ENCLOSURE 6 Brecon Beacons National Park Authority PLANNING, ACCESS AND RIGHTS OF WAY COMMITTEE 13 March 2012 RECOMMENDATIONS OF THE DIRECTOR OF PLANNING AND HEAD OF DEVELOPMENT CONTROL ON APPLICATIONS FOR DETERMINATION BY THE PLANNING, ACCESS AND RIGHTS OF WAY COMMITTEE Page 1 of 82 ENCLOSURE 6 INDEX ITEM REFERENCE ADDRESS RECOMMENDATION 1 11/07249/FUL Tylegarw Permit Heol Senni Brecon Powys LD3 8SU 2 12/07628/FUL Y Grithig Permit Penycae Swansea Powys SA9 1GD 3 12/07636/CON Y Grithig Permit Penycae Swansea Powys SA9 1GD 4 11/07421/FUL Land south of Greenfield Ind Permit Estate Forest Road Hay On Wye HR3 5FA 5 12/07619/FUL Tylebrithos Minded to Permit Cantref Brecon Powys LD3 8LR 6 11/07511/CPL The National Park Visitor Deemed Permitted Centre Development Libanus Brecon LD3 8ER 7 11/07528/FUL Tir Yr Onen Permit Off A4059 Penderyn Rd Aberdare Rhondda Cynon Taff 8 12/07603/FUL BROOK COTTAGE Permit Ffawyddog Crickhowell NP8 1PY Page 2 of 82 ENCLOSURE 6 ITEM NUMBER: 1 APPLICATION NUMBER: 11/07249/FUL APPLICANTS NAME(S): Mr Paul Thorne SITE ADDRESS: Tylegarw Heol Senni Brecon Powys LD3 8SU GRID REF: E: 292770 N:220685 COMMUNITY: Maescar DATE VALIDATED: 3 October 2011 DECISION DUE DATE: 28 November 2011 CASE OFFICER: Mrs Kate Edwards PROPOSAL 1. Works to extend the existing farmhouse, 2. Construction of a garage, 3. Conversion of existing agricultural building into 2 holiday lets (including change of use), 4. engineering works to create level areas including construction of gabion retaining walls and to control drainage through the site 5. Landscape works to integrate the development into the landscape Page 3 of 82 ENCLOSURE 6 ADDRESS Tylegarw, Heol Senni, Brecon CONSULTATIONS/COMMENTS Consultee Received Comments Countryside Council 19th Oct 2011 Countryside Council for Wales do not object to the For Wales application, providing appropriately worded condition requiring the implementation of the mitigation measures are attached to any planning permission. Suggested condition: the scheme shall be implemented in accordance with the recommendations set out in Section 5 ‘Recommendations for Mitigation, Compensation and Enhancement of the report Tyle Garw Farm near Brecon, South Wales Survey for Bats dated June 2011 and completed by Acer Ecology. A European Protected Species Licence will be required. Countryside Council 7th Nov 2011 The revised plans are unlikely to adversely affect For Wales bats. Environment Agency 25th Oct 2011 This application does not require direct consultation Wales with the Environment Agency Wales as the developments fall outside the Environment Agency's 'consultation checklist'. Maescar Community 13th Oct 2011 Supported. Council Maescar Community 14th Nov 2011 Supported. Council NP Ecologist 8th Nov 2011 Comments 1.0 I note that there are multiple aspects to the above development proposals that affect the full range of buildings on the site and the surrounding land. I will endeavour to comment on these aspects separately so that my views can be taken in context. 2.0 Farmhouse Extension 2.1 The Acer Ecology survey report (June 2011) states that a "large aggregation of droppings were found in the farmhouse attic, the size, shape and quantity of the droppings was characteristic of Natterer's bat." No additional comment is provided Page 4 of 82 ENCLOSURE 6 regarding the status of these droppings as old or fresh that might suggest the historic or current use of this roost. The subsequent evening emergence and dawn re-entry surveys completed by Acer Ecology identified only one Natterer's bat emerging from the adjoining barn. Section 4.1 of the survey report states that, "Female bats tend to form large maternity colonies and therefore it is considered likely that the animals recorded roosting within the building [it is not clear from the report which ‘building' is referred to here] are either males or non breeding females." It is my opinion that this statement is potentially under assessing the status of the Natterer's roost in the farmhouse. It is quite possible that the historic and more recent alterations to the farmhouse eaves and roof area, notably the filling of gaps with expanding foam and the installation of solid insulation boards have adversely affected this roost. 2.2 I acknowledge the recommendations in Section 5.0 of the Acer Ecology report offer a range of generic "guidelines and options for possible mitigation:" The suggested measure of a dedicated bat loft in the roof space of the proposed rear extension to the farmhouse, as illustrated on Plan 4 in the survey report, offers in principle the opportunity to mitigate and significantly enhance the Natterer's roost in the existing attic. Plan 4 also illustrates a full array of access options to the existing and the proposed additional dedicated bat loft. 2.3 It is a significant disappointment, despite the specific references in Section 6 of the Combined Design and Planning Policy Statement, and the recommendations in the Acer Ecology report, that the mitigation and enhancement measures have not been captured within the architect's design drawings. This is a notable weakness in the current application that needs to be addressed. Presently it is not possible to determine whether the Natterer's roosting opportunities can be effectively retained and enhanced within the farmhouse, especially due to the positioning of the two dormer style windows on the roof pitch of the proposed rear extension. Page 5 of 82 ENCLOSURE 6 3.0 Barn, Stable & Cow Byre Conversion 3.1 The Just Mammals report (September 2009) recorded common pipistrelle and Daubenton's bats emerging from barn buildings adjoining the farmhouse. The more recent survey by Acer Ecology (June 2011) has observed small numbers of common pipistrelle, Natterer's and brown long-eared bats emerging from the main door openings of the stable and barn and also the south eastern (rear) gable wall of the barn. A single brown long-eared bat was also observed during the day-time inspection roosting in shallow cavity on the internal face of the stable wall. Apart from the direct observation of the brown long-eared bat the Acer Ecology report does not make any specific remarks regarding the likely roost locations within these barn buildings that are being utilised by the various bats. 3.2 I welcome the recommended mitigation options described in Section 5.0 of the Acer Ecology report, including the dedicated bat loft illustrated on Plan 4 towards the western gable wall of the barn building, which have the potential to address the loss of the recorded roosting opportunities within the affected buildings. It is again of concern that these recommendation, despite the remarks in the Combined Design and Planning Policy Statement, that these measures have not been fully adopted into the design drawings. It is not clear from the current drawings whether the prescribed mitigation measures can actually be accommodated into the proposed development. It is essential that a revised set of design drawings are produced to effectively illustrate the inclusion of the necessary mitigation measures. 3.3 Confirmation is also required whether the mitigation measures proposed in the Acer Ecology report will also offer roosting opportunities for the Daubenton's bats that were recorded by the previous Just Mammals survey. 3.4 Barn owl activity has been recorded, in the form of pellets, within the cow byre and the barn. Page 6 of 82 ENCLOSURE 6 The Acer Ecology report states that there is "no evidence of past of current nesting by barn owls ...". The report nevertheless recognises the importance of the roost site and recommends to the provision of a barn owl nest box. Design drawing NP4v1 of the proposed new garage building show the location of an purpose-built opening to a barn owl box mounted in the garage roof space. 4.0 Garage Construction 4.1 I note the illustration on design drawing NP4v1 of an access hole to an owl box. I welcome the inclusion of this proposed mitigation feature, but recognise the need for more detail of the nesting box design and position in the garage roof space. 5.0 Landscaping 5.1 I welcome the illustration of the detailed planting and re-seeding schemes shown on design drawings NP9v1 and NP10v1 which provide significant benefits for the overall site. These benefits soften the impacts of the existing gabion retaining wall to the rear of the buildings, seek to restore the land to the front of the buildings used for the ‘deposition' of the previously excavated spoil and help to link the bat roosts with the wider surrounds. I acknowledge that these landscaping proposals and the tree and grassland species mixes described on drawing NP9v1 and NP10v1 offer significant opportunities to enhance the value of the application site for biodiversity. Recommendations The absence of suitable design drawings clearly demonstrating that the necessary bat mitigation measures can be accommodated within the proposed development is a significant deficiency that needs to be addressed. I therefore offer the following recommendations: 1.0 Confirmation is sought from the applicant/agent's bat specialist that the bat mitigation measures described and illustrated in the Acer Page 7 of 82 ENCLOSURE 6 Ecology bat survey report (June 2011) will provide roosting opportunities for the full range of bat species recorded by both Just Mammals and Acer Ecology. 2.0 A revised set of design drawings are provided to the National Park Authority by the architect/agent illustrating, within the proposed farmhouse extension and barn/stable/cow byre conversion, the bat mitigation/enhancement measures shown on Plan 4 of the Acer Ecology bat survey report (June 2011) and described in Section 5.0 of the same report. 3.0 A revised drawing is provided to the National Park Authority by the architect/agent illustrating the design and position of the barn owl nest box within the roof space of the proposed new garage.