P/2016/0324 Haulage Depot, the Old Station Yard, Pen Y Bont, Oswestry

Planning, Taxi Licensing and Rights of Way Committee Report

Application No: P/2016/0324 Grid Ref: 321005.54 323474.43

Community Llansantffraid Valid Date: Officer: Council: 05/04/2016 Kate Bowen

Applicant: Mr Doug Williams, Bryn Vyrnwy, Llansantffraid-ym-Mechain, Powys, SY22 6AY

Location: Haulage Depot, The Old Station Yard, Pen y Bont, Oswestry

Proposal: Erection of up to 5 dwellings, construction of vehicular access and installation of septic tank (outline)

Application Application for Outline Planning Permission Type:

Reason for Committee determination

The Local Member has exercised their right to call-in the application for determination by the Committee.

Site Location and Description

The application site extends to 0.45 hectares and is located to the south of the settlement boundary of Pen-y-bont Llanerch Emrys, on the western side of the C2003 class three highway. To the north east of the application site, across the C2003 highway, there is a cluster of properties known as The Old New Inn and New Inn Cottages. The planning history of the site indicates that planning permission was granted for ‘use of land as heavy goods haulage depot’ in 1993 and the site is currently vacant with a portakabin on site. The site consists of a mixed hard surfaced and vegetated area bound by fencing along the eastern boundary, a hedgerow along the southern boundary and hedging and trees along the northern and western boundaries.

The application is submitted in outline with access to be considered at the outline stage for the erection of up to five detached dwellings with various indicative scales as set out below:

 One, three bedroom detached house (147 square metres, 8.4m x 9.4m); and  Four, four bedroom detached houses (141 square metres to 189 square metres, 8.7m x 11m to 11m x 12m).

Eaves height will be approximately 4.8m with ridge heights of up to 9m. There is a mixture of detached and attached garages indicated to have eaves heights of 2.2m and ridge heights of 5.35m.

The indicative layout indicates that access would be gained off the C2003 highway leading to turning and parking facilities for each dwelling. During the processing of the application, the

proposed method of drainage has been amended from a septic tank with discharge to a soakaway on site to discharge to the watercourse to the north west of the application site.

Consultee Response

Llansantffraid Community Council

At a recent meeting of the above council, planning application P2016/0324 was discussed and the council is in favour of supporting this application as it was felt that the area is an eyesore and needs to be tidied up and also the strength of the bridge was questioned in regards to HGVs travelling over it.

Llangedwyn Community Council

Llangedwyn Community Council is in favour of additional housing in the area, particularly if it meets the needs of the local community. We are, therefore, in support of the outline application and look forward to seeing more detailed plans if and when available.

PCC Building Control

Please note building regulations required on this application.

PCC Highway Authority

The HA is unable to support this application as the site is simply not sustainable and has no pedestrian links back into the village. I appreciate it has a former use but the location of this access for residential purposes is too close to the junction of the C2003/U2043 as it would cause driving confusion as to when a vehicle is entering which road.

PCC Land Drainage

Thank you for consulting the LLFA.

In respect to flood risk, I note that the TAN 15 Development Advise Maps designate part of the development site as category B. You may want to consult NRW, particularly with reference to any Section 105(2) Survey and indicative flood map data.

With regard to surface water drainage, the proposal is to utilise soakaway systems. The use of soakaways is commended and should be investigated in the first instance for surface water disposal. Porosity tests and the sizing of the soakaways should be designed in accordance with BRE Digest 365 to cater for a 1 in 100 year return storm event plus an allowance of 30% for climate change.

Full details, calculations and location of the porosity tests and the proposed soakaways should be submitted and approved in writing by the LPA.

If soakaways are not feasible, drainage calculations to limit the discharge rate from the site equivalent to a Greenfield run-off rate. The attenuation drainage system should be designed so that storm events of up to 1 in 100 year + 30% for climate change and will not cause flooding of any property either within the proposed development or any other in the vicinity.

There must be no discharge to a surface water body or sewer that results from the first 5mm of any rainfall event.

Although rainwater harvesting for the use of washing purposes is to be encouraged, it cannot be taken into account when sizing an attenuation system as the storage facility may be full when a storm event occurs.

No surface water run-off shall flow onto the public highway.

Reason: To ensure that the proposed surface water drainage systems for the site are fully compliant with regulations and are of robust design.

Informative: The applicant should consider employing measures such as the following: · Water Butts · Permeable paving on any new driveway/paved area · Greywater recycling system

Wales & West Utilities

According to our mains records Wales & West Utilities has no apparatus in the area of your enquiry. However Gas pipes owned by other GT's and also privately owned may be present in this area. Information with regard to such pipes should be obtained from the owners.

Safe digging practices, in accordance with HS(G)47, must be used to verify and establish the actual position of mains, pipes, services and other apparatus on site before any mechanical plant is used. It is your responsibility to ensure that this information is provided to all persons (either direct labour or contractors) working for you on or near gas apparatus.

Please note that the plans are only valid for 28 days from the date of issue and updated plans must be requested before any work commences on site if this period has expired.

Severn Trent Water

Thank you for the opportunity to comment on this planning application. Please find our response noted below:

Waste Water Comments:

With Reference to the above planning application the company’s observations regarding sewerage are as follows.

I can confirm we have no comment to make as no foul sewage or surface water is to discharge to the public sewerage system.

PCC Environmental Health

First response:

I will require more information regarding the plant and percolation test results for the proposed development.

Has the applicant considered a private treatment plant and a discharge into the river?

Second response:

I did a site visit on the 3rd of May and saw the percolation test holes. Whilst the ground conditions on the site should not differ the holes have been dug where the proposed dwellings are to be placed. The soil appeared to compromise heavily of gravel/shale and drained well.

Third response:

Provided that the foul drainage discharges into the watercourse I have no objection to the application.

PCC Affordable Housing

I am happy to support the application however, I will be looking forward to receiving details regarding the proposal for an Affordable Housing contribution so it can then be agreed as part of this application.

I can confirm the majority of housing need for the area concerned is for 1 and 2 bedroomed properties only.

PCC Contaminated Land

The following document has been submitted in support of Planning Application P/2016/0324:

 Brownfield Solutions Ltd ‘Pan-y-Bont, Llanerch Emrys, Powys: Desk Study Assessment Report’ (ref: WG/C3134/1225) February 2016.

Based on the information submitted in the above referenced report the following advice is provided for the consideration of Development Control.

Advice Consultations 1. Paragraph 3.6.2 of the ‘Desk Study Assessment Report’ states: “Pen-y-Bont, Llanerch Emrys, is not in an area that requires Radon precautions in foundations in accordance with BRE Report 211 ‘Radon – Guidance on protective measures for new dwellings’ 2007 Edition”.

Development Control should consult with Building Control to confirm the requirements for Radon protection measures. It is requested that any advice from Building Control is also provided to this Section.

2. It is stated in paragraph 4.5.12 of the ‘Desk Study Assessment Report’ that: “The risks to Controlled Waters from the identified on-site sources of contamination are deemed to be moderate”.

Development Control should consult with Natural Resources Wales (NRW) to confirm the requirements for the investigation and assessment of the risks associated with Controlled Waters. It is requested that any advice from NRW is also provided to this Section.

Preliminary Risk Assessment 3. It has been stated in paragraph 3.2.6, of the ‘Desk Study Assessment Report’, that: “There are no potable water abstraction licenses recorded within 2000m of the site”. Records available to this Section identify that the following private water supplies are located within 1000m if the application site:

 Borehole (280m to South) Four Crosses Farm (Grid Ref: 320873, 323209)  Spring (850m to North) Nant Goch (Grid Ref: 321376, 324315)  Spring (1000m to Northwest) Abercynllaith (Grid Ref: 320097, 324011)

The preliminary risk assessment and conceptual site model should be updated accordingly.

4. The potential human health and controlled waters receptors associated with the application site have been identified in subsection 4.4 ‘Receptors’ of the ‘Desk Study Assessment Report’.

It is recommended, for completeness, that the residential properties/cottages located approximately 50m to the Northeast of the application site should be included in the preliminary conceptual site model as potential off-site receptors.

5. Paragraph 4.6.2 of the ‘Desk Study Assessment Report’ states: “Made ground was identified as a potential source of ground gas however thick and widespread made ground deposits are not anticipated at the site and the gas generation potential is likely to be low to very low. The risk is deemed moderate/low”.

Furthermore, it is stated in paragraph 4.6.3 that: “In accordance with CIRIA C665 the recommended gas monitoring programme should comprise 6-9 visits over a 3-6 month period”.

Based on the identified ground gas source and the potential risk associated with the source it is recommended that consideration could be given to employing the approach to ground gas risk assessment prescribed in the CL:AIRE Research Bulletin ‘RB17: A Pragmatic Approach to Ground Gas Risk Assessment’ (2012).

6. It is detailed in paragraph 6.1.2, of the ‘Desk Study Assessment Report’ that: “Potential on- site sources of contamination have been identified associated with the historic uses of the site. The potential risks to human health from contaminants associated with the railway and coal yard are considered to be moderate and a Phase 2 investigation is recommended to quantify the risks”.

A detailed proposal for the intrusive site investigation should be submitted for review and approval prior to the works being undertaken.

Furthermore, the intrusive site investigation should be designed, justified and completed in accordance with current guidance and best practice, such as; BS10175:2011:A1:2013 ‘Investigation of Potentially Contaminated Sites – Code of Practice’ and BE8576:2013

‘Guidance on Investigations for Ground Gases – Permanent Gases and Volatile Organic Compounds (VOCs)’.

Summary The ‘Desk Study Assessment Report’ has identified potential risks, associated with the presence of land contamination, to the proposed development and has provided outline recommendations to investigate these potential risks. Therefore, it is advised that the following Condition and Note to the applicant should be included on any permission granted for Planning Application P/2016/0324:

Condition A Condition 1. Site Characterisation An investigation and risk assessment, in addition to any assessment provided with the planning application, must be completed in accordance with a scheme to assess the nature and extent of any contamination on the site, whether or not it originates on the site. The contents of the scheme are subject to the approval in writing of the Local Planning Authority. The investigation and risk assessment must be undertaken by competent persons (a contaminated land specialist with proven experience within the contaminated land industry) and a written report of the findings must be produced. The written report is subject to the approval in writing of the Local Planning Authority. The report of the findings must include:

(i) a survey of the extent, scale and nature of contamination; (ii) an assessment of the potential risks to: • human health, • property (existing or proposed) including buildings, crops, livestock, pets, woodland and service lines and pipes, • adjoining land, • groundwaters and surface waters, • ecological systems, • archaeological sites and ancient monuments;

(iii) an appraisal of remedial options, and proposal of the preferred option(s).

This must be conducted in accordance with DEFRA and the Environment Agency’s ‘Model Procedures for the Management of Land Contamination, CLR 11’ and the WLGA document ‘Development of land affected by contamination: a guide for developers’ 2012 .

Item (iii) above should not be submitted until written approval has been obtained from the Local Planning Authority for items (i) & (ii).

Condition 2. Submission of Remediation Scheme A detailed remediation scheme to bring the site to a condition suitable for the intended use by removing unacceptable risks to human health, buildings and other property and the natural and historical environment must be prepared, and is subject to the approval in writing of the Local Planning Authority. The scheme must include all works to be undertaken, proposed remediation objectives and remediation criteria, timetable of works and site management procedures. The scheme must ensure that the site will not qualify as contaminated land under Part 2A of the Environmental Protection Act 1990, The Contaminated Land (Wales) Regulations 2001 in relation to the intended use of the land after remediation. The detailed

remediation scheme should not be submitted until written approval for Condition 1 has been received from the Local Planning Authority.

Condition 3. Implementation of Approved Remediation Scheme The approved remediation scheme must be carried out in accordance with its terms prior to the commencement of development other than that required to carry out remediation, unless otherwise agreed in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The Local Planning Authority must be given two weeks written notification of commencement of the remediation scheme works.

Following completion of measures identified in the approved remediation scheme, a verification report (referred to in PPS23 as a validation report) that demonstrates the effectiveness of the remediation carried out must be produced, and is subject to the approval in writing of the Local Planning Authority. The verification report contents must be agreed with the Local Planning Authority before commencement of the remediation scheme.

Condition 4. Reporting of Unexpected Contamination In the event that contamination is found at any time when carrying out the approved development that was not previously identified it must be reported in writing immediately to the Local Planning Authority. An investigation and risk assessment must be undertaken in accordance with the requirements of condition 1, and where remediation is necessary a remediation scheme must be prepared in accordance with the requirements of condition 2, which is subject to the approval in writing of the Local Planning Authority. Following completion of measures identified in the approved remediation scheme a verification report must be prepared, which is subject to the approval in writing of the Local Planning Authority in accordance with condition 3.

Condition 5. Long Term Monitoring and Maintenance A monitoring and maintenance scheme to include monitoring the long-term effectiveness of the proposed remediation over a period of duration to be agreed in writing with the Local Planning Authority and the provision of reports on the same must be prepared, both of which are subject to the approval in writing of the Local Planning Authority.

Within six months following the completion of the measures identified in that scheme and the achievement of the remediation objectives, reports that demonstrate the effectiveness of the monitoring and maintenance carried out must be produced, and submitted to the Local Planning Authority.

This must be conducted in accordance with DEFRA and the Environment Agency's 'Model Procedures for the Management of Land Contamination, CLR 11'.

Reason (common to all): To ensure that risks from land contamination to the future users of the land and neighbouring land are minimised, together with those to controlled waters, property and ecological systems, and to ensure that the development can be carried out safely without unacceptable risks to workers, neighbours and other offsite receptors [in accordance with policy ____ of the adopted Local Plan (date)].

Note to Applicant Potential Contamination

The Council’s guidance leaflet on the development of sites with potential land contamination is attached. Further advice on compliance with this condition may be obtained by contacting the Environmental Health Service on 0870 1923757.

PCC Ecologist

No response received.

Natural Resources Wales (NRW)

First response (dated 27th April 2016):

Thank you for referring the above application which NRW received by letter on the 7th of April 2016. Natural Resources Wales do not object to the proposal, subject to suitable conditions being attached to any planning permission.

Summary of Requirements:

Requirement 1 – European Protected Species - Bats

Tanat & Vyrnwy Bat Sites SAC / Hendre, Llangedwyn SSSI / Garth-eryr SSSI

The proposal site is close to two designated sites, namely Hendre, Llangedwyn SSSI (2.2 km to the West) and Garth-eryr SSSI (4.7 km to the West). The first supports a maternity roost of Lesser Horseshoe Bats, and the latter a hibernaculum for the same species. Both SSSIs are also included within Tanat & Vyrnwy Bat Sites SAC. Lesser Horseshoe Bats forage largely within 3 km of a roost, but also need good habitat connectivity between roosts used in different seasons. In this case the site of the development does not contain good habitat and neither are there connectivity implications. NRW consider that there would be no likely significant effects on the Tanat & Vrynwy Bat SAC.

NRW have also considered the possibility of impact on a further Lesser Horseshoe Bat maternity roost at Pentre Mawr, approximately 0.5 km SW of the proposal. The site is recently discovered and undesignated although NRW consider it probable that the bats are part of the same meta-population as those in the Tanat & Vrynwy Bat SAC. Examination of an aerial photograph indicates that there are two good flight routes to the Afon Tanat and neither of these routes include the site of the development proposal which is not well connected by hedges or trees in a southerly direction. We have reached a conclusion that the proposed development would not impact on the Lesser Horseshoe Bat roost at Pentre Mawr.

Requirement 1 – European Protected Species - Bats

European Protected Species – Bats

NRW note that the ecological report submitted in support of the above application (Land at Pen-y-bont Station Yard, Preliminary Ecological Assessment (February 2016) by Turnstone Ecology Ltd) is satisfactory. The report did not identify the presence of part of the Tanat and Vyrnwy bat sites SAC within 2km to the west, however, this has been considered in our comments on protected sites above.

We consider that the proposed development represents a lower risk for bats, as defined in our guidance document ‘Natural Resources Wales Approach to Bats and Planning (2015)’. Bats and their breeding sites and resting places are protected under the Conservation of Habitats and Species Regulations 2010 (as amended). Any development that would contravene the protection afforded to bats under the Regulations would require a derogation licence from Natural Resources Wales. A licence may only be authorised if: i. There is no satisfactory alternative and ii. The action authorised will not be detrimental to the maintenance of the population of the species concerned at a favourable conservation status in its natural range. In addition, iii. The development works to be authorised must be for the purposes of preserving public health or safety, or for other imperative reasons of overriding public interest, including those of a social or economic nature and beneficial consequences of primary importance for the environment.

Paragraph 6.3.7 of Technical Advice Note 5: Nature Conservation and Planning (TAN5) states that your Authority should not grant planning permission without having satisfied itself that the proposed development either would not impact adversely on any bats on the site or that, in its opinion, all three conditions for the eventual grant of a licence are likely to be satisfied.

In this case, the ecological report concludes that the proposed development is not likely to harm or disturb the bats or their breeding sites and resting places at this site, provided that avoidance measures described in the report, in section 4.3.5 are implemented. Also, because the development represents a lower risk to bats in this case, we do not consider that the development is likely to be detrimental to the maintenance of the population of the species concerned at a favourable conservation status in its natural range.

Therefore, we do not object to the proposal, subject to; i. The implementation of a site lighting plan. Security lighting must be installed in a way that minimise/avoid light spill in areas that could potentially be used by foraging and commuting bats (all tree lines and hedgerows surrounding the site) and otters (river corridor). Low level and low wattage, as well as low pressure sodium or high pressure sodium lamps, should be preferred to mercury or metal halide lamps. ii. The retention of existing hedgerows and tree lines around the perimeter of the development site to maintain habitat connectivity for bats and wildlife. A Root Protection Zone must be established and fenced off to protect hedgerows and trees during the construction phase.

This advice applies to the proposal in its present form. If the plans are changed in ways that may harm or disturb the bats or their breeding sites and resting places at this site, you would need a revised report that takes account of such changes. Please consult us again if a revised report concludes that this is no longer a lower risk case. Otherwise, our advice for lower risk cases would still apply and we would recommend that you secured the avoidance measures described in the revised report.

Contaminated Land

The geoscience team have examined the following reports that were submitted with the planning application and have no concerns.  Planning Application Supporting Statement (including Design and Access Statement). Berrys, report reference SA21445 Rev.01, date unknown.  Desk Study Assessment Report. Brownfield Solutions Limited, WG/C3134/1225, February 2016.

With regards the potential for land contamination, NRW note that the desk study assessment report suggests intrusive site investigation (Phase 2) to determine the level of potential contamination. We consider the site to be low priority given the environmental setting and therefore do not require further consultation, but we offer the following information in relation to this planning application.

Contaminated Land - Advice to LPA

Natural Resources Wales considers that the controlled waters at this site are of low environmental sensitivity, therefore we will not be providing detailed site-specific advice or comments with regards to land contamination issues for this site.

It is recommended that the requirements of Planning Policy Wales and the Environment Agency Guiding Principles for Land Contamination (GPLC 1, 2, and 3), March 2010, should be followed. GPLC can be downloaded from the Environment Agency website.

These comments are based on our assumption that gross contamination is not present at this location. If, during development, gross contamination is found to be present at the site the Local Planning Authority may wish to re-consult the Natural Resources Wales.

Foul Drainage

NRW note that this outline planning application will present the details of the foul and surface water disposal in greater details as part of the Reserved Matters application. Given the size of the site the discharge from the proposed septic tank may require an Environmental Permit from NRW and we recommend early consultation with NRW on the permit application.

Government policy states that, where practicable, foul drainage should be discharged to the mains sewer. Where this is not possible and private sewage treatment / disposal facilities are utilised, they must be installed and maintained in accordance with British Standard 6297 and Approved Document H of the Building Regulations 2000. You should also have regard to Welsh Office Circular 10/99 in respect of planning requirements for non mains sewerage. The applicant will need to apply for a Permit or Exemption, if they wish to discharge anything apart from uncontaminated surface water to a watercourse/ditch. They may also need to apply for a Permit from our National Permitting Team to allow certain discharges into ground. They must obtain any necessary Permit prior to works starting on site. The Welsh Government has also advised that all septic tanks and small sewage treatment plant discharges in Wales will need to be registered. More information, including a step by step bilingual guide to registering, is available on our website at the following link https://naturalresources.wales/media/2879/septic-tank-registration-guidance.pdf?lang=en

Flood Risk

DAM B indicates an area known to have been flooded in the past evidenced by sedimentary deposits. DAM B is used as part of a precautionary approach to indicate where site levels should be checked against the extreme (0.1%) flood level. If site levels are greater than the flood levels used to define adjacent extreme flood outline there is no need to consider flood risk further.

We have examined lidar data from the Lle Geo-Portal and can confirm site levels are greater than adjacent extreme flood levels. This assessment is based on desk study only, we are not liable for any variations in levels that may exist.

Of course, as with any highly vulnerable development, it is advised that finished floor levels are set a nominal distance above adjacent ground level, for the perimeter of the dwelling, in order to mitigate against flash flooding from sources and other unmapped sources

The Natural Environment and Rural Communities (NERC) Act (2006)

Please note that we have not considered possible effects on all species and habitats listed in section 42 of the Natural Environment and Rural Communities (NERC) Act 2006, or on the Local Biodiversity Action Plan or other local natural heritage interests. To comply with your authority's duty under section 40 of the NERC Act, to have regard to conserving biodiversity, your decision should take account of possible adverse effects on such interests. We recommend that you seek further advice from your authority's internal ecological adviser and/or nature conservation organisations such as the local Wildlife Trust, RSPB, etc. The Wales Biodiversity Partnership's web site has guidance for assessing proposals that have implications for section 42 habitats and species (www.biodiversitywales.org.uk).

Second response:

We have no comments to make regarding these drainage proposals. Our response from 27th April Ref: CAS-17635-M6V1 is still valid.

PCC Planning Policy

No response received.

Councillor Representations

County Councillor Gwynfor Thomas

First response:

In respect of planning application P/2016/0324 (Haulage Depot, Penybont LE), I would like to exercise the call in procedure to bring the application to committee. I believe there would be a planning gain from this application to convert from its current use to residential. It has longstanding issues within its current usage and residents locally feel that residential usage would see an end to these problems. It would further benefit highways as its current usage allows it to have large vehicles using an unsuitable road.

I have discussed this application with cllr. Aled Davies who shares my thoughts. It does not appear that he has received notification of the application and in some respects this has a

greater relevance to his ward rather than mine due to its locality. It would obviously bring much needed housing into that community.

I trust this meets with the regulations to call this to committee, if you require any further information do not hesitate to contact me.

Second response:

Thank you for your telephone call on Monday.

I have been reflecting on our conversation and I visited the application on line last evening. I notice there is no communication recorded from Llansantffraid and Llangedwyn community councils. Can you confirm whether you are in possession of them because I understand that there are some very relevant supportive comments particularly surrounding the development boundary.

I would further add that I am not aware of any opposition locally to this application. It is clear that the surrounding communities see the application as more desirable than a return to its current usage. There are massive problems with large vehicles using the adjacent Winllan Road and residents see this application as a planning gain.

I acknowledge your concerns as regards the development boundary and I understand that the agent has made relevant comments as regards this issue and I do not wish to be repetitive but reading his comments sent to me yesterday I felt that the fact that the yard was the old railway station, made it very relevant because it established a connection with the local village. I note that the agent’s correspondence was also not available on line.

Many thanks once again for your attention to this application.

Public Representations

Following display of a site notice and publicity in the local press, one public representation received and summarised as follows:

 This brownfield site is preferable to any greenfield site in this area; and  The visual impact would be minimised if the dwellings were low rise and existing boundary hedges were retained.

In addition, a representation has been received from the applicant and is summarised as follows:

The site was purchased several years ago with the aim of using it as a haulage depot, but over the years the need reduced. Many years ago full planning was given for a five bedroom dwelling house and it is felt that this site is best suited for such a scheme. Also taking into consideration the structures that would be erected to accommodate a haulage business (large obtrusive buildings) in an otherwise residential area.

Planning History

M/2004/1211 - Outline application for residential development (5 dwellings), installation of septic tanks and formation of vehicular access (resubmission M2004 0562). Refused 06.12.2004

M/2004/562 – Outline application for residential development (5 dwellings), installation of septic tanks and formation of vehicular access. Refused 06.09.2004

M23727 - Use of land as a haulage depot (heavy goods), siting of temporary residential caravan (during construction of proposed dwelling) and siting of temporary building. Conditional consent 01.10.1993

M20935 – Erection of a dwelling, construction of new vehicular access and installation of septic tank. Conditional consent subject to section 106 agreement 07.06.1991

M19361 – Outline permission for erection of a dwelling. Conditional consent 06.07.1990

M17817 – Outline for erection of a dwelling. Refused 25.11.1989

Principal Planning Constraints

 Flood Zone B  Class 3 Road C2003  Unclassified highway  Open countryside

Principal Planning Policies

National Planning Policy

Planning Policy Wales (Edition 8, 2016)

TAN 1: Joint Housing Land Availability Studies (2015) TAN 2: Planning and Affordable Housing (2006) TAN 5: Nature Conservation and Planning (2009) TAN 6: Planning for Sustainable Rural Communities (2010) TAN 12: Design (2016) TAN 15: Development and Flood Risk (2004) TAN 18: Transport (2007) TAN 20: Planning and the Welsh Language (2013) TAN 23: Economic Development (2014)

Welsh Government Circular 016/2014 – The Use of Planning Conditions for Development Management

Welsh Office Circular 13/97 - Planning Obligations

Welsh Office Circular 10/99 - Planning requirements in respect of the use of non-mains sewerage incorporating septic tanks in new development

Welsh Office Circular 61/96 – Planning and the Historic Environment: Historic Buildings and Conservation Areas

Welsh Office Circular 22/87: Development of Contaminated Land

Local Planning Policy

Powys Unitary Development Plan (2010)

UDP SP1 – Social, Community and Cultural Sustainability UDP SP2 - Strategic Settlement Hierarchy UDP SP3 – Natural, Historic and Built Heritage UDP SP5 – Housing Developments UDP SP6 – Development and Transport UDP GP1 – Development Control UDP GP2 – Planning Obligations UDP GP3 – Design and Energy Conservation UDP GP4 – Highway and Parking Requirements UDP GP5 – Welsh Language and Culture UDP ENV1 – Agricultural Land UDP ENV2 – Safeguarding the Landscape UDP ENV3 – Safeguarding Biodiversity and Natural Habitats UDP ENV4 – Internationally Important Sites UDP ENV5 – Nationally Important Sites UDP ENV7 – Protected Species UDP ENV14 – Listed Buildings UDP CS3 – Additional Demand for Community Facilities UDP HP3 – Housing Land Availability UDP HP4 – Settlement Development Boundaries and Capacities UDP HP5 – Residential Developments UDP HP6 – Dwellings in the Open Countryside UDP HP7 – Affordable Housing within Settlements UDP HP8 – Affordable Housing Adjoining Settlements with Development Boundaries UDP HP10 – Affordability Criteria UDP TR2 – Tourist Attractions and Development Areas UDP DC11 – Non-mains Sewerage Treatment UDP DC13 – Surface Water Drainage UDP DC15 – Development on Unstable or Contaminated Land UDP RL2 – Provision of Outdoor Playing and Recreation Space

Affordable Housing for Local Needs Supplementary Planning Guidance (SPG) Approved September 2010 Updated July 2011

Powys Residential Design Guide (2004)

RDG=Powys Residential Design Guide NAW=National Assembly for Wales TAN= Technical Advice Note UDP=Powys Unitary Development Plan, MIPPS=Ministerial Interim Planning Policy Statement

Officer Appraisal

Section 38 (6) of the Planning and Compulsory Purchase Act 2004

Members are advised to consider this application in accordance with Section 38 (6) of the Planning and Compulsory Purchase Act 2004, which requires that, if regard is to be had to the development plan for the purpose of any determination to be made under the Planning Acts, the determination must be made in accordance with the plan unless material considerations indicate otherwise.

Background

Members will note that planning application M/2004/1211 for residential development (5 dwellings), installation of septic tanks and formation of vehicular access (resubmission M2004 0562) was refused. The reason for refusal was as follows:

1. It is the general policy of the local planning authority and the approved Powys Structure Plan to confine new residential development within the physical limits of those settlements defined in development plans, in order to safeguard the character of the open countryside and economise on the provision of services. The local planning authority consider that insufficient reasons have been shown in this case to warrant a departure from this general policy and the application is therefore contrary to Local Plan Policy HD10: Housing in the Countryside of the Draft Montgomeryshire Local Plan 1995 and Policy HD11: Housing Development in the Countryside of the Interim Planning Guidance 1997.

Consent was granted under reference M23727 for use of land as heavy goods haulage depot in 1993 along with the temporary siting of a caravan during the construction of a dwelling and a temporary building. Permission (subject to a section 106 agreement) was granted for a single dwelling in 1993.

Principle of development

The proposed development lies wholly outside the development boundary of Pen-y-bont Llanerch Emrys as detailed on inset map M185 (Powys Unitary Development Plan) and would result in five dwellings being constructed outside the settlement boundary.

Outside of settlement boundaries, UDP Policy HP4 applies and states that ‘outside settlement boundaries, proposals for new residential development will only be approved where they comply with UDP Policies HP6, HP8 or HP9’. Policy HP6 relates to rural enterprise dwellings, policy HP8 relates to affordable dwellings adjoining a settlement boundary and Policy HP9 relates to affordable dwellings within rural settlements. It is considered that the proposed development does not comply with UDP Policy HP6, HP8 or HP9. The proposed development is therefore not in accordance with the UDP and should be considered a departure.

Housing land supply

The departure is being justified by the applicant on the basis that Powys County Council does not have a 5 year housing land supply.

Paragraph 9.2.3 of Planning Policy Wales states that ‘Local planning authorities must ensure that sufficient land is genuinely available or will become available to provide a 5 year supply of land for housing judged against the general objectives and the scale and location of development provided for in the development plan.’

The Powys Joint Housing Land Availability Study (JHLAS) 2015 states that there was 1.9 years supply of housing land in the Powys Local Planning Authority (LPA) area. Failure to have a 5-year housing land supply is an important material consideration that should be taken into account when determining this scheme. Technical Advice Note 1: Joint Housing Land Availability Studies (2015) states as follows:

“The housing land supply should also be treated as a material consideration in determining planning applications for housing. Where the current study shows a land supply below the 5 year requirement or where the local planning authority has been unable to undertake a study, the need to increase supply should be given considerable weight when dealing with planning applications provided that the development would otherwise comply with development plan and national planning policies”.

The JHLAS identified a significant undersupply of housing land within Powys. As mentioned above, TAN 1 confirms that the need to increase supply should be given considerable weight but only where the development would otherwise comply with development plan and national planning policies.

Members are advised that the lack of housing land supply should be primarily considered on a county-wide basis. One site was allocated within the UDP for residential development (site M185 HA1 – Land opposite Pen-y-bont Inn extending to 0.39 ha) and this site has been developed.

In light of the above, whilst acknowledging that the proposal does constitute a departure from the development plan, Members are advised that the lack of a five year housing supply in Powys does need to be given considerable weight in the determination of this application. However, before reaching a decision, the scheme will need to be considered against other polices contained within the UDP in order for a balanced view to be made on the acceptability of the development overall.

Sustainable location

When providing additional housing it is important to consider whether the scheme can be considered to be sustainable development. This can relate to a wide range of matters including public transport provision and access to education, employment opportunities and other services.

Pen-y-bont Llanerch Emrys is classified as a small village in the UDP and it is noted that the village is served by limited community services and facilities consisting of a public house. It is also noted that the village lies on the B4396 highway which hosts a public bus route. It is also noted that the larger settlements of Llansantffraid Ym Mechain and Oswestry are located approximately 3 miles and 7 miles distant respectively and that these settlements host a range of facilities and services. The nearest primary school is located at Llangedwyn approximately 2 miles distant.

The site is located approximately 139 metres to the south of the southern part of the settlement boundary of Pen-y-bont Llanerch Emrys. There is no footway to link the site with the village.

The site has been put forward as previously developed (brownfield) land. Paragraph 4.9.1 of Planning Policy Wales advises that previously developed (or brownfield) land should, wherever possible, be used in preference to greenfield sites, particularly those of high agricultural or ecological value. PPW further advises that many previously developed sites in built-up areas may be considered suitable for development because their re-use will promote sustainability objectives. Figure 4.4 of Planning Policy Wales includes a definition of previously developed land:

‘Previously developed land is that which is or was occupied by a permanent structure (excluding agricultural or forestry buildings) and associated fixed surface infrastructure. The curtilage of the development is included, as are defence buildings, and land used for mineral extraction and waste disposal where provision for restoration has not been made through development management procedures.

Excluded from the definition are: • land and buildings currently in use for agricultural or forestry purposes; • land in built-up areas which has not been developed previously, for example parks, recreation grounds and allotments, even though these areas may contain certain urban features such as paths, pavilions and other buildings; • land where the remains of any structure or activity have blended into the landscape over time so that they can reasonably be considered part of the natural surroundings; • previously developed land the nature conservation value of which could outweigh the re-use of the site; and • previously developed land subsequently put to an amenity use’.

The site is currently vacant and the applicant states that two local haulage firms have used the site in the past following the M23727 consent. The contents of the Committee report for planning application M/2004/0562 state that the permission was implemented. The submission states that the use has been scaled back in recent years, however the planning permission granted under reference M23727 enabled the operation of several 30 ton tipper lorries operating of a 24 hour basis and also a 38 ton articulated vehicle. There is a portakabin on site along with piled materials, and whilst these items are not of a significant scale and the use is not noticeably in operation at present, because of the presence of the portakabin and the piled materials, it cannot be said that the remains of the structure or activity have blended into the landscape so that they can reasonably be considered part of the natural surroundings. Therefore, it is considered that the site can be considered previously developed land, subject to the use having been commenced lawfully and having been abandoned. Therefore, whilst the HGV use is not currently apparent on site, it is recognised that the proposal would have benefits in terms of removing the potential for impacts upon the amenities of the area including noise, disturbance, odour and dust.

In light of the above considerations, Members are advised that the sustainability of the development at this location is considered borderline by Development Management.

Affordable housing provision

Given that the proposal is for five dwellings, the UDP requires a proportion of affordable housing. UDP Policy HP7 states that a proportion of affordable housing will be sought based on the extent and type of need as identified by the Council’s Housing Needs Survey, successive surveys or other reliable robust data sources and the nature of the site.

The submission puts forward a financial contribution to the provision of affordable housing because the Viability Assessment forming part of the evidence base for the LDP identifies a guideline of 10% affordable provision in this area of Powys. The Council’s Affordable Housing Officer has advised that the majority of housing need for the area concerned is for 1 and 2 bedroomed properties only. The Affordable Housing Officer further advises that they are happy to support the application, however they will be looking forward to receiving details regarding the proposal for an Affordable Housing contribution.

Therefore, the Affordable Housing Officer provides evidence of housing need in the locality, albeit for smaller properties. The outline submission indicates a mixture of dwellings, however Members are advised that this scale is indicative only with scale being a reserved matter for future consideration.

The applicant has offered to provide less than the current 30-35% proportion advised that is normally achievable within the UDP and as a financial contribution rather than on-site provision. The UDP supporting text to Policy HP7 emphasises that:

‘The negotiation process will be the key to actual provision by ensuring that each site is capable of providing the necessary subsidy and yet still able to be developed economically. All negotiations for the provision of affordable housing will be based on the characteristics - development costs, constraints and nature – of each individual site and whilst all eligible sites will be expected to contribute, the degree of provision actually achieved will vary in relation to the circumstances of each site. Although the scale of affordable housing to be provided will be a matter for negotiation for each individual site, as a guideline, proportions of between 30- 35% should normally be achievable and this is in line with the level of need identified in the Housing Needs Study 2002.’

The submission contends that the CIL Viability Assessment provides a more up to date and robust basis for determining the affordable housing contribution than the now historic “guideline” figure contained within the UDP. Whilst the proposed provision of the financial contribution would equate to a lower proportion than that identified within the UDP and on- site affordable housing provision is the preferred method of delivery set out by the UDP and SPG, officers are aware that the viability evidence of the Local Development Plan is currently being reviewed and updated. It is understood that it is likely that the affordable housing provision requirement will be lower than that currently required under the Unitary Development Plan. Therefore, if the proposal is considered acceptable in all other respects, Members will need to consider whether the proposed financial contribution is acceptable.

Crime reduction

Paragraph 4.11.12 of Planning Policy Wales advises that ‘Local authorities are under a legal obligation to consider the need to prevent and reduce crime and disorder in all decisions that they take. Crime prevention and fear of crime are social considerations to which regard must be given by local planning authorities in the preparation of development plans. They should

be reflected in any supplementary planning guidance, and may be material considerations in the determination of planning applications’.

The submission states that the site has a history of anti-social and criminal behaviour including fly-tipping and the occupation of the site on two separate occasions by travellers. Whilst these concerns are recognised, the issues put forward do not appear to have occurred frequently or in recent years, particularly given that the site is now secured (by fencing and padlocked). However, Members are advised that weight can be given the proposal’s benefits in reducing the potential for crime prevention and fear of crime at the site.

Design and layout and impact upon surrounding area – landscape and visual impacts

Guidance contained within UDP policy HP5 indicates that residential development will be permitted where the development is of an appropriate scale, form and design and general character, to reflect the overall character and appearance of the settlement and surrounding area. Whilst design and layout are reserved and will be dealt with at the reserved matters stage, it is relevant to consider whether the number of dwellings proposed could be appropriately developed on the site and whether the site is appropriate in consideration of its impact upon the surrounding area.

The site is detached from the settlement boundary of Pen-y-bont Llanerch Emrys by agricultural land and the Afon Tanat at a distance of approximately 139 metres. Opposite the site, across the highway, at a distance of approximately 50 metres is a cluster of dwellings adjacent to the Old New Inn. The site can be seen from the surrounding highway network and public rights of way in the locality. However, the principal concern is the detached form of development from the principal part of the settlement located within the development boundary and the resulting impact upon the landscape. The site is located within the LANDMAP Visual and Sensory Aspect Area of Lower Tanant Valley (MNTGMVS580) which is evaluated as moderate and summarised as follows:

‘Relatively narrow valley bottom levels with heavily cultivated farmland consisting medium to large scale field pattern clearly defined by managed hedgerows. Contains the meandering upper to mid reaches of the Afon Tanat and Rhaeadr defined with a narrow band of mixed broadleaf woodland plantings. Two main settlements at Penybontfawr and Llanrhaeadr-ym- Mochnant plus numerous scattered farmsteads. Domestic, settled setting’

The submission contends that whilst the site is located outside the settlement boundary, this does not mean that it would not be part of the settlement, despite the physical features of separation. Reference is also made within the submission to the cluster of dwellings opposite the site and that the site also accommodated the former railway station and the HGV depot. In terms of the HGV use, the visual appearance of this use is appreciated where parking of 30 ton tipper lorries and a 38 ton articulated vehicle was enabled. Whilst this use has been scaled back in recent years, the submission states that the owner has been approached by an operator of 44 ton vehicles used for the transportation of chemicals which has expressed interest in acquiring the site. The benefits of removing this use and the associated visual impact are recognised as is the opportunity to improve the character and appearance of the locality.

The indicative layout and scale indicates five, two storey dwellings, with attached and detached garages. The layout demonstrates that the site can accommodate five dwellings

and detailed design would follow at reserved matters stage, which would provide the opportunity to ensure that the dwellings have an acceptable appearance and design. Properties within the settlement and in proximity to the site are a mixture of one and two storey and whilst the comments regarding scale within the public representations are noted, it is considered that the proposed scale of two storeys is not considered to be out of character with the locality. The proposal does not include landscaping details, however the site is enclosed with hedgerows and trees. Additional landscape planting could assist in mitigating visual impact and landscaping is a reserved matter and therefore detailed proposals could be considered at a later date.

Whilst the proposal demonstrates that the site can accommodate the proposed number of dwellings and that some benefits would result from the loss of the HGV use, it is considered that proposal would appear as an isolated form of development, being separated from the settlement by the physical features of agricultural land and the river. Therefore, it is concluded that the proposal would be contrary to UDP Policies HP5 and ENV2.

Impact upon tourist attractions

There are a number of public rights of way in the locality, the closest being located at a distance of approximately 90 metres to the north east. Given the distances involved and that the proposal would introduce residential development which is not uncommon in the locality, it is not considered that the proposal would have an unacceptable adverse effect upon the environmental setting of established tourist attractions in accordance with UDP Policy TR2.

Impact upon heritage assets

Setting of Listed Building

The authority is required have special regard to the desirability of preserving the listed buildings or their settings under section 66(1) of the Planning (Listed Buildings and Conservation Areas) Act 1990. UDP Policy ENV14 states that proposals unacceptably adversely affecting a listed building or its setting will be refused taking into account the desirability of preserving the listed building and its setting, the importance of the building, the effects of the proposal on any particular features and the contributions of the building to the local scene.

Pont Llanerch Emrys is a grade II listed building and was listed as a fine example of an early nineteenth century masonry bridge of elegant form suggestive of estate influence, combined with plain, vernacular detailing. The bridge is located to the north of the application site, along the C2003 highway at a distance of approximately 90 metres.

Whilst the proposal would result in visual changes in the area, subject to appropriate design to be considered at the reserved matters stage and the distance involved, the proposed development is not considered to have a significant unacceptable adverse effect upon the setting of the listed building known as Pont Llanerch Emrys in accordance with UDP Policy ENV14.

It is acknowledged that the HGV use would generate heavy vehicles using the Pont Llanerch Emrys and as such this can also be considered as a benefit of the proposal; the reduction of the number of heavy vehicles travelling over the listed bridge.

Residential amenity

Policy GP1 states that development proposals will only be permitted where the amenities enjoyed by the occupants of nearby or proposed properties will not be unacceptably affected. The Powys Residential Design Guide provides guidance on overshadowing and privacy.

As discussed above, the benefits of replacing the HGV use are recognised in terms of removing the potential for noise, odour etc associated with such uses. In terms of the impacts of the construction of the proposed dwellings, the distances between the site and the nearest neighbouring properties (approximately 50 metres) leads to the conclusion that residential development can be provided at this location without unacceptably adversely affecting the amenities enjoyed by occupants of existing residential properties and that of the proposed dwellings in accordance with UDP Policy GP1 and the Council’s Residential Design Guide. Furthermore, the proposal may see improvements upon residential amenities through the loss of the existing use.

Highway access and parking requirements

UDP Policy GP4 requires adequate highway provision in terms of a safe access, visibility, turning and parking. Access to the site would be gained off the C2003 class three highway with the existing access proposed to be upgraded. The centre of the access measures at 23 metres from the centre of the junction of the C2003/U2043 highways (in a northerly direction). The application site is located within the 60mph national speed limit zone, although the 30mph zone is located immediately north of the access.

The Highway Authority has objected to the proposal because the site is not sustainable and has no pedestrian links back into the village. The Highway Authority has taken the former use into consideration but the location of the access for residential purposes is considered too close to the junction of the C2003/U2043 because it would cause driving confusion as to when a vehicle is entering which road.

In terms of the HGV depot, as discussed above the permission enabled the operation of several 30 ton tipper lorries operating on a 24 hour basis and also a 38 ton articulated vehicle. This use has been scaled back in recent years, however it is appreciated that the site has the potential to generate significant highways movements and the Highway Authority has acknowledged this use. On the basis of the Highway Authority’s comments, concern is expressed as to the close proximity of the junction of the C2003/U2043 highways to the access and that the proposal would cause driving confusion.

In terms of the lack of pedestrian facilities into the village, given the nature of the highway, there is limited opportunity for the provision of a footway and this is a situation which is replicated in a number of locations within Powys. Whilst the provision of a footway would be extremely beneficial, it is considered that such cannot be requested as a result of the proposed development. The lack of an existing footway is also of concern, however, given that such situations are present within Powys, this matter is not considered to warrant a reason for refusal.

Overall, whilst the lack of a footway is not considered to warrant a reason for refusal, the Highway Authority’s concerns over the close proximity of the access to the junction are

appreciated and as such, it is concluded that the proposal would not provide an adequate means of access, contrary to UDP Policy GP4.

Contaminated land

A contaminated land Desk Study Assessment Report supports the application which has identified potential risks, associated with the presence of land contamination, to the proposed development and has provided outline recommendations to investigate these potential risks. Therefore, the Council’s Contaminated Land Officer has advised that the conditions requiring the submission, approval and implementation of an investigation and risk assessment, a remediation scheme and monitoring and maintenance should be included on any permission granted.

On the basis of the advice from the Contaminated Land Officer and NRW, it is concluded that subject to the use of the conditions and informative, the applicant has demonstrated that the proposal would not result in problems of contamination on or off site and would not unacceptable adversely affect public health and safety or nature conservation in accordance with UDP Policy DC15.

Development and flood risk and surface water disposal

The site is located within the DAM B flood zone which indicates an area known to have been flooded in the past evidenced by sedimentary deposits. DAM B is used as part of a precautionary approach to indicate where site levels should be checked against the extreme (0.1%) flood level. If site levels are greater than the flood levels used to define adjacent extreme flood outline there is no need to consider flood risk further.

NRW have confirmed that the site levels are greater than adjacent extreme flood levels (based upon a desk study assessment) and it is recommended that the finished floor levels are set a nominal distance above adjacent ground level, for the perimeter of the dwellings, in order to mitigate against flash flooding from sources and other unmapped sources. On the basis of the advice from NRW, it is considered that the proposal is acceptable in flood risk terms.

In terms of surface water drainage, it is proposed to utilise soakaway systems. The Council’s Land Drainage Engineer has commended the use of soakaways and has recommended conditions requiring full details of the proposed soakaways and the prevention of surface water run-off onto the public highway. Subject to the use of these conditions, it is considered that the proposal would make adequate provision for surface water drainage in accordance with UDP Policy DC13.

Impact upon nature conservation

The site is close to two protected sites; Hendre, Llangedwyn SSSI (2.2 km to the West) and Garth-eryr SSSI (4.7 km to the West). The first supports a maternity roost of Lesser Horseshoe Bats, and the latter a hibernaculum for the same species. Both SSSIs are also included within Tanat & Vyrnwy Bat Sites SAC. Lesser Horseshoe Bats forage largely within 3 km of a roost, but also need good habitat connectivity between roosts used in different seasons. The site does not contain good habitat and neither are there connectivity

implications and as such NRW advise that there would be no likely significant effects on the Tanat & Vrynwy Bat SAC.

NRW have also considered the possibility of impact on a further Lesser Horseshoe Bat maternity roost at Pentre Mawr, approximately 0.5 km SW of the proposal. The site is recently discovered and undesignated although NRW consider it probable that the bats are part of the same meta-population as those in the Tanat & Vrynwy Bat SAC. Examination of an aerial photograph indicates that there are two good flight routes to the Afon Tanat and neither of these routes include the site of the development proposal which is not well connected by hedges or trees in a southerly direction. NRW have reached a conclusion that the proposed development would not impact on the Lesser Horseshoe Bat roost at Pentre Mawr.

In terms of protected species, NRW confirm that the report did not identify the presence of part of the Tanat and Vyrnwy bat sites SAC within 2km to the west, however, this has been considered in NRW’s comments on protected sites above. NRW advise that the proposal represents a lower risk for bats and the ecological report concludes that the proposed development is not likely to harm or disturb the bats or their breeding sites and resting places at this site, provided that avoidance measures described in the report are implemented. NRW have therefore advised that because the development represents a lower risk to bats, it is not considered that the development is likely to be detrimental to the maintenance of the population of the species concerned at a favourable conservation status in its natural range.

NRW have recommended conditions in respect of the implementation of a site lighting plan and the retention of existing hedgerows and trees around the perimeter of the site which are considered reasonable. Therefore subject to the use of conditions in relation to avoidance measures, lighting and retention of existing vegetation, it is considered that the proposal would comply with the relevant nature conservation policies.

Foul sewage disposal

During the processing of the application, the proposed method of drainage has been amended from a septic tank with discharge to a soakaway on site to a treatment plant with discharge to the watercourse to the north west of the application site. The revised discharge method would travel through land within the ownership of a third party. Written confirmation has been received from the neighbouring landowner which states that access will be allowed onto the neighbouring land to place the drainage across the land to the watercourse. Therefore, Development Management is satisfied that the proposed method of drainage can be achieved.

Government policy states that, where practicable, foul drainage should be discharged to the mains sewer. It is accepted that connection to the mains sewer would not be practicable at this location and therefore on the basis that an acceptable drainage solution has been achieved and agreed by the Council’s Environmental Health Officer and NRW, it is considered that the proposal meets the requirements of UDP Policy DC11.

Welsh language and culture

Pen-y-bont Llanerch Emrys is a settlement where the Welsh language has been identified within the UDP as being important to the social, cultural and community fabric. The Planning

(Wales) Act 2015 contains provisions relating to the consideration of the Welsh language in dealing with applications for planning permission. Paragraph 4.13.5 of Planning Policy Wales advises:

‘Considerations relating to the use of the Welsh language may be taken into account by decision makers so far as they are material to applications for planning permission. If required, language impact assessments may only be carried out in respect of major development not allocated in, or anticipated by, a development plan proposed in areas of particular sensitivity or importance for the language. Any such areas should be defined clearly in the development plan. Decisions on applications for planning permission must not introduce any element of discrimination and should not be made on the basis of any person(s)’ linguistic ability’.

Therefore, given that the proposal is not classified as major development, a language impact assessment is not required to be carried out. One way in which developers can demonstrate that the language has been taken into account is by ensuring that there is provision of affordable homes. This approach does not seek to restrict occupancy on grounds of linguistic criteria but recognises that those meeting the affordable housing eligibility criteria are more likely to be able to support the Welsh language and culture. Therefore, given that Members could require the provision of at least one affordable dwelling as part of a development at the site, it is concluded that the development would assist in contributing to the well-being of the Welsh language within Powys. Otherwise the proposal is not of a scale that would warrant a language impact assessment.

Recommendation

The Council’s lack of housing land supply is acknowledged as are the benefits of the proposal in terms of utilising a previously developed site and the potential to address concerns over anti-social behaviour as well as the advantages of losing the existing HGV depot use. The support from the Local Member, Community Councils and within the public representation is also acknowledged. However, in consideration of all the factors, the schemes benefits are not considered to outweigh the Highway Authority’s objection regarding the close proximity of the junction of the C2003/U2043 highways and developments adverse impact upon the character and appearance of the locality. The recommendation is one of refusal.

Reasons for Refusal

1. The proposal would result in unjustified dwellings in the open countryside, contrary to Planning Policy Wales (2016), Technical Advice Note 6 (2010) and Policies HP4 and HP8 of Powys County Council’s Unitary Development Plan (2010).

2. The proposed development would be a detached form of development which would have an unacceptable adverse impact upon the character and appearance of the locality, contrary to Policies HP5 and ENV2 of the Powys Unitary Development Plan (2010), Planning Policy Wales (2016) and Technical Advice Note (TAN) 12 (2016).

3. The proposal would not make adequate provision for highway access in respect of the access being in close proximity to the junction of the C2003/U2043 highways thereby

causing driving confusion contrary to Policy GP4 of the Powys Unitary Development Plan (2010), Planning Policy Wales (2016) and Technical Advice Note 18: Transport (2007).

______Case Officer: Kate Bowen- Planning Officer Tel: 01938 551268 E-mail:[email protected]