drainage to be submitted for approval before development commences.

Conclusion

Whilst it is recognised that the existing development benefits from a an open A1 retail consent and are prepared to offer a bulky floorspace restriction on 1,858 sqm (20,000 sqft) on the proposed floorspace, the proposal represents an application for new development and as such must be determined in accordance with the relevant development plan.

The proposed development would be contrary to the retail objectives of the UDP which seek to resist further out of centre / town retail development. The UDP policies focus on the enhancement of the city centre’s regional shopping role and offer, and developments that pose a threat to the vitality, viability or attractiveness of the existing retail hierarchy will be resisted. Promotion of the retail sector’s development within the City Centre is seen as being crucial to the regeneration of the central shopping area as an attractive and vibrant place within which to work, live and spend leisure time. A revitalised City Centre is a key objective of the Wales Spatial Plan and critical to the fulfilment of Swansea’s role as a driver for economic growth within South West Wales.

For the reasons indicated above, notwithstanding the positive impacts this development would have on the physical appearance of the site, it is considered that the proposal fails to accord with adopted Unitary Development Plan policies and objectives aimed at reinforcing and improving the City Centre as a regional shopping centre and resisting new out of centre retail development unless the need is demonstrated and there would not be material adverse impact on the attractiveness, vitality and viability of the City Centre and other established shopping centres. This reflects National Planning Policy Guidance as set out in the MIPPS 2005 “Planning for Retailing and Town Centres”. Refusal is therefore recommended.

RECOMMENDATION REFUSE, for the following reason:

1 The proposed development would be contrary to the retail objectives of Ministerial Interim Planning Policy Statement (MIPPS) 02/2005 "Planning for Retailing and Town Centres" and Unitary Development Plan Retail Objectives and Policies EC4 and EC7 aimed at reinforcing and improving the City Centres as a regional shopping centre and resiting further out of centre retail development unless the need is demonstrated and there would not be a material adverse impact on the vitality, attractiveness and viability of the City Centre and surrounding town, district and local shopping centres. AREA 1 DEVELOPMENT CONTROL COMMITTEE – 16TH FEBRUARY 2010

ITEM 16 (CONT’D) APPLICATION NO. 2009/0472

INFORMATIVES

PLANS

14008-A-TP-001 site location plan, 14008-A-TP-002 existing site plan, 14008-A-TP-101A proposed site plan, 14008-A-TP-011 existing site elevation sections, 14008-A-TP-102B proposed ground floor plan, 14008-A-TP-111A proposed site elevations/sections, 14008- A-TP-201A detailed elevation studies received 27th March 2009

AREA 1 DEVELOPMENT CONTROL COMMITTEE – 16TH FEBRUARY 2010

ITEM 1 APPLICATION NO. 2008/1615 WARD: Landore Area 1

Location: Bernard Hastie and Co and adjacent Maliphant Sidings, Morfa Road, Swansea, SA1 2EW Proposal: Redevelopment of site with construction of up to 52 houses (3 storey) and 84 apartments (5 storey) together with phase 2 Morfa Distributor Road, new access road, car parking, landscaping, infrastructure, re- profiling and engineering works (outline) Applicant: Guy Hall Partnership and Network Rail

BACKGROUND INFORMATION a. Relevant Planning Policies

Swansea Unitary Development Plan

Policy EV1 New development shall accord with a defined set of criteria of good design.

Policy EV2 The siting of new development shall give preference to the use of previously developed land and have regard to the physical character and topography of the site and its surroundings.

Policy EV3 Accessibility criteria for new development.

Policy EV4 Creating a quality public realm

Policy EV5 Provision of public works of art, craft or decorative features to enhance major new development will be supported.

Policy EV6 Ancient Monuments and Protection of Archaeological Sites

Policy EV34 Development proposals will only be permitted where they would not pose a significant risk to the quality of controlled waters.

Policy EV35 Surface water run-off

Policy EV36 New development within flood risk areas will only be permitted where flooding consequences are acceptable.

Policy EV38 Development proposals on contaminated land will not be permitted unless it can be demonstrated that measures can be taken to overcome damage to life, health and controlled waters.

Policy EV40 Development proposals will not be permitted that would cause or result in significant harm to health, local amenity because of significant levels of air, noise or light pollution.

Policy EC3 Improvement and enhancement of the established industrial and commercial areas will be encouraged. AREA 1 DEVELOPMENT CONTROL COMMITTEE – 16TH FEBRUARY 2010

ITEM 17 (CONT’D) APPLICATION NO. 2008/1615

Policy HC2 Proposals for housing developments within the urban area will be supported where the site has been previously developed or is not covered by conflicting plans policies or proposals.

Policy HC3 In areas where a demonstrable lack of affordable housing exists, the Council will seek to negotiate the inclusion of an appropriate element of affordable housing on sites which are suitable in locational / accessibility terms and where this is not ruled out by exceptional development costs.

Policy HC17 In considering proposals for development the Council will, where appropriate, enter into negotiations with developers to deliver planning obligations under Section 106 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990. The Council will expect developers to make contributions towards:

(i) Improvements to infrastructure, services or community facilities, (ii) Mitigating measures made necessary by a development, and (iii) Other social, economic or environmental investment to address reasonable identified needs.

Provisions should be fairly and reasonably related in scale and kind to the individual development

Policy HC19 The Tawe Riverside Park will be completed to improve its role as an attractive recreation area and complete the pedestrian and cycle network

Policy HC24 Provision of public open space within new housing developments

Policy AS1 New developments (including housing) should be located in areas that are currently highly accessible by a range of transport modes, in particular public transport, walking and cycling

Policy AS2 Design and layout of access to new developments should allow for the safe, efficient and non intrusive movement of vehicles

Policy AS4 Creation or improvement of public access routes will be encouraged

Policy AS6 Parking provision to serve developments will be assessed against adopted maximum parking standards to ensure appropriate levels of parking

Policy AS11 Road construction and /or improvements are proposed at the Morfa Distributor Road

Planning Policy Wales 2002 Supports in principle the redevelopment of ‘brownfield’ sites for new development.

AREA 1 DEVELOPMENT CONTROL COMMITTEE – 16TH FEBRUARY 2010

ITEM 17 (CONT’D) APPLICATION NO. 2008/1615

Supplementary Planning Guidance:

The Tawe Riverside Corridor Study was adopted as policy by the Council in October, 2006. b. Relevant Planning History

2008/0919 Construction of Morfa distribution road and widening of existing express bus route (Council Development Regulation 3) Currently being considered c. Response to Consultations

The application was advertised on site and in the local press as a development accompanied by an Environmental Statement and as a development which might materially affect the setting of a listed building (Former Vivian Locomotive Shed). One letter of observation has been received, making the following enquiry:

1. Is it proposed to schedule archaeological digs at the Bernard Hastie and Cambrian Pottery sites ?

Countryside Council for Wales – does not object to the proposal.

In our opinion, the development as proposed is not likely to have an adverse effect on natural heritage provided the recommendations in the ecological appraisal for reptiles are followed.

Glamorgan Gwent Archaeological Trust –

Original response The application has an archaeological restraint.

The Historic Environment Record, and an archaeological desk-based assessment prepared for the site, shows that there has been significant activity in the area over time, including several phases of construction associated with the various uses of the site. The desk-based assessment notes, in particular, the numbers of early industrial buildings that have been in existence here, visible in historic mapping and in other pictorial sources, as well as several surviving elements of these early industrial structures in use to day as working buildings. The desk-based assessment also highlights evidence for the rapid pace of change and expansion in industry at the above site throughout the late 18th and early 19th centuries, this rapid pace of change is indicative of the innovative and groundbreaking nature of industry in Swansea at this time.

Whilst the area may have been cleared to some extent, recent archaeological work on similar sites, such as the old Addis Site (The Copper Quarter) Swansea (Our Ref: SWA0269), has shown that with substantial industrial structures such as engine houses, buried remains often survive with a high degree of integrity even though it was believe the site had been completely cleared. It therefore can be expected that archaeological remains of significance are located in the area of the proposed development. Consequently, the desk-based assessment produced provides a series of mitigation measures, including; AREA 1 DEVELOPMENT CONTROL COMMITTEE – 16TH FEBRUARY 2010

ITEM 17 (CONT’D) APPLICATION NO. 2008/1615

Building recording, to be carried out in order to assess and record the remains of the newly identified nineteenth century industrial buildings.

Building recording, of the structures forming the remainder of the Hasties site, as this is itself a culturally significant site in the industrial history of Swansea.

Pre-determination archaeological evaluation, in order to mitigate the effects of the proposed development on the archaeological resource.

Pre-determination Written Scheme of Investigation and Plan for Mitigation, to be produced based on the results of the above evaluation, and approved by the archaeological advisors to the Local Planning Authority. In order to provide a clear outline for a programme of continuing archaeological works.

Archaeological monitoring, of any further ground investigations, geo-technical works or other works of this nature on site by an appropriately appointed archaeologist.

All of which we would agree as the professionally retained archaeological advisors to your Members are necessary in order to appropriately fulfil the requirements of Planning Policy Wales’ guidance relating to the treatment of the historic environment.

The proposed development has the potential to affect archaeological remains.

Planning Policy Wales 2002 Section 6.5.1 notes that “The desirability of preserving an ancient monument and its setting is a material consideration in determining a planning application whether that monument is scheduled or unscheduled.” The more detailed advice in Welsh Office Circular 60/96, Section 12, recommends that “where research indicates that important archaeological remains may exist, the planning authority should request the prospective developer to arrange for an archaeological field evaluation to be carried out before any decision on the planning application is taken.”

It is therefore our opinion in our role as the professionally retained archaeological advisors to your Members that the applicant should be requested to commission such an archaeological work. The determination of the planning application therefore should be deferred until a report on the archaeological evaluation ahs been submitted to your Members. We recommend that this work be undertaken to a brief approved by yourselves and upon request, we can provide a suitable document for your approval.

Furthermore we would recommend that a Written Scheme of Investigation be produced based on the results of such an evaluation and a detailed plan for continuing archaeological works, including details of the mitigation in place to balance the effects of the proposed development against damage to the archaeological resource. This written scheme should be approved by us, the archaeological advisors to the Local Planning Authority, prior to any decision on the planning application being taken. AREA 1 DEVELOPMENT CONTROL COMMITTEE – 16TH FEBRUARY 2010

ITEM 17 (CONT’D) APPLICATION NO. 2008/1615

A building recording survey should also be undertaken on the early nineteenth century industrial structures and those structures forming the Hasties site. We would envisage that the condition for this work be based on the model suggested by the Association of Local Government Archaeological Officers (ALGAO) in their document Analysis and Recording for the Conservation and Control of Works to Historic Buildings and that this work will ensure that the structures are fully recorded before development commences. We envisage this survey to be undertaken to a Level III standard (English Heritage ‘Understanding Historic Buildings: A Guide to Good Recording Practice’ 2006). The completed record should then be deposited in a suitable repository such as the West Glamorgan Archives or the Historic Environment Record so that future historians can access it.

The ALGAO model is worded:-

No site works shall be undertaken until the implementation of an appropriate programme of building recording and analysis has been agreed with the Local Planning Authority, to be carried out by a specialist acceptable to the Local Planning Authority and in accordance with an agreed written brief and specification.

The justification for the imposition of the condition would therefore be:-

Reason: As the buildings are of architectural and cultural significance the specified records are required to mitigate the impact of the demolition and development.

In addition we recommend that a condition should be attached to any planning consent granted to the current application requiring a programme of archaeological investigation to be approved prior to the commencement of the development, further ground investigation, geo-technical or other works of this nature. We envisage that this would take the form of an archaeological watching brief with contingency arrangements to allow sufficient time and resources for the excavation and recording of archaeological features to be undertaken, post excavation analysis and the production of a report containing the results of the work.

This recommendation follows the advice given in Welsh Office Circular 60/96, and we suggest that the condition is worded in a similar manner to the model given in Section 23 of that document:

No development shall take place until the applicant, or their agents or successors in title, has secured the implementation of a programme of archaeological work in accordance with a written scheme of investigation which has been submitted by the applicant and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority.

Reason: To identify and record any features of archaeological interest discovered during the works, in order to mitigate the impact of the works on the archaeological resource.

We note that in the Environmental Impact Assessment it is stated that the applicant does not consider that pre-application “intrusive archaeological work … would achieve any mitigation” due to the extensive geo-technical work required to stabilise the site. On the contrary, as the regional archaeological curators it is our opinion that this geo-technical work would be in itself reason enough to require archaeological evaluation potentially followed by full resource. AREA 1 DEVELOPMENT CONTROL COMMITTEE – 16TH FEBRUARY 2010

ITEM 17 (CONT’D) APPLICATION NO. 2008/1615

Pre-determination archaeological work in this case is essential in order to mitigate the effects of the necessary ground stabilising works let alone any other aspect that the applicant, as a non-archaeological professional, has not understood the necessity of the recommended mitigation work or that the proposed mitigation detailed in the desk-based assessment is a recommendation primarily designed to protect the archaeological resource and consider only after this benefit to the smooth progress of any proposed development.

Further response In our letter of the 12th September 2008 in response to your initial consultation on this application we noted that potentially there was a significant archaeological resource in the application area. We noted that this resource was industrial and that the recent work at the old Addis Site (The Copper Quarter) Swansea had shown that with substantial industrial structures such as engine houses, buried remains often survive with a high degree of integrity even though it was believed the site had been completely cleared. It was therefore our recommendation following the advice given in Planning Policy Wales 2002 Section 6.5.2 and Welsh Office Circular 60/96, Section 13, an archaeological field evaluation to be carried out before any decision on the planning application is taken. Ms. Cole’s letter explains why access cannot be gained to carry out the required evaluation and therefore we must consider whether or not it is appropriate for the current application to be determined without more detailed information on the archaeological resource being provided. Without detailed information on the archaeological resource being available there is a risk of significant archaeological features being revealed during the development and delays occurring leading to a significant financial impact. Therefore to mitigate this potential risk and to ensure that any prospective developer clearly understands the archaeological potential of the site and the measures that will need to be carried out prior to and during any development of the site we recommend that the applicant is requested to produce a document outlining what archaeological investigations will be undertaken on the site, the timing of such works and also the type of mitigation measures that will be employed on the site if archaeological features are present. The presentation of the above document would be sufficient for us to be able to recommend conditions safeguarding the archaeological resource to be attached to any planning consent granted by your Members.

Environment Agency

Original Response

Flood Risk As you are aware, part of the site is classed as C2, as defined by the development advice maps (dam) referred to under TAN15: Development and Flood Risk, July 2004. We note that we have previously commented on this site in response to a request for a scoping opinion. Within this, it was stated that due to site levels submitted suggesting the site is outside the extreme flood outline, no flood consequences assessment (FCA) would be required.

It is noted however, that the current application site differs from that submitted previously and now takes in areas of lower ground closer to the River Tawe. Part of the application site now includes land that may be at risk of flooding in events up to the 0.1% event. AREA 1 DEVELOPMENT CONTROL COMMITTEE – 16TH FEBRUARY 2010

ITEM 17 (CONT’D) APPLICATION NO. 2008/1615

We would therefore advise that a FCA will in fact be required in order to establish in detail, the extent of flood risk on the site and how the development will be designed to manage the risk. The flood risk to the site could be tidal, fluvial or a combination of the two and all scenarios should be assessed.

Site Contamination The River Tawe has been classed as the receptor, rather than the ground waters beneath the site. The site is entirely covered by made ground, consisting of ash, clinker, slag and demolition rubble. No petroleum hydrocarbons were detected in the soils, however it was evident in all CP boreholes at depths greater than 5.4m This is suggested to be lateral movement from an off-site source, thought to be the railway lines. The trial pits for TP10, 11, 12 and 14 are only to a depth of 0.3m. Samples at depth would be needed as they are all on the NE of the site and no other trial pits characterise this area of the site. TP8 is only on the surface. Limited sampling has been undertaken due to the footprint of the existing buildings.

We are however satisfied, that there are generic remedial options available to deal with the risks to controlled waters posed by contamination at this site. However, further details will be required in order to ensure that risks are appropriately addressed prior to development commencing. In line with the advice given in Planning Policy for Wales we understand that the Authority must decide whether to obtain such information prior to determining the application or as a condition of the permission. Should the LPA decide to obtain the necessary information under condition then the following conditions must be include on any permission granted. Without these conditions, we believe the proposed development poses an unacceptable risk to the environment and we would object to the application.

Surface water drainage With regard to surface water drainage from the site, we note that the Environmental Statement states that ground conditions and contamination make it unsuitable for a sustainable urban drainage system (SUDS) and that surface water will drain to the River Tawe.

At present, much of the site is covered and during construction and post development, there will be greater infiltration. We recognise that there is an increased potential for the pollution of controlled waters from inappropriately located infiltration systems such as soakaways, unsealed porous pavement systems or infiltration basins. However there are SUDS options which could be incorporated, for example lined attenuation ponds, grey-water harvesting systenms, green roofs and even the provision of water-butts. We would also welcome some investigation into hydro-brakes.

In order to satisfy the requirement of section 8.5 of TAN15, further evidence on why it will not be possible to incorporate any type of SUDS must be provided. Only if it can be clearly demonstrated that SUDS are not feasible, should a conventional system be utilised. If such a system is installed, them this must improve upon the current status quo.

All foul water generated from this development must be disposed to the main public sewerage system. We note that Dwr Cymru/Welsh Water have been contacted by the developer who has advised that capacity exists to accommodate the proposed flows. AREA 1 DEVELOPMENT CONTROL COMMITTEE – 16TH FEBRUARY 2010

ITEM 17 (CONT’D) APPLICATION NO. 2008/1615

Biodiversity With regard to the biodiversity interests at the site, we note the findings of the ecological assessment undertaken. Although the ecology of the site is limited, the River Tawe is an important water body and is regarded as being high environmental sensitivity. An appropriate development free buffer strip must be maintained between the development and the top of the bank of the river. This is to provide some protection to habitats and wildlife that may be present, as well as allowing sufficient access for maintenance purposes.

In consideration of the above, whilst we are satisfied that the majority of our concerns can be addressed via appropriate planning permission, we would ask that determination of the application be deferred until the required FCA has been submitted for review.

Further Response Following further correspondence it has been clarified that during the preparation work for the Environmental Assessment it was found that the riverbank was not stable and that stabilisation work to the bank is required as part of the development. This has resulted in the increase in size of the development area. It was acknowledged that the bank area is within zone C2 and that the land is at risk of flooding. However, we note that there is no proposal in include built development within this area and that all development is set well above flood levels.

Based on this information we are satisfied that due consideration has been given to the flood risk at this site. In this instance, as the flood risk has been acknowledged, we will accept the correspondence as a limited Flood Consequences Assessment (FCA). The following condition is requested for inclusion:

Condition No built development approved by this permission shall take place within the area defined as zone C1 / C2 on the Welsh Assembly Government’s development advice map (DAM), referred to under TAN15: Development and Flood Risk (July 2004). Development shall only take place on those areas currently above 16.5m AOD.

Reason: to reduce the risk of flooding to the proposed development and future occupants.

Head of Environmental Management and Protection –

Condition: Land Contamination This site lies on or adjacent to a number of sites where previous historic industrial use was undertaken resulting in a likely legacy of gross contamination, including Hafod Phosphate works, Hafod Iron Foundry, Hafod Isaf Cobalt-Nickel works, Swansea High Street Station & Yard.

The applicant shall submit a phased scheme, comprising three progressively more detailed reports, detailing measures to be undertaken in order to investigate the presence of land contamination, including relevant gas, vapour and, where appropriate, radiation related risks, at the proposed site. AREA 1 DEVELOPMENT CONTROL COMMITTEE – 16TH FEBRUARY 2010

ITEM 17 (CONT’D) APPLICATION NO. 2008/1615

Where the initial investigations indicate the presence of such contamination, including the presence of relevant gas/vapour and/or radioactivity, subsequent reports shall indicate the extent of the contamination and the measures to be undertaken in order to remediate the contamination identified. The reports shall be submitted individually. The provision of Phase 2 and Phase 3 reports will be required only where the contents of the previous report indicate to the Local Planning Authority that the next phase of investigation/ remediation is required.

Air Quality Management The applicant shall be required to conduct, and provide the results of, an air quality assessment of the potential impact of the proposed development on the surrounding local area.

i) The assessment shall consider the seven key pollutants within the National Air Quality Strategy and the Air Quality (Wales) Regulations 2000 as amended by the Air Quality (Amendment) (Wales) Regulations 2002 and should pay particular attention to the 1 hour NO2 objective and NO2 annual mean objective. ii) In addition the assessment should also pay particular attention to the PM10 objectives set in regulation ( 24 hour mean objective of 50ug/m3 - 35 exceedences and the annual mean objective of 40ug/m3 to be achieved by the 31/12/2004 and maintained thereafter) Also, an indication of the new Particles (PM2.5) Exposure Reduction objective (contained within the Air Quality strategy 2007) of 25ug/m3 in 2010 and 2020 should be made.

Domestic - Sound Insulation Require a detailed assessment of night time rail noise on development and how the site design will mitigate the effects of this.

Unless otherwise agreed by the Local Planning Authority, prior to the commencement of development a scheme shall be submitted to and approved by the Local Planning Authority to provide that all habitable rooms achieve an internal noise level of 37dBA Leq 16 hour during the day and 35 dBA Leq 8 hour at night. The submitted scheme shall ensure that habitable rooms subject to sound insulation measures shall be provided with acoustically treated active ventilation units. No habitable room shall be occupied until the approved sound insulation and ventilation measures have been installed in that room.

Subject to the inclusion of the above the Pollution Control Division of the Environment Department has no objection to this application.

Highway Observations –

1. Background

1.1 This proposal is for the redevelopment of the Bernard Hastie site at the end of Morfa Road. The proposal is to erect 142 dwelling units made up of 52 houses and 84 flats together with 189 car parking spaces. A Transport Assessment has been submitted in support of the application. AREA 1 DEVELOPMENT CONTROL COMMITTEE – 16TH FEBRUARY 2010

ITEM 17 (CONT’D) APPLICATION NO. 2008/1615

1.2 The Transport Assessment has assessed the transport and traffic implications of the development and the results indicate that the proposal is acceptable.

2. Traffic Generation

2.1 Traffic generation is predicted to be 21 arrivals and 62 departures in the am peak hour and 55 arrivals with 30 departures in the pm peak hour. This equates to just over 1 vehicle a minute during the peak hour and does not give rise to any capacity issues.

2.2 No reference has been made to the traffic generated by the previous use of the site and all predicted movements have been assumed to be new, therefore a robust assessment has been undertaken.

3. Parking

3.1 Parking for the site is stated to be 189 spaces, however as this is an outline application no detail of how spaces are allocated to each dwelling is given. This aspect will be addressed at detail stage should consent be given

4. Morfa Road Improvements

4.1 The Morfa Distributor Road scheme passes through the site and therefore this development will need to accommodate this road improvement. The developer has agreed to provide this part of the Morfa Distributor where it passes through this site at his expense and this is a positive contribution to the overall scheme. The site access will therefore join the new Distributor road and all traffic movements will be down towards the New Cut Road junction until such time as the Distributor road has been completed and provides a through link.

5. Access by other modes

5.1 Walking distances between the site and access to public transport is acceptable being approximately 300m to bus stops on Neath Road. The City Centre is just under 2Km from the site which is recommended as the maximum walking distance by the Chartered Institute of Highways and Transportation.

5.2 This Council's strategy for the riverside includes the provision of a riverside walk and cycle path. This is referred to in the Transport Assessment. It will be necessary therefore to ensure that development of the site does not prejudice this and therefore a suitable condition should be imposed to safeguard the route and allow for negotiation on the developer's contribution towards its provision.

6. Recommendation

6.1 I recommend no highway objection subject to the following;

i. Prior to occupation of any dwelling within the site, the Morfa Distributor road where it passes through the site, shall be constructed in accordance with details to be submitted and agreed. All at the expense of the developer. AREA 1 DEVELOPMENT CONTROL COMMITTEE – 16TH FEBRUARY 2010

ITEM 17 (CONT’D) APPLICATION NO. 2008/1615

ii. The internal road serving the site shall be constructed in accordance with details to be submitted and agreed.

iii. Each dwelling shall be provided with suitable parking facilities in accordance with details to be submitted and agreed.

iv. Details of the treatment to the Riverside Walk shall be submitted for approval and implemented in accordance with approved details.

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

Note 1. The Developer must contact the Team Leader - Highways Management, City and County of Swansea (Highways), Players Industrial Estate, Clydach, Swansea. SA6 5BJ (Tel 01792 841601) before carrying out any work.

Note 2: The Travel Plan shall include details of car reduction initiatives and methods of monitoring, review and adjustment where necessary. Advice on Travel Plans can be obtained from Jayne Cornelius, SWWITCH Travel Plan Co-ordinator Tel 07796 275711.

APPRAISAL

The application has been called to Committee at the request of the Ward Member, Councillor Robert Speht.

The site and its surroundings

The application site is located on the western banks of the Rive Tawe at the northern end of the Morfa Industrial Estate. The eastern end of the site comprises the former industrial site of Bernard Hastie, whilst the western part of the site is land owned by Network Rail and consists of railway sidings. Whilst they are technically operational, they are unused. Additionally, the application site also comprises the wooded embankment above the River Tawe. This is included within the application site because of the engineering operations which will be required to stabilise the embankment to allow the re-development of the land above.

The existing vehicular access into the application site is via Morfa Road. Morfa Road runs generally parallel to the railway line to the west and serves all of the premises on the western bank of the river within the Morfa Industrial Estate. It forms a junction with the A483 New Cut Road approx. 1 km to the south of the site. Additionally, there is a vehicular access via Maliphant Street onto Neath Road which runs underneath the railway line.

The redevelopment of this brownfield site is considered to be one of the key development elements of the implementation of the Tawe Riverside Corridor Study (TRCS), adopted by the City and County of Swansea in 2006. The strategy for the Morfa Road is for a significant opportunity for redevelopment, capitalising on the riverside setting, the proximity of the area to the City Centre and waterfront and also to celebrate and interpret the heritage of the area. AREA 1 DEVELOPMENT CONTROL COMMITTEE – 16TH FEBRUARY 2010

ITEM 17 (CONT’D) APPLICATION NO. 2008/1615

The strategy for the regeneration of the area is to alter the balance of uses from light and heavy industry and dereliction, which ignores the river frontage, to a high quality mixed area of residential, commercial and light industrial uses. The masterplan for the Morfa Road area envisages the residential development of the Hasties Site. The application indicates that the realisation of the residential scheme on the application site would act as a catalyst for further development, and would radically change the appearance of the area.

In addition, one of the key aspirations of the TRCS is the delivery of the ‘Morfa Distributor Road’, which would require the upgrading of the existing Morfa Road from its junction on New Cut Road and then providing a new road link via the existing Landore park and ride access onto the A4067 to enable to have a distributor road function. The distributor road would serve development within the area and moreover would relieve traffic congestion elsewhere on the highway network by providing an alternative direct corridor to the city centre from the north. The proposed alignment of the Morfa Distributor Road would cross the application site frontage before linking into the ‘Phase 2’ element which links the Landore Park and Ride to the northern boundary of the site, which is currently under consideration under Ref:2008/0919, and is also reported on this agenda.

The planning application

The planning application seeks outline planning permission for the following development:

• 58 no. three storey town houses; • 84 apartments together with:

• open space, including play spaces, footpaths, cycle paths and areas for informal recreation; • second phase of the proposed Morfa distributor road; • New roads, accesses, parking areas and paths including • Other ancillary uses and activities;

The scheme as originally submitted involved the re-development of the site with the construction of up 91 houses (3 storeys) and 134 apartments (5 storey), 225 residential units in total. However, during the consideration of the application the developable site area has been reduced as the operational requirements of Network Rail have become clearer. Network Rail have determined that they wish to retain a larger portion of the railway siding for future use and this has resulted in a smaller footprint for the proposed residential area. As a result it is now proposed to construct up to 52 houses and 84 apartments, 136 residential units in total. In addition, the reduction in the site area has meant a re-alignment of the proposed section of the Morfa Distributor Road which would be constructed through the site.

The application is submitted as an outline application with matters of siting and means of access to be determined at this stage. The issues of design, external appearance and landscaping are reserved for future consideration. The planning application is accompanied by a Design Statement which provides additional information on layout concepts and the principles of the scheme. AREA 1 DEVELOPMENT CONTROL COMMITTEE – 16TH FEBRUARY 2010

ITEM 17 (CONT’D) APPLICATION NO. 2008/1615

Design Issues The site is currently occupied by the former Bernard Hasties buildings and is being used by small industrial users and also comprises the underused Network Rail railway land (‘Maliphant Sidings’). The Swansea to London main railway line isolates the site from the housing area of the Hafod. The site is identified in the Tawe Riverside Corridor Study for housing and the vision for the Tawe Riverside Corridor is to: ‘Develop a modern, attractive and vibrant riverside urban area, creating a place where people wish to live, work and visit, capitalising upon and celebrating the Tawe’s unique contribution to the Industrial Revolution’.

It is proposed for the access to the site to be formed from the ‘Morfa Distributor Road’ which would created by the construction of a road extension from the northern side of Morfa Road through the application site which would then link into the park and ride extension at Landore. The submitted Design and Access Statement (DAS) indicates that owing to the existing topography it is not possible to link the site with the riverside walkway. However, it is proposed to contribute to improvements to the nearby railway underpass (Maliphant Road) as part of the proposal.

Design Strategy The DAS indicates that the proposed form of the development is informed by the site character and that the curved layout derives from the natural sweep of the River Tawe, and the proposed Morfa Distributor Road would provide a buffer to the existing railway line. The DAS states that the design concept has reflected the aspiration to optimise the ‘Riverfront’, and consequently, the masterplan has been configured to promote visual permeability with the 5 storey apartment blocks positioned at ‘right angles’ to the curvature of the river in order to allow a large proportion of the residential units an aspect to the river. The scale of the terraced housing facing onto the proposed distributor road and internal estate road provide a sense of enclosure and legibility to the streetscape. The apartment blocks form individual pavilions whilst the terraced housing contain the development.

The DAS indicates that the density of the development responds to the guidelines set in the TRCS, as the 58 houses and 84 apartments equates to 75 units per hectare. The TRCS recommends a minimum density of 50 units to the hectare, as relatively high densities will need to be achieved having regard to the development costs of the redevelopment brownfield sites. Additionally, the TRCS anticipates higher density apartments on the river frontage and two or three storey dwellings elsewhere, which is considered an appropriate scale for the site. The proposed housing layout attempts to reflect the recommendations of the TRCS. The higher density 5 storey high apartment blocks are located adjacent to the River Tawe which incorporate under-croft car parking with the ground floor raised by 1 metres above the external ground level. The change in level would be masked by landscaping while level access would be accommodated between blocks via raised links. This integration of the under-croft parking reduces its visual impact whilst at the same time allows for the space between to be laid with soft landscaping.

The inner aspect is more intimate and is characterised by 3 storey houses forming streets and squares with car parking provided in front of the houses or in courtyards. The internal layout also provides a legible development pattern whilst encouraging slower traffic. AREA 1 DEVELOPMENT CONTROL COMMITTEE – 16TH FEBRUARY 2010

ITEM 17 (CONT’D) APPLICATION NO. 2008/1615

Development Plan Policy and Land Uses

National Planning Policy In line with recent Central Government guidance provided by Planning Policy Wales 2002 (PPW 2002), the redevelopment of the former industrial site would fall to be considered as a windfall ‘brownfield’ site, that is a vacant site within the established urban area and that has been previously developed and is now available for redevelopment. In principle, this national policy guidance actively encourages proposals for the redevelopment on such sites, provided they do not give rise to an over-intensive form of development, or an unacceptable loss of important urban greenspace, or have an unacceptable detrimental impact on the character and appearance of the existing residential neighbourhood or on highway conditions. PPW 2002 provides up to date guidance on the Government’s vision for Wales, which seeks to provide a greater choice and variety of homes in sustainable communities, and ensure that previously developed land is used in preference to green field sites. New developments are required to improve the quality of life, regenerate communities, with a mix of private and social housing that enhances where practicable the surrounding landscape and wildlife features.

Unitary Development Plan The site is an established industrial and commercial area and is therefore afforded white land status in the adopted UDP where redevelopment proposals are considered on their merits. Whilst there is no site specific allocation in the Plan, the Tawe Riverside Corridor Strategy (TRCS) provides a relatively up to date planning policy framework for considering schemes along the Morfa Road corridor. The TRCS was adopted as Council policy in August 2006 and it is anticipated that it will become Supplementary Planning Guidance now that the Unitary Development Plan has been adopted.

It is the TRCS rather than the UDP that sets out specific site allocations and proposed uses within the context of a wider strategy for the whole of the Tawe Riverside extending northwards. The overall concept for the Morfa Road section is to deliver a mix of uses, however the TRCS does point out that there is sufficient flexibility to enable the majority of sites to be developed for housing purposes in the longer term. However, phasing is clearly an important element in ensuring that the amenity of future occupiers is not unacceptably compromised by factors such as noise pollution and general disturbance. The UDP states that proposals for non-commercial uses at or adjacent to industrial areas should be determined on their individual merits against broad planning principles, many of which are set out in UDP Policies EV1 and EV2. Of particular relevance is the requirement to consider the level of impact caused by existing commercial uses in terms of environmental pollution to future occupiers at neighbouring sites. The TRCS also deals with ‘Pollution Considerations’, which states that Planning Permission may be refused at sites along Morfa Rd if – notwithstanding the use of good design – the close proximity of a site to existing noise generating uses is considered unacceptable.

UDP Policy EV1 requires that the scheme provides a safe environment for future occupiers by addressing issues of security, crime prevention, fear of crime, and giving consideration to spaces and routes around the site. There is concern whether existing connections to/from the site and areas around it are possible having regard to personal safety issues for future residents. The safety and quality of pedestrian routes from the site to the City Centre and local facilities is crucial. UDP Policy AS2 in particular states that the design and layout of new developments should provide suitable facilities and attractive environment for pedestrians and non car users. AREA 1 DEVELOPMENT CONTROL COMMITTEE – 16TH FEBRUARY 2010

ITEM 17 (CONT’D) APPLICATION NO. 2008/1615

The extent to which the submitted scheme meets these requirements to provide safe, attractive direct links for the large number of pedestrian movements that would arise from residential occupiers is a significant consideration.

Affordable Housing The need for affordable housing is a material planning consideration and an essential element in contributing to community regeneration and social inclusion. The provision of affordable housing is a key priority for WAG and National Planning Policy in the form of Planning Policy Wales (as updated by Ministerial Interim Planning Policy Statement 01/2006 Housing – June 2006) and Technical Advice Note 2: Planning and Affordable Housing (June 2006) provides the policy guidance. Policy HC3 of the Unitary Development Plan is a strengthening of this policy and requires in areas where a demonstrable lack of affordable housing exists, the Council will seek to negotiate the inclusion of an appropriate element of affordable housing on suitable sites. The general threshold is reduced to 25 dwellings or 1 hectare or phases of such development. The requirement to provide affordable housing will depend upon factors such as the site size, suitability and development costs and whether it would prejudice the realisation of other planning objectives. The TRCS also indicates that a proportion of housing should be affordable.

The Housing Department has completed its Local Housing Market Needs Assessment (LHMNA) which is a key supporting document to the Council’s Housing Strategy. The LHMNA was completed by consultants in accordance with WAG/Central Government Guidance. The Housing Strategy was approved by Council on 13th September, 2007 and represents a significant change in the policy framework relating to the provision of affordable housing. Whilst the LHMNA, which underpins the Housing Strategy, sets a target of 30%, a reduced provision considered to be appropriate given the other benefits which form part of the scheme.

The Head of Housing has indicated that a minimum provision of 15% affordable housing should be provided on the site, with the mix of units and tenure to be determined. However, the developer indicates that the cost of providing affordable housing on the site would be prohibitive having regard to the additional abnormal costs and as such would it unviable for the developer to incur the additional cost. As indicted above, Policy HC3 of the UDP indicates that in areas where a demonstrable lack of affordable housing exists, the Council will seek to negotiate the inclusion of an appropriate element of affordable housing on sites which are suitable in locational / accessibility terms and where this is not ruled out by exceptional development costs. This would need to be negotiated therefore as part of the overall Section 106 contribution requirements, acknowledging that the construction of the road is the highest priority.

Environmental Impact Assessment

The application has been accompanied by an Environmental Statement (ES) due to the fact that the site is located in a sensitive environmental location adjacent to the River Tawe and it was therefore considered that the proposed uses would have significant effects on the environment. The non-technical summary of the ES is available separately.

AREA 1 DEVELOPMENT CONTROL COMMITTEE – 16TH FEBRUARY 2010

ITEM 17 (CONT’D) APPLICATION NO. 2008/1615

The content and structure of the Environmental Statement

The EA provides a detailed description of the site and its surrounding area. It also provides an indication of the recent planning history of this area, and places the current proposals in the context of the overall long-term vision for the site and its hinterland, as proposed by the City and County of Swansea. It also explains the development mix and provides a more detailed description of the proposal. The indicative construction programme is also outlined, along with a broad description of the way in which the proposal contributes to the principles of sustainable development. The EA also provides an overview of the policy context within which the planning application will be assessed. It highlights the key issues arising from Planning Policy Wales and relevant Technical Advice Notes (TANs) and provides a summary of the most relevant adopted and emerging regional and local planning policies, along with other relevant plans and strategies. The EA also examines the need for the scheme and outlines the alternative options that have been considered as the plans have been developed. It explains the rationale for the selected proposal, and the reasons why the described alternatives were not pursued.

The following main issues have been identified within the EA:

• Ecology; • Archaeology; • Air Quality; • Noise and Vibration; • Highways and Transportation; • Land Quality

It is not considered that the provisions of the Human Rights Act raise any other overriding considerations.

Ecology The EIA indicates that an ecological assessment of the development site was carried out. This included a bat survey of the buildings at and around the Hastie factory in order to assess the extent of any bat or other protected species use of the buildings, and to identify any constraints upon the discovery of bats (or other species). The conclusions of the bat surveys were that there was no evidence of bat use at or around the buildings and that bat roost opportunity was very limited.

An examination was undertaken of the western bank of the River Tawe adjacent to the Hasties site, in search of protected species interest which might be affected by works to the embankment. In particular, otters are known to use this stretch of rover, and the examination was made for rest-site use. However, no field evidence of otter presence nor actual or potential resting-sites were found along the bank.

A survey was also conducted of the railway sidings to identify any potential protected species. This indicated limited potential for reptiles and the EIA recommends a number of mitigation measures to encourage suitable habitats. The Countryside Council for Wales have raised no objection to the proposal subject to the recommendations in the ecological appraisal for reptiles being followed. In addition, whilst acknowledging the limited ecological value of the site, the Environment Agency note the environmental sensitivity of the River Tawe, and recommend the retention of an appropriate development free buffer strip between the development and the top of the bank of the river. AREA 1 DEVELOPMENT CONTROL COMMITTEE – 16TH FEBRUARY 2010

ITEM 17 (CONT’D) APPLICATION NO. 2008/1615

This is to provide some protection to habitats and wildlife that may be present, as well as allowing sufficient access for maintenance purposes.

Archaeology and cultural heritage

The EIA indicates that an Archaeological desk-based assessment was carried out. This concluded that the proposed development will have a major effect upon the Swansea Canal, Former Hafod Phosphate Works, Hafod Foundry, the Hasties site itself and the railway sidings. The report recommends that in terms of mitigation, a building survey be carried out to assess and record the remains of the nineteenth century industrial buildings and the remaining Hasties buildings.

Information regarding the remaining archaeological resource is limited although it is likely that there are significant surviving archaeological deposits below ground. The assessment therefore recommends that an archaeological evaluation is carried out prior to the commencement of development on the site. This should take the form of a written scheme of investigation and plan for further mitigation based on the results of the evaluation. Additionally, it is recommended that an archaeological watching brief is initiated during any further ground investigation and geotechnical works. Whilst acknowledging this advice, the applicants indicate that due to the extensive geotechnical work required to stabilise the site and deal with decontamination, it is not considered that undertaking further intrusive archaeological work prior to determining the planning application would achieve any mitigation. Glamorgan Gwent Archaeological Trust (GGAT) confirm the presence of an archaeological restraint on the site and requested the deferral of the planning application until an archaeological evaluation report has been submitted.

However, the applicants have responded outlining the problems of carrying out an archaeological evaluation of the site at this stage. In particular, as the buildings on the site are still in occupation and as such would place significant constraints on the operation of the business. The applicants would be willing to initiate an archaeological evaluation prior to the commencement of works on site and would except an appropriate condition accordingly. GGAT express concern that without detailed information on the archaeological resource, there is a risk of significant archaeological features being revealed during the development and delays occurring leading to a significant financial impact. GGAT recommends that a document is produced outlining what archaeological investigations will be undertaken on the site, the timing of such works and also the type of mitigation measures that will be employed on the site if archaeological features are present. This could be a requirement of the Section 106, to be attached to the Agreement.

Air Quality An air quality assessment was carried out on the site. The assessment assesses the potential air quality impacts associated with the proposed residential development.

The four key aspects within the proposed development that might be subject to air quality are: • New properties within the proposed development that might be subject to air quality impacts from nearby road traffic; • railway locomotives impacts; • Industrial emission impacts; and • Operational and Construction impacts (Operational impacts on future residents and construction impacts on the local surroundings). AREA 1 DEVELOPMENT CONTROL COMMITTEE – 16TH FEBRUARY 2010

ITEM 17 (CONT’D) APPLICATION NO. 2008/1615

The assessment considered that the development would only generate approximately 1000 vehicle movements per day, which would not lead to a significant increase in traffic on local roads. The assessment has not assessed the impact of traffic generated by the proposed development on the surroundings.

The air quality impacts of all probable situations were modelled using a modelling system and data provided by the highway authority and the effects on the air quality within the development from road traffic, with and without the proposed new Morfa Distributor Road, railway locomotives and Industrial sources were found to be negligible, falling below relevant government guidelines in all these areas. Other key findings were that the air quality impacts during construction were judged to mostly comprise dust emissions from demolition and construction activities.

In term of mitigating any potential road traffic impact the assessment considers that the proposed new road is not positioned any closer to the proposed residential properties than illustrated on the submission plans. Any additional distance that can be placed to offset the road from the houses, greater than that shown in the current submitted plans would lessen the impact of the new road on this development.

The assessment also proposes a number of mitigation measures to mitigate dust emissions during the construction phase. These measures involve dampening down of dry unpaved roads on the site and regular sweeping of the site access road to avoid dust spreading. It is also proposed that all vehicles carrying material off site would be sheeted to avoid dust emissions. These measures will minimise the effects on the air quality in the local area such that they do not cause any hazard whatsoever.

Noise and vibration

The EIA incorporates an environmental noise and vibration impact assessment. The purpose of the assessment was to determine the potential noise impact of the proposed development to the local environment during construction and site operation, and to also assess the impact of the local environment on the proposed new dwellings.

Having undertaken a site survey and assessment it was considered that the following areas were investigated more thoroughly:

• Demolition and construction noise • Noise from car parking and on-site vehicular activity • Noise from access road traffic • Noise from the potential Morfa Distributor road • Noise from existing industry and business

The effect and extent of vibration carried through the ground during construction was also investigated.

Construction Noise In general the assessment concluded that the development’s construction noise and vibration would not cause disturbance to local residents. However to mitigate a potential construction noise disturbance, any construction equipment to be used will have to comply with relevant regulations regarding noise and vibration to ensure not to cause a disturbance. AREA 1 DEVELOPMENT CONTROL COMMITTEE – 16TH FEBRUARY 2010

ITEM 17 (CONT’D) APPLICATION NO. 2008/1615

The assessment considers it is uncommon for the development of residential developments to be such that vibration levels are high, however consideration should be given to the demolition of buildings close to receivers directly adjacent to the development site. The levels required to be generated before structural damage occurs are high and highly unlikely to be reached in the construction of this development.

Operational Impacts

The proposed development would be in close vicinity of the Swansea Mainline railway. Additionally, the operation of the proposed Morfa Distributor Road would lead to the introduction of a new source of noise. The EIA concludes that Noise and vibration from existing surrounding road networks, from the proposed new link road (Morfa Distributor) and the existing railway line would have a negligible impact on existing residential dwellings but would have a medium to high impact on the proposed development. However, mitigation measures can be applied to reduce this potential impact to a negligible level. These measures would include the use of high quality double glazed windows to block sound indoors and screening for outside areas.

The Head of Environmental Management and Protection raises no objection to the application subject to the implementation of a scheme to ensure that all habitable rooms within the proposed development are subject to sound insulation measures.

Transport and highways

The Environmental Impact Assessment submitted with the application incorporates a Transport Assessment. The site would be accessed from the proposed Morfa Distributor Road via a priority right hand turn junction. The Head of Transportation indicates that the proposed traffic generation which equates to just over 1 vehicle a minute during the peak hour and would not give rise to any capacity issues. The developer has agreed to provide the section of the Morfa Distributor Road at their expense and is therefore a positive contribution to the overall scheme. This will be secured via a Section 106 Planning Obligation. The developer has indicated that the cost of constructing the distributor road to a point where the access to the site is anticipated to be £240,000 (based on a length of approx. 120 metres). Additionally, the developer has agreed to contribute to the remaining section of the distributor road across the land within their control at a cost of £303,000 (for a length of approx. 152 metres). It is considered that the total cost and construction of providing the section of the Morfa Distributor Road within the application site be borne by the developer and secured by a Section 106 Planning Obligation.

The site access will therefore join the new Distributor road and all traffic movements will go down Morfa Road to the New Cut Road junction until such time as the Distributor Road has been completed to provide the through link. The completion of the section of the Distributor Road to meet the park and ride extension (currently under consideration Ref: 2008/0919 refers) and thus allow movements northwards would depend on the availability of funding for that proposal. There is also the existing single width vehicular access via Maliphant Street underneath the railway line located at the end of Morfa Road. It is the aspiration of the TRCS to close this access to vehicular traffic pending the completion of the Morfa Distributor Road.

Walking distances between the site and access to public transport is acceptable being approximately 300 metres to bus stops on Neath Road. This pedestrian access would utilise the existing Maliphant Street access underneath railway line. AREA 1 DEVELOPMENT CONTROL COMMITTEE – 16TH FEBRUARY 2010

ITEM 17 (CONT’D) APPLICATION NO. 2008/1615

Network Rail have indicated the potential of closing the existing Maliphant Street access in order to facilitate their future operational requirements and that in its place they would be prepared to construct a pedestrian bridge over the existing railway line in order to facilitate / retain the existing access. The TRCS recognises that to improve pedestrian linkages from Morfa Road, the feasibility of a pedestrian linkage / bridge over the railway line may need to be considered although the engineering and cost implications are recognised. However, the TRCS also envisages that the link under the railway from Maliphant Street would be for pedestrian and cyclists only, and would be enhanced. The developers have also indicated a willingness to contribute £15,000 towards improving the pedestrian access across / under the railway line. This may be secured by the Section 106 Planning Obligation.

It is an aspiration and one of the development objectives of the TRCS to provide continuous and pleasant public access along the riverbanks of the River Tawe which would provide public access from Parc Tawe through to the Hafod site. A footpath is in place for the majority of the route and present, with the exception of the Swansea Industrial Components site (in the Morfa Industrial Estate), however, it is currently impassable in places due to overgrowth and there are no barriers to protects users along the river edge.

Land Quality

A comprehensive ground investigation has been undertaken as part of the EIA. The site lies on or adjacent to a number of sites where current and previous historic industrial use was undertaken resulting in a legacy of ground contamination by chemicals or materials that have leaked or been spilled during the industrial activity. Within or adjacent to the site, there was the Hafod Phosphate Works, Hafod Iron Foundry, Hafod Isaf Cobalt-Nickel works and also the railway line and sidings.

The ground investigation indicates that the made ground is widely contaminated by metals and contains localised hotspots of organic contamination. In order to mitigate against this a suitable thickness of clean cover will be required in gardens and other areas of soft landscaping to mitigate human heath risks. Chlorinated solvent contamination has been found at two isolated locations in the south-west and east of the site and further investigation of these areas is recommended. The groundwater appears to widely contaminated by petroleum hydrocarbons and appears to be locally contaminated by PAHs, VOCs and PCBs. Further investigation is therefore recommended to gain a more detailed understanding of the characteristics of the identified organic contaminants and to inform a more sophisticated assessment of pollution risk. No protection measures are required in respect of radon, methane, or carbon dioxide gas. Chlorinated solvents have, however, been found on site. Conventional gas protection measures comprising of gas tight ground floor construction and passive sub-floor ventilation may, therefore, be required as a precautionary measure to mitigate such risks for properties located in the vicinity of these boreholes.

The EA indicates that there are generic remedial options available to deal with the risks to controlled waters posed by contamination at this site. AREA 1 DEVELOPMENT CONTROL COMMITTEE – 16TH FEBRUARY 2010

ITEM 17 (CONT’D) APPLICATION NO. 2008/1615

The Head of Environmental Management and Protection considers that the ground contamination can be controlled by imposing planning conditions requiring the developer to submit a phased scheme, comprising three progressively more detailed reports, detailing measures to be undertaken in order to investigate the presence of land contamination, including relevant gas, vapour and, where appropriate, radiation related risks, at the proposed site and the measures to be undertaken in order to remediate the contamination identified.

Additionally, the EIA indicates that the site’s east boundary slope along the banks of the River Tawe appears to be only marginally stable and stabilisation works will be required. It is considered that the most robust means of enhancing the stability of the slope would be to excavate and re-compact the made ground to form a uniform slope of engineered fill. Further work will be required to inform and complete detailed design of the slop stabilisation works. This may be controlled by planning condition.

Drainage Strategy The EIA indicates that surface water from the existing site discharges direct into the River Tawe without any attenuation and that the public sewerage system in the area is generally of a combined type. It is proposed that the site will drain surface water un-attenuated into the River Tawe, with the proviso that the proposed surface water discharge rate is not to exceed the existing rate of discharge. It is further indicated the impervious surface area of the proposed development will decrease from the existing layout, and therefore there would be a reduction in the surface water run-off rate. It is proposed that a new network of on-site dedicated surface water sewers will convey by gravity surface water to an existing outfall located within the site. The EIA considers that Sustainable Urban Drainage Systems (SUDS) are unsuitable for this site due to the prevailing ground conditions and site contamination, which would make soak-away drainage not a viable option. The Environment Agency (EA) acknowledge that there is the potential for the pollution of controlled waters from inappropriately located infiltration systems such as soakaways. However, the EA indicate there are other SUDS options which could be incorporated, for example lined attenuation ponds, grey water harvesting systems, green roofs or even water- butts. In order to satisfy TAN15 further evidence should be submitted on why it is not possible to incorporate any type of SUD, and only then if it is has been demonstrated that SUDS are not possible that a conventional system may be used. It is proposed that a planning condition is imposed requiring a scheme for the disposal of surface water to be implemented.

With regard to foul drainage, the location of the combined sewer on the western boundary means that a new network of dedicated foul sewers will be constructed that drain the proposed development by gravity. Dwr Cymru Welsh Water have advised that the capacity of the existing public foul sewer can accommodate the proposed flows subject to the submission of a detailed scheme indicating a comprehensive and integrated drainage scheme for the site. This can be controlled by planning condition.

UDP Policy EV36 states that development within flood risk areas will only be permitted where it can be demonstrated that its location is justified and the consequences associated with flooding are acceptable. The EA originally objected to the proposal in order to assess the flood risk from the site. However, during the consideration of the application it became apparent that existing ground levels on the development range from 16.5 m AOD to around 18.5 m AOD and as such are well above the river flood levels. The EA are therefore satisfied that due consideration has been given to the flood risk at the site and that the proposed development will not be liable to a flood risk. AREA 1 DEVELOPMENT CONTROL COMMITTEE – 16TH FEBRUARY 2010

ITEM 17 (CONT’D) APPLICATION NO. 2008/1615

Conclusion The proposed development would represent a strategic regeneration of a brownfield site within the urban area offering considerable benefits, in particular in facilitating the first phase of the Morfa Distributor Road and would be consistent as a more sustainable form of development being promoted by the Council and the National Assembly for ‘brownfield sites’, in line national and local policy guidance. Having regard to all the relevant Development Plan Policies, the adopted River Tawe Corridor Study and all other material considerations the proposal would represent an acceptable form of development.

It is considered however that conditions and a Section 106 Obligation are necessary to adequately control the development and to achieve the strategic objectives within the RTCS and the Unitary Development Plan. It is acknowledged that scheme viability will be material to the details of the Section 106, and the applicant has supplied some financial information in that respect. This will need to be given more detailed consideration in the final drafting of the Section 106, with priority being afforded to the construction of the highway and the investigation of the archaeological resource within the site.

RECOMMENDATION It is recommended that the application be APPROVED, subject to the following conditions and to the applicant entering into a Section 106 Legal Agreement with regard to:

Section 106 Planning Obligation Heads of Terms • An affordable Housing contribution. • The construction of the proposed section of the Morfa Distributor Road within the developable area. (estimated to be the cost of £543,000). • A contribution of £15,000 towards pedestrian improvements in the vicinity of the railway crossing. • Proposed archaeological investigations.

1 Approval of the details of the design and external appearance of the buildings and the landscaping of the site shall be obtained from the Local Planning Authority in writing before any development is commenced. Reason: To ensure that the development is carried out in an orderly and satisfactory manner.

3 Approval of the details of the siting, design and external appearance of the building(s) and the means of access thereto and the landscaping of the site shall be obtained from the Local Planning Authority in writing before any development is commenced. Reason: To comply with the provisions of Section 92 of the Town and Country Planning Act, 1990 and to ensure that development is begun within a reasonable period. AREA 1 DEVELOPMENT CONTROL COMMITTEE – 16TH FEBRUARY 2010

ITEM 17 (CONT’D) APPLICATION NO. 2008/1615

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

6 Before the development hereby permitted is commenced, details of the levels of the buildings, roads and footpaths in relation to the adjoining land and highways together with any changes proposed in the levels of the site shall be submitted to and agreed by the Local Planning Authority in writing. Reason: To ensure that the work is carried out at suitable levels in relation to the highway and adjoining land having regard to drainage, gradient of access, and the amenities of adjoining occupiers.

7 Samples of all external finishes together with an external finishes schedule illustrating the disposition of finishes within the layout shall be submitted to and approved by the Local Planning Authority before the development is commenced. The scheme shall be implemented in accordance with the approved details. Reason: In the interests of visual amenity.

8 Prior to the commencement of the development of the adoptable roads, full road engineering details of the internal road layout shall be submitted to and approved by the Local Planning Authority and shall be constructed in accordance with the approved details. Reason: To allow the proper consideration of all details in the interests of highway safety.

9 No part of the development shall be occupied until the proposed adoptable roads linking to the existing adopted road network have been constructed to base course level and provided with street lighting in accordance with details to be submitted to and approved by the Local Planning Authority. Reason: To ensure that the development is provided with satisfactory vehicular access in the interests of public safety.

10 No part of the development hereby approved shall be occupied until a Travel Plan for the development has been submitted to and approved by the Local Planning Authority. The Travel Plan shall be implemented in accordance with the approved scheme. Reason: In the interests of sustainability and to reduce reliance on the car as a mode of transport.

AREA 1 DEVELOPMENT CONTROL COMMITTEE – 16TH FEBRUARY 2010

ITEM 17 (CONT’D) APPLICATION NO. 2008/1615

11 Unless otherwise agreed by the Local Planning Authority, prior to the commencement of development a scheme shall be submitted to and approved by the Local Planning Authority to provide that all habitable rooms achieve an internal noise level of 37dBA Leq 16 hour during the day and 35 dBA Leq 8 hour at night. The submitted scheme shall ensure that habitable rooms subject to sound insulation measures shall be provided with acoustically treated active ventilation units. No habitable room shall be occupied until the approved sound insulation and ventilation measures have been installed in that room. Reason: To ensure acceptable living conditions for future residents having regard to the existing and proposed noise environment experienced at the site.

12 Unless otherwise agreed by the Local Planning Authority, no development (which shall exclude site clearance, demolition, ground investigation and site preparation works) approved by this planning permission shall be commenced until a phased scheme, comprising three progressively more detailed reports, detailing measures to be undertaken in order to investigate the presence of land contamination, including relevant gas and vapour related risks, at the proposed site shall be submitted to and approved by the Local Planning Authority. The Phase 1 desktop study should include a Conceptual Method for the initial site investigation which must include a risk assessment relating to the potential affects on groundwater and surface water as a result of the works. Where the site investigation indicates the presence of such contamination, including the presence of relevant gas/vapour, a Method Statement shall indicate the extent of the contamination and the measures to be undertaken in order to remediate the contamination identified, including measures to minimise the impact on ground and surface waters. The reports shall be submitted individually. The provision of the Phase 2 (Method Statement) detailed report and Phase 3 remediation strategy/validation report will be required only where the contents of the previous [Phase 1 desk top study] report indicates to the Local Planning Authority that the next phase of investigation/ remediation is required. Reason: To ensure that the site contamination is satisfactorily remediated in the interests of public safety and amenity.

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

AREA 1 DEVELOPMENT CONTROL COMMITTEE – 16TH FEBRUARY 2010

ITEM 17 (CONT’D) APPLICATION NO. 2008/1615

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

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

16 Piling or any other foundation designs using penetrative methods shall not be permitted other than with the express written consent of the Local Planning Authority, which may be given for those parts of the site where it has been demonstrated that there is no resultant unacceptable risk to groundwater. The development shall be carried out in accordance with the approved details. Reason: To protect the water environment.

17 A detailed scheme for the eradication of Japanese Knotweed shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority, and shall be implemented in accordance with the approved scheme. Reason: In the interests of the ecology and amenity of the area.

18 No development shall take place until a waste management plan for the control, management, storage and disposal of demolition waste / excavated material has been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. Reason: To ensure sustainability principles are adopted during the development.

19 The development hereby approved shall not be occupied until a scheme for the comprehensive and integrated foul water, surface water and land drainage for the site has been implemented in accordance with details to be submitted to and approved by the Local Planning Authority. Reason: To ensure that a satisfactory comprehensive means of drainage is achieved and that no adverse impact occurs to the environment or the existing public sewerage system.

AREA 1 DEVELOPMENT CONTROL COMMITTEE – 16TH FEBRUARY 2010

ITEM 17 (CONT’D) APPLICATION NO. 2008/1615

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

21 No built development approved by this permission shall take place within the area defined as zone C1 / C2 on the Welsh Assembly Government's development advice map (DAM), referred to under TAN15: Development and Flood Risk (July 2004). Development shall only take place on those areas currently above 16.5 m AOD. Reason: To reduce the risk of flooding to the proposed development and future occupants.

22 No development approved by this permission shall be commenced until a Method Statement detailing all necessary pollution prevention measures for the construction phase of the development is submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. Reason: In order to prevent pollution.

23 No development shall take place within the area indicated (i.e. the area of archaeological interest) until the applicant, or their agents or successors in title, has secured the implementation of a programme of archaeological work in accordance with a written scheme of investigation which has been submitted by the applicant and approved in writing by the local planning authority. Reason: To safeguard this area of archaeological interest.

INFORMATIVES

1 The phased land contamination condition shall incorporate the following information:

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

Phase 2: Detailed Investigation this shall: ¢ Provide detailed site-specific information on substances in or on the ground, geology, and surface/groundwater. AREA 1 DEVELOPMENT CONTROL COMMITTEE – 16TH FEBRUARY 2010

ITEM 17 (CONT’D) APPLICATION NO. 2008/1615

Provide for a more detailed investigation of the site in order to confirm the presence or absence of those potentially significant source-pathway-receptor pollutant linkages identified in Phase 1. Note; where any substance should be encountered that may affect any controlled waters the applicant, or representative, must contact the Environment Agency in order to agree any further investigations requred. In the event that the need for remediation is identified the applicant shall submit a subsequent detailed [Phase 3] report to the Local Planning Authority, viz:

Phase 3: Options Appraisal/ Remediation Strategy this shall: ¢ Include an appraisal of the proposed options for reducing the environmental and human health risks identified in Phase 1 and Phase 2 to an acceptable level, in a managed and documented manner, to best practice and current technical guidance, and the remediation measures required and how they are to be undertaken.

Phase 3: Verification Report ¢ A verification report will be produced providing details of the data that will be collected in order to demonstrate that the approved remediation works have been ca ried out satisfactorily, remediation targets have been achieved and identifying any requirements for longer term monitoring/ measurement.

[See Footnote]

Footnote The applicants attention should be drawn to the following documents: " EA/WLGA: "Land Contamination - a Guide for Developers" and its associated briefing note which can be found on the Pollution Control - Contaminated Land pages of the City & County of Swansea website http://www.swansea.gov.uk/index.cfm?articleid=1084 " LQM/CIEH: "Generic Assessment Criteria for Human Health Risk Assessment"[ISBN 0-9547474-3-7][recently published in respect of various heavy metals, petroleum hydrocarbons, polyaromatic hydrocarbons and chlorinated solvents NOT addressed by CLEA guidelines]. " DEFRA - Industry Profiles: "Industrial Activities Which Have Used Materials Using Radioactivity" [March 2006] http://www.defra.gov.uk/ENVIRONMENT/land/contaminated/pdf/industryprofile060 3.pdf " Environment Agency Guidance Documents: " Briefing Note 1 - Potential sources of radioactive contamination " Briefing Note 2 - An overview of land contaminated with radioactive substances " Briefing Note 3 - Developing land contaminated with radioactivity " Briefing Note 4 - Contaminated land regime (Part 2A) and radioactivity " Briefing Note 5 - Land contaminated with radioactivity on nuclear licensed sites " Briefing Note 6 - Land contaminated with radioactivity and the Radioactive Substances Act 1993 " Briefing Note 7 - Voluntary remediation of land contaminated with radioactivity AREA 1 DEVELOPMENT CONTROL COMMITTEE – 16TH FEBRUARY 2010

ITEM 17 (CONT’D) APPLICATION NO. 2008/1615

" Briefing Note 8 - Land contaminated with radioactivity and the principles of radiation protection " Radioactive contaminated land glossary http://www.environmenta- gency.gov.uk/subjects/landquality/113813/1442829/?version=1&lang=_e

PLANS

AS_02 site location plan, AS_00 sections, aerials and photo montages received 31st July 2008), Environmental Impact Assessment - received 31 Oct. 2008), Design and Access Statement (amended information received 21 Oct. 2009). AL 28 (amended plan received 21 Oct. 2009), AS (amended plan 21 Oct. 2009).

AREA 1 DEVELOPMENT CONTROL COMMITTEE (37)

Swansea Administration Councillors: V N Abbott (Vice Chair) J Newbury P M Black (Non Voting) S J Rice A R A Clement (Chair) I M Richard J Evans D A Robinson J B Hague R Speht C A Holley R J Stanton D T Howells D G Sullivan Mervyn R Jones J M Thomas Mary H Jones L G Thomas R D Lewis J Woodman (Non Voting) P N May

Labour Councillors: N S Bradley (Non Voting) A Lloyd J E Burtonshaw R J Lloyd (Non Voting) W J F Davies P M Matthews C R Doyle J T Miles R Francis-Davies Hazel M Morris M J Hedges (Non Voting) B G Owen D H Hopkins D Phillips B J Hynes G Phillips D H James P B Smith (Non Voting) W (Billy) E A Jones (Non Voting) R C Stewart E T Kirchner (Non Voting) C Thomas

Communities of Swansea Councillors: M E Gibbs R L Smith