Item 4 REPORT TO: Planning Committee REPORT NO. HEP/81/16 DATE: 7 November 2016 REPORTING OFFICER: Head of Environment and Planning CONTACT OFFICER: David Williams (Ext 8775) SUBJECT: Development Control Applications WARD: N/A PURPOSE OF THE REPORT To determine the listed planning applications. INFORMATION Detailed reports on each application together with the recommendations are attached. RECOMMENDATION See attached reports. BACKGROUND PAPERS None. Page 15 REPORT OF THE HEAD OF ENVIRONMENT AND PLANNING 7th NOVEMBER 2016 Community Code No Applicant Recommendation Pages PEN P/2015 /0561 MR M WRIGHT GRANT 18 – 29 WRO P/2016 /0023 MR PAUL WOOLLAM GRANT 30 – 38 ROS P/2016 /0384 MR IAN GARDEN GRANT 39 – 50 GWE P/2016 /0655 MR PETER EAMES GRANT 51 – 59 WRO P/2016 /0707 MR RODERICK MCLEAN GRANT 60 – 65 LLR P/2016 /0716 MR WILLIAM NOTT GRANT 66 – 70 GRE P/2016 /0755 MR DEREK ROBERTS GRANT 71 – 74 GRE P/2016 /0756 MR DEREK ROBERTS GRANT 75 – 81 WRA P/2016 /0767 MR CHRISTOPHER J GRANT 82 – 84 GROSVENOR ROS P/2016 /0780 B DAVIES GRANT 85 – 89 WRO P/2016 /0799 MRS COREEN HOWELL REFUSE 90 – 92 WRA P/2016 /0816 MR STEPHEN MURPHY GRANT 93 – 95 WRA P/2016 /0817 H3G UK LIMITED GRANT 96 – 100 COE P/2016 /0836 MR IAN ELLIS GRANT 101 – 108 WRC P/2016 /0847 BARDON PROPERTIES LTD GRANT 109 – 113 MR DON BIRCHAM GWE P/2016 /0865 MR KIM TAYLOR GRANT 114 – 117 ROS P/2016 /0875 MR & MRS S AND G GRANT 118 – 121 ANTROBUS AND ROGERSON WRR P/2016 /0897 MR RUSSELL JONES GRANT 122 – 125 Page 16 REPORT OF THE HEAD OF ENVIRONMENT AND PLANNING 7th NOVEMBER 2016 GRE P/2016 /0904 MR JONATHAN HUNT GRANT 126 – 128 OVE P/2016 /0910 MR BARBER GRANT 129 – 137 GLY P/2016 /0943 MR DAFYDD ROBERTS GRANT 138 – 140 OVE P/2016 /0946 MR ABUL HUSSAIN GRANT 141 – 143 WRA P/2016 /0956 MR DAVID ELLIS GRANT 144 – 147 Total Number of Applications Included in Report – 23 All plans included in this report are re-produced from Ordnance Survey Mapping with the permission of the Controller of Her Majesty’s Stationery Office. Crown Copyright. Unauthorised reproduction infringes Crown Copyright and may lead to prosecution or civil proceedings. WCBC Licence No. LA0902IL All plans are intended to be illustrative only and should be used only to identify the location of the proposal and the surrounding features. The scale of the plans will vary. Full details may be viewed on the case files. Page 17 REPORT OF THE HEAD OF ENVIRONMENT AND PLANNING 7th NOVEMBER 2016 APPLICATION NO: LOCATION: DATE RECEIVED: P/2015 /0561 SITE OF WRIGHTS GARAGE AND 20/07/2015 ADJOINING LAND HALL STREET PENYCAE WREXHAM COMMUNITY: LL14 2RU CASE OFFICER: Penycae SEH DESCRIPTION: DEMOLITION OF GARAGE AND WARD: OUTLINE PLANNING PERMISSION AGENT NAME: Penycae & Ruabon FOR RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT BLUEPRINT South (8 DWELLINGS) WITH ALL ARCHITECTURAL DETAILED MATTERS RESERVED SERVICES LTD FOR FURTHER APPROVAL APPLICANT(S) NAME: MR M WRIGHT ______________________________________________________________ THE SITE PROPOSAL As above. Page 18 REPORT OF THE HEAD OF ENVIRONMENT AND PLANNING 7th NOVEMBER 2016 RELEVANT PLANNING HISTORY None relevant DEVELOPMENT PLAN The application site is on Brownfield land and is located within the settlement limit. Policies PS1, PS2, PS3, PS4, GDP1, H2, EC13 and T8 of the Wrexham Unitary Development Plan (UDP) are applicable. These policies are amplified in Local Planning Guidance Notes (LPGN) Nos. 16 ‘Parking Standards’ and 21 ‘Space around Dwellings’. CONSULTATIONS Community Council: Re-consulted 12.10.2016 Local Member: Re-notified 12.10.2016 Highways: No objection subject to conditions. WW: No objection subject to standard drainage conditions. NRW: No objection subject to conditions. PP: No objection subject to conditions relating to contaminated land and construction noise. Flood Officer: Satisfactory infiltration tests are required to show that the land can support the proposed soakaways. Once this is confirmed, there are no objections subject to conditions relation to SuDs. Education: Contribution required for Ruabon secondary School in accordance with LPGN 27. Site Notice: Expired 25.08.2016 Neighbours: 3 responses received sharing the following views: • Loss of privacy and view; • Potential noise from the demolition, building, builders, vehicles etc.; • objection due to the fact that when it was a garage / business it was only operational from 9am - 5pm Mon - Fri which meant evenings and weekends there wasn't any disruption or noise from the garage. Building houses will dramatically change the environment with noise from families, dogs and vehicles etc.; • Increased traffic generation will impact upon highway safety; • Although the regeneration of the site will be beneficial for the area, access via the unadopted road is undesirable; Page 19 REPORT OF THE HEAD OF ENVIRONMENT AND PLANNING 7th NOVEMBER 2016 • Loss of on-street parking which currently fronts the site where the access is intended; • Access should not interfere with the bus stop. Re-consulted 12.10.2016 SPECIAL CONSIDERATIONS Background: The proposal is for the removal of the existing garage building and for the residential development of this brownfield land. The application is made in outline with all matters reserved for further consideration. An indicative site plan was originally submitted showing 9 no. two storey dwellings. This was considered to be discordant with the existing pattern of development and the applicant has now amended the scheme. An amended site layout plan is now provided showing the potential layout of the development for 8 no. dwellings (5 two storey and 3 bungalows). The main issues to consider relate to the impact of the development upon the character and appearance of the area, the impact upon the amenities of the occupiers of the adjacent properties, and the impact upon highway safety. Policy: The proposed development of the land for housing accords with UDP Policies PS1, PS2, PS3 and PS4 which are the strategic polices which relate to the broad location of the development. It is also in accordance with Policies H2 and GDP1 which allow for residential development of land within settlement limits provided that it accordance with the character of the site, the development would make a positive contribution to the appearance of the area. Highways: The development will have 3 access points. There will be two access onto Hall Street (which is subject to a 30mph speed limit), one serving 5 dwellings, the other being a driveway serving one property. The other access is via an unadopted road to the west of the site and will serve 2 dwellings. Adequate visibility in accordance with national guidance is achievable from the proposed access points on Hall Street. The access onto the unadopted road is substandard however the traffic generated by the 2 properties served by it will be significantly lower than that generated by the users of the existing garage and will be an improvement in terms of highway safety. The highway authority has requested conditions be attached to the permission to secure the visibility splays together with a footway across the site frontage which will to the benefit of all road users. Scale, Design and Site Layout: Whilst the proposal is made in outline, with matters relating to layout, scale and appearance reserved for approval at a later stage, the Council can broadly rely upon the contents of the illustrative plan and supporting documentation, such as the Design and Access Statement, in determining the anticipated impact of the development. The proposed site layout (as amended) demonstrates that it is possible to achieve Page 20 REPORT OF THE HEAD OF ENVIRONMENT AND PLANNING 7th NOVEMBER 2016 a functional development that sits comfortably in the street scene and makes a positive contribution to the character and appearance of the area. Indicative site layout The properties can be sited at sufficient distances from the existing nearby dwellings to avoid any significant loss of light or overlooking, and the proposal accords with UDP Policies GDP1, PS2 and PS4. Separation in accordance with LPGN 21 can be achieved in all cases except where the block of 3 mews style two storey dwellings front the highway, opposite Nos. 30 and 31 Hall Street. The separation distance between the proposed dwellings and those as existing would be around 14 metres. The minimum separation distance recommended in Local Planning Guidance Note 21 is 22 metres. However in this instance I am satisfied that development as proposed would represent a typical layout, sympathetic to the character of this area where dwellings are located in close proximity to the street. For this reason, I consider that the principles of good design outweigh the need to maximise separation standards in this instance. Furthermore, the rooms of existing dwellings that face the site are already overlooked by vehicles and pedestrians using the adjoining highway. Matters relating to the detailed planning such as boundary treatments etc. will be dealt with at reserved matters application stage. Drainage: It is proposed to discharge the surface water by means of on-site soakaway. Infiltration testing results should therefore be submitted prior to determination of the application. These results should demonstrate that the land is capable of supporting on-site soakaways allowing a detailed SuDS scheme to be secured by condition (see conditions no.11 and 12). Other matters: Although matters relating to the construction works are not strictly planning considerations, advisory notes will be attached to any approval which advise the developers of their responsibilities in limiting any noise and dust pollution through the development phase. Page 21 REPORT OF THE HEAD OF ENVIRONMENT AND PLANNING 7th NOVEMBER 2016 There is no right for individuals to park their cars on the public highway and so the displacement of the on-street parking along the frontage of the site is not a valid reason for refusal.