Development Management:Planning Application

Report
Planning Committee
Part 1
Date:
1 April 2015
Item No:
4
Subject
Planning Application Schedule
Purpose
To take decisions on items presented on the attached schedule
Author
Head of Regeneration, Investment and Housing
Ward
As indicated on the schedule
Summary The Planning Committee has delegated powers to take decisions in relation to
planning applications. The reports contained in this schedule assess the proposed development
against relevant planning policy and other material planning considerations, and take into
consideration all consultation responses received. Each report concludes with an Officer
recommendation to the Planning Committee on whether or not Officers consider planning
permission should be granted (with suggested planning conditions where applicable), or refused
(with suggested reasons for refusal).
The purpose of the attached reports and associated Officer presentation to the Committee is to
allow the Planning Committee to make a decision on each application in the attached schedule
having weighed up the various material planning considerations.
The decisions made are expected to benefit the City and its communities by allowing good quality
development in the right locations and resisting inappropriate or poor quality development in the
wrong locations.
Proposal
1. To resolve decisions as shown on the attached schedule.
2. To authorise the Head of Regeneration, Investment and Housing to draft
any amendments to, additional conditions or reasons for refusal in respect of
the Planning Applications Schedule attached
Action by Planning Committee
Timetable Immediate
This report was prepared after consultation with:



Local Residents
Members
Statutory Consultees
The Officer recommendations detailed in this report are made following consultation as set
out in the Council’s approved policy on planning consultation and in accordance with legal
requirements.
Background
The reports contained in this schedule assess the proposed development against relevant
planning policy and other material planning considerations, and take into consideration all
consultation responses received. Each report concludes with an Officer recommendation to the
Planning Committee on whether or not Officers consider planning permission should be granted
(with suggested planning conditions where applicable), or refused (with suggested reasons for
refusal).
The purpose of the attached reports and associated Officer presentation to the Committee is to
allow the Planning Committee to make a decision on each application in the attached schedule
having weighed up the various material planning considerations.
The decisions made are expected to benefit the City and its communities by allowing good quality
development in the right locations and resisting inappropriate or poor quality development in the
wrong locations.
Applications can be granted subject to planning conditions. Conditions must meet all of the
following criteria:
• Necessary;
• Relevant to planning legislation (i.e. a planning consideration);
• Relevant to the proposed development in question;
• Precise;
• Enforceable; and
• Reasonable in all other respects.
Applications can be granted subject to a legal agreement under Section 106 of the Town and
Country Planning Act 1990 (as amended). This secures planning obligations to offset the impacts
of the proposed development. However, in order for these planning obligations to be lawful, they
must meet all of the following criteria:
• Necessary to make the development acceptable in planning terms;
• Directly related to the development; and
• Fairly and reasonably related in scale and kind to the development.
The applicant has a statutory right of appeal against the refusal of permission in most cases, or
against the imposition of planning conditions. There is no third party right of appeal against a
decision.
Work is carried out by existing staff and there are no staffing issues. It is sometimes necessary to
employ a Barrister to act on the Council’s behalf in defending decisions at planning appeals. This
cost is met by existing budgets. Where the Planning Committee refuses an application against
Officer advice, Members will be required to assist in defending their decision at appeal.
Where applicable as planning considerations, specific issues relating to sustainability and
environmental issues, equalities impact and crime prevention impact of each proposed
development are addressed in the relevant report in the attached schedule.
Financial Summary
The cost of determining planning applications and defending decisions at any subsequent appeal
is met by existing budgets and partially offset by statutory planning application fees. Costs can be
awarded against the Council at an appeal if the Council has acted unreasonably and/or cannot
defend its decisions. Similarly, costs can be awarded in the Council’s favour if an appellant has
acted unreasonably and/or cannot substantiate their grounds of appeal.
Risks
Three main risks are identified in relating to the determination of planning applications by Planning
Committee: decisions being overturned at appeal; appeals being lodged for failing to determine
applications within the statutory time period; and judicial review.
An appeal can be lodged by the applicant if permission is refused or if conditions are imposed.
Costs can be awarded against the Council if decisions cannot be defended as reasonable, or if it
behaves unreasonably during the appeal process, for example by not submitting required
documents within required timescales. Conversely, costs can be awarded in the Council’s favour if
the appellant cannot defend their argument or behaves unreasonably.
An appeal can also be lodged by the applicant if the application is not determined within the
statutory time period. However, with the type of major development being presented to the
Planning Committee, which often requires a Section 106 agreement, it is unlikely that the
application will be determined within the statutory time period. Appeals against non-determination
are rare due to the further delay in receiving an appeal decision: it is generally quicker for
applicants to wait for the Planning Authority to determine the application. Costs could only be
awarded against the Council if it is found to have acted unreasonably. Determination of an
application would only be delayed for good reason, such as resolving an objection or negotiating
improvements or Section 106 contributions, and so the risk of a costs award is low.
A decision can be challenged in the Courts via a judicial review where an interested party is
dissatisfied with the way the planning system has worked or how a Council has made a planning
decision. A judicial review can be lodged if a decision has been made without taking into account
a relevant planning consideration, if a decision is made taking into account an irrelevant
consideration, or if the decision is irrational or perverse. If the Council loses the judicial review, it is
at risk of having to pay the claimant’s full costs in bringing the challenge, in addition to the
Council’s own costs in defending its decision. In the event of a successful challenge, the planning
permission would normally be quashed and remitted back to the Council for reconsideration. If the
Council wins, its costs would normally be met by the claimant who brought the unsuccessful
challenge. Defending judicial reviews involves considerable officer time, legal advice, and
instructing a barrister, and is a very expensive process. In addition to the financial implications, the
Council’s reputation may be harmed.
Mitigation measures to reduce risk are detailed in the table below. The probability of these risks
occurring is considered to be low due to the mitigation measures, however the costs associated
with a public inquiry and judicial review can be high.
Risk
Decisions
challenged at
appeal and
costs awarded
against the
Council.
Appeal lodged
against non-
Impact of
risk if it
occurs*
(H/M/L)
M
M
Probability
of risk
occurring
(H/M/L)
L
L
What is the Council doing or
what has it done to avoid the
risk or reduce its effect?
Ensure reasons for refusal can
be defended at appeal.
Who is
responsible
for dealing
with the risk?
Planning
Committee
Ensure planning conditions
imposed meet the tests set out
in Circular 016/2014.
Planning
Committee
Provide guidance to Planning
Committee regarding relevant
material planning
considerations, conditions and
reasons for refusal.
Development
Services
Manager and
Senior Legal
Officer
Ensure appeal timetables are
adhered to.
Development
Services
Manager
Avoid delaying the
determination of applications
Planning
Committee
Risk
Impact of
risk if it
occurs*
(H/M/L)
Probability
of risk
occurring
(H/M/L)
determination,
with costs
awarded
against the
Council
Judicial review
successful
with costs
awarded
against the
Council
What is the Council doing or
what has it done to avoid the
risk or reduce its effect?
Who is
responsible
for dealing
with the risk?
unreasonably.
Development
Services
Manager
H
L
Ensure sound and rational
decisions are made.
Planning
Committee
Development
Services
Manager
* Taking account of proposed mitigation measures
Links to Council Policies and Priorities
The Council’s Corporate Plan 2012-2017 identifies five corporate aims: being a Caring City; a
Fairer City; A Learning and Working City; A Greener and Healthier City; and a Safer City. Key
priority outcomes include ensuring people live in sustainable communities; enabling people to lead
independent lives; ensuring decisions are fair; improving the life-chances of children and young
people; creating a strong and confident local economy; improving the attractiveness of the City;
promoting environmental sustainability; ensuring people live in safe and inclusive communities;
and making Newport a vibrant and welcoming place to visit and enjoy.
Through development management decisions, good quality development is encouraged and the
wrong development in the wrong places is resisted. Planning decisions can therefore contribute
directly and indirectly to these priority outcomes by helping to deliver sustainable communities and
affordable housing; allowing adaptations to allow people to remain in their homes; improving
energy efficiency standards; securing appropriate Planning Contributions to offset the demands of
new development to enable the expansion and improvement of our schools and leisure facilities;
enabling economic recovery, tourism and job creation; tackling dangerous structures and unsightly
land and buildings; bringing empty properties back into use; and ensuring high quality ‘placemaking’.
The Corporate Plan links to other strategies and plans, the main ones being:
• Single Integrated Plan;
• Local Development Plan 2011-2026 (Adopted January 2015);
The Newport Single Integrated Plan (SIP) is the defining statement of strategic planning intent for
the next 3 years. It identifies key priorities for improving the City. Its vision is: “Working together to
create a proud and prosperous City with opportunities for all”
The Single Integrated Plan has six priority themes, which are:
• Skills and Work
• Economic Opportunity
• Health and Wellbeing
• Safe and Cohesive Communities
• City Centre
• Alcohol and Substance Misuse
Under Section 38(6) of the Planning and Compulsory Purchase Act 2004 all planning applications
must be determined in accordance with the Newport Local Development Plan (Adopted January
2015) unless material considerations indicate otherwise. Planning decisions are therefore based
primarily on this core Council policy.
Options Available
1) To determine the application in accordance with the Officer recommendation (with
amendments to or additional conditions or reasons for refusal if appropriate);
2) To grant or refuse planning permission against Officer recommendation (in which case the
Planning Committee’s reasons for its decision must be clearly minuted);
3) To decide to carry out a site visit, either by the Site Inspection Sub-Committee or by full
Planning Committee (in which case the reason for the site visit must be minuted).
Preferred Option and Why
To determine the application in accordance with the Officer recommendation (with amendments to
or additional conditions or reasons for refusal if appropriate).
Comments of Chief Financial Officer
In the normal course of events, there should be no specific financial implications arising from the
determination of planning applications.
There is always a risk of a planning decision being challenged at appeal. This is especially the
case where the Committee makes a decision contrary to the advice of Planning Officers or where
in making its decision, the Committee takes into account matters which are not relevant planning
considerations. These costs can be very considerable, especially where the planning application
concerned is large or complex or the appeal process is likely to be protracted.
Members of the Planning Committee should be mindful that the costs of defending appeals and
any award of costs against the Council following a successful appeal must be met by the taxpayers
of Newport.
There is no provision in the Council's budget for such costs and as such, compensating savings in
services would be required to offset any such costs that were incurred as a result of a successful
appeal.
Comments of Monitoring Officer
Planning Committee are required to have regard to the Officer advice and recommendations set
out in the Application Schedule, the relevant planning policy context and all other material planning
considerations. If Members are minded not to accept the Officer recommendation, then they must
have sustainable planning reasons for their decisions.
Staffing Implications: Comments of Head of People and Business Change
Development Management work is undertaken by an in-house team and therefore there are no
staffing implications arising from this report. Officer recommendations have been based on
adopted planning policy which aligns with the Single Integrated Plan and the Council’s Corporate
Plan objectives.
Local issues
Ward Members were notified of planning applications in accordance with the Council’s adopted
policy on planning consultation. Any comments made regarding a specific planning application are
recorded in the report in the attached schedule
Equalities Impact Assessment
The Equality Act 2010 contains a Public Sector Equality Duty which came into force on 06 April
2011. The Act identifies a number of ‘protected characteristics’, namely age; disability; gender
reassignment; pregnancy and maternity; race; religion or belief; sex; sexual orientation; marriage
and civil partnership. The new single duty aims to integrate consideration of equality and good
relations into the regular business of public authorities. Compliance with the duty is a legal
obligation and is intended to result in better informed decision-making and policy development and
services that are more effective for users. In exercising its functions, the Council must have due
regard to the need to: eliminate unlawful discrimination, harassment, victimisation and other
conduct that is prohibited by the Act; advance equality of opportunity between persons who share
a protected characteristic and those who do not; and foster good relations between persons who
share a protected characteristic and those who do not. The Act is not overly prescriptive about the
approach a public authority should take to ensure due regard, although it does set out that due
regard to advancing equality involves: removing or minimising disadvantages suffered by people
due to their protected characteristics; taking steps to meet the needs of people from protected
groups where these differ from the need of other people; and encouraging people from protected
groups to participate in public life or in other activities where their participation is disproportionately
low.
An Equality Impact Assessment for delivery of the Development Management service has been
completed and can be viewed on the Council’s website.
Children and Families (Wales) Measure
Although no targeted consultation takes place specifically aimed at children and young people,
consultation on planning applications and appeals is open to all of our citizens regardless of their
age. Depending on the scale of the proposed development, applications are publicised via letters
to neighbouring occupiers, site notices, press notices and/or social media. People replying to
consultations are not required to provide their age or any other personal data, and therefore this
data is not held or recorded in any way, and responses are not separated out by age.
Consultation
Comments received from wider consultation, including comments from elected members, are
detailed in each application report in the attached schedule.
Background Papers
NATIONAL POLICY
Planning Policy Wales (PPW) Edition 7 (July 2014)
Minerals Planning Policy Wales (December 2000)
PPW Technical Advice Notes (TAN):
TAN 1: Joint Housing Land Availability Studies (2006)
TAN 2: Planning and Affordable Housing (2006)
TAN 3: Simplified Planning Zones (1996)
TAN 4: Retailing and Town Centres (1996)
TAN 5: Nature Conservation and Planning (2009)
TAN 6: Planning for Sustainable Rural Communities (2010)
TAN 7: Outdoor Advertisement Control (1996)
TAN 8: Renewable Energy (2005)
TAN 9: Enforcement of Planning Control (1997)
TAN 10: Tree Preservation Orders (1997)
TAN 11: Noise (1997)
TAN 12: Design (2014)
TAN 13: Tourism (1997)
TAN 14: Coastal Planning (1998)
TAN 15: Development and Flood Risk (2004)
TAN 16: Sport, Recreation and Open Space (2009)
TAN 18: Transport (2007)
TAN 19: Telecommunications (2002)
TAN 20: The Welsh Language: Unitary Development Plans and Planning Control (2013)
TAN 21: Waste (2014)
TAN 23: Economic Development (2014)
Minerals Technical Advice Note (MTAN) Wales 1: Aggregates (30 March 2004)
Minerals Technical Advice Note (MTAN) Wales 2: Coal (20 January 2009)
Welsh Government Circular 016/2014 on planning conditions
LOCAL POLICY
Newport Local Development Plan (LDP) 2011-2026 (Adopted January 2015)
OTHER
The Colliers International Retail Study (July 2010) is not adopted policy but is a material
consideration in making planning decisions.
The Economic Development Strategy is a material planning consideration.
Section 17(1) of the Crime and Disorder Act 1998 imposes a duty on the Local Authority to
exercise its various functions with due regard to the likely effect of the exercise of those functions
on, and the need to do all that it reasonably can to prevent, crime and disorder in its area.
The Town and Country Planning (Environmental Impact Assessment) (England and Wales)
Regulations 1999 as amended by the Town and Country Planning (Environmental Impact
Assessment) (Amendment) (Wales) Regulations 2008 are relevant to the recommendations made.
Other documents and plans relevant to specific planning applications are detailed at the end of
each application report in the attached schedule
Dated: 1 April 2015
APPLICATION DETAILS
No:
14/1275
Ward:
LANGSTONE
Type:
FULL (MAJOR)
Expiry Date:
29-APRIL-2015
Applicant:
ROBERT AYRES, COURT FARM SOLAR LIMITED
Site:
COURT FARM, MAGOR ROAD, NEWPORT, NP18 2EB
Proposal:
PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT OF SOLAR PHOTOVOLTAIC PANELS
(10mwp) AND ASSOCIATED WORKS, ACCESS TRACKS, SECURITY
FENCING AND CAMERAS, AFFECTING PUBLIC RIGHT OF WAY 394/59
AND 394/60 LLANMARTIN (RESUBMISSION FOLLOWING REFUSAL OF
13/1203).
Recommendation: Granted with Conditions
1.
1.1
INTRODUCTION
The proposal is to build a solar farm of up to 10.0MWp (Megawatt peak) on land to the
north of Court Farm, Magor Road. Annual power generation will be approximately 8,100
MWh, enough to power 1,650 average UK households. The site is located on south facing
agricultural fields to the north of the B4245 Magor Road approximately 200m west of the
junction between Magor Road and Waltwood (Underwood) Road. The site is a rough
triangle in shape and covers approximately 14.5Ha. The western end of the site will be
about 230m from the nearest houses in Carpenter Close, Langstone. Views from
Langstone will be mitigated by a scheme of landscaping proposed for the western end of
the site and by the installation of a 1.8m wattle fence. A new access track is proposed for
the site starting close to the junction of Green Lane (100-12) and the B4245 and then
running parallel to the green lane until it reaches the main part of the site. The access track
will include passing bays and will be constructed of granular material other than under tree
canopies where Geocellular material will be used to protect the tree roots.
1.2
The development will consist of a series of solar arrays that will face due south. The solar
farm will be divided into three discrete areas. At the western end of the site in Section A
the arrays will be 1.285m in height, in Section B at the northern end of the site they will be
1.628M high and in the south eastern part of the site they will be 2m high. The panels will
be mounted on 720 metal frames. Three trees are to be removed under the proposal and
some short fragments of hedgerow from the interior of the site. New hedging is proposed
along the site’s western and northern boundaries.
1.3
The direct current generated by the panels will be converted to alternating current by
inverters which are connected to each row of panels. The inverters take the form of boxes
which are approximately 1m wide 70cm high and 30cm deep. The inverters are solid state
devices but do need to be cooled meaning fans are employed for this purpose. The
inverters are connected to marshalling cabinets that combine the electricity generated by
multiple inverters. This electricity is then fed to a transformer which is then linked to the
sub-station. There would be 1 No. sub-station building (to convert the current to the
necessary voltage to enter the electricity grid) which measures 9.0m long by 4m wide and
3.5m high and 4 No. CCTV columns which would be 3m high. The grid connection will be
due south to the Magor Road and then along that road to the Magor sub-station. All
cabling will be underground. The site will be surrounded by a 1.8m high wire mesh fence
(deer fence). Access will be via the new access track which is proposed to be temporary
with the existing green lane that runs along the site’s eastern boundary being used for day
to day maintenance over the life time of the development. The development has a life span
of 25 years.
1.4
This application is a resubmission and is in broad terms the same application as that which
was previously refused permission in October 2014. That application was refused due to
the loss of agricultural land of higher grading which is protected by national policy.
However a recent appeal decision at Llanvapley in Monmouthshire confirmed that solar
farms are temporary developments that do not necessitate the permanent loss of
agricultural land so long as assurance can be given to the reversibility of the development.
In such a case the Inspector judged that the weight to be given to national policy protecting
agricultural land would be significantly weakened. In effect he afforded it very little weight.
1.5
Case law has determined that the interpretation of planning policy is ultimately a matter for
the courts [Tesco Stores Limited (Appellants) v Dundee City Council (Respondents)
(Scotland)]. The Supreme Court held that a plan is a legal document but whilst it has a
legal status it should not be read line by line as statute or a contract since policies may be
mutually irreconcilable or have a broad and generalised thrust. However the wording of
policies is not meaningless and a plan cannot be properly applied if policies are
misunderstood or given a meaning they are not capable of bearing. The Court held ‘policy
statements should be interpreted objectively in accordance with the language used, read as
always in its proper context’. The Inspector’s interpretation of national policy has not been
legally challenged so no ultimate legal view on the correctness of the Inspector’s
conclusions on the application of national policy has been made. Despite this his decision
is a material planning consideration. The weight to be put upon the appeal decision is a
matter for subsequent decision makers. However in officer’s opinion the appeal decision
can bear significant weight in the determination of this application.
1.6
Confirmation that the Inspector’s decision is a material planning consideration is contained
at Paragraph 11 of Annex 1 of Welsh Office Circular 23/93 [Award of Costs Incurred in
Planning and Other (Including Compulsory Purchase Order) Proceedings] states that
‘similarly, a planning authority may be held to have acted unreasonably if they fail to take
into account reported judicial authority, or well-publicised appeal decisions relevant to their
reasons for refusal, or relevant policy statements in Government White Papers, DOE and
WO Circulars or Planning Policy Guidance Notes (PPW). As such appeal decisions are
material to planning decisions and should be given appropriate weight.
2.
RELEVANT SITE HISTORY
Ref. No.
11/0867
13/0073
13/0101
13/0713
3.0
3.1
Description
SCREENING OPINION REQUEST IN RELATION TO PROPOSED SOLAR
FARM
SCREENING OPINION FOR THE INSTALLATION OF A 5MW SOLAR
FARM
SCREENING OPINION FOR THE INSTALLATION OF A 2.8 MW SOLAR
FARM
PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT OF SOLAR PHOTOVOLTAIC PANELS
(8.5MW) AND ASSOCIATED WORKS INCLUDING, ACCESS TRACKS,
SECURITY FENCING AND CAMERAS AFFECTING PUBLIC RIGHTS OF
WAY 394/59 AND 394/60 LLANMARTIN
Decision & Date
ES not required
22 December 2010
ES not required
13 February 2013
ES not required
13 February 2013
Refused
01 October 2014
POLICY
PLANNING POLICY WALES (EDITION 7) JULY 2014
Paragraph 4.10.1 - In the case of agricultural land, land of grades 1, 2 and 3a of the
Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs (DEFRA) Agricultural Land
Classification system (ALC) is the best and most versatile, and should be conserved as a
finite resource for the future. In development plan policies and development management
decisions considerable weight should be given to protecting such land from development,
because of its special importance. Land in grades 1, 2 and 3a should only be developed if
there is an overriding need for the development, and either previously developed land or
land in lower agricultural grades is unavailable, or available lower grade land has an
environmental value recognised by a landscape, wildlife, historic or archaeological
designation which outweighs the agricultural considerations. If land in grades 1, 2 or 3a
does need to be developed, and there is a choice between sites of different grades,
development should be directed to land of the lowest grade.
Paragraph 12.8.1 - The UK is subject to the requirements of the EU Renewable Energy
Directive. These include a UK target of 15% of energy from renewables by 2020. The UK
Renewable Energy Roadmap sets the path for the delivery of these targets, promoting
renewable energy to reduce global warming and to secure future energy supplies. The
Welsh Government is committed to playing its part by delivering an energy programme
which contributes to reducing carbon emissions as part of our approach to tackling climate
change whilst enhancing the economic, social and environmental wellbeing of the people
and communities of Wales in order to achieve a better quality of life for our own and future
generations. This is outlined in the Welsh Government’s Energy Policy Statement Energy
Wales: A Low Carbon Transition (2012).
Paragraph 12.8.6 - The Welsh Government’s aim is to secure an appropriate mix of energy
provision for Wales which maximises benefits to our economy and communities, whilst
minimising potential environmental and social impacts. This forms part of the Welsh
Government’s aim to secure the strongest economic development policies to underpin
growth and prosperity in Wales recognising the importance of clean energy and the efficient
use of natural resources, both as an economic driver and a commitment to sustainable
development.
Paragraph 12.8.8 - The Welsh Government is committed to using the planning system to:
• optimise renewable energy generation;
• optimise low carbon energy generation;
• facilitate combined heat and power systems(and combined cooling, heat and power)
where feasible; and
• recognise that the benefits of renewable energy are part of the overall commitment to
tackle climate change by reducing greenhouse gas emissions as well as increasing
energy security.
Paragraph 12.8.9 - Local planning authorities should facilitate the development of all forms
of renewable and low carbon energy to move towards a low carbon economy to help to
tackle the causes of climate change. Specifically, they should make positive provision by:
• considering the contribution that their area can make towards developing and
facilitating renewable and low carbon energy, and ensuring that development plan
policies enable this contribution to be delivered;
• ensuring that development management decisions are consistent with national and
international climate change obligations, including contributions to renewable energy
targets and aspirations.
Paragraph 12.8.10 - At the same time, local planning authorities should:
• ensure that international and national statutory obligations to protect designated areas,
species and habitats and the historic environment are observed;
• ensure that mitigation measures are required for potential detrimental effects on local
communities whilst ensuring that the potential impact on economic viability is given full
consideration.
Paragraph 12.10.1 - In determining applications for renewable and low carbon energy
development and associated infrastructure local planning authorities should take into
account:
• the contribution a proposal will play in meeting identified national, UK and European
targets and potential for renewable energy, including the contribution to cutting
greenhouse gas emissions;
• the wider environmental, social and economic benefits and opportunities from
renewable and low carbon energy development;
• the impact on the natural heritage, the Coast and the Historic Environment;
• the need to minimise impacts on local communities to safeguard quality of life for
existing and future generations;
• ways to avoid, mitigate or compensate identified adverse impacts;
• the impacts of climate change on the location, design, build and operation of renewable
and low carbon energy development. In doing so consider whether measures to adapt
to climate change impacts give rise to additional impacts;
•
•
grid connection issues where renewable (electricity) energy developments are
proposed; and
the capacity of and effects on the transportation network relating to the construction and
operation of the proposal.
Paragraph 12.10.3 - Developers for renewable and low carbon energy developments
should seek to avoid or where possible minimise adverse impacts through careful
consideration of location, scale, design and other measures.
3.2
Technical Advice Note 6
3.2.1
Paragraph 6.2.1 - When preparing development plans and considering planning
applications, planning authorities should consider the quality of agricultural land and other
agricultural factors and seek to minimise any adverse affects on the environment.
3.2.2
Paragraph 6.2.2 - Planning authorities should bear in mind that, once land is built on, the
restoration of semi-natural and natural habitats and landscape features is rarely possible
and usually expensive, and archaeological and historic features cannot be replaced. Also,
once agricultural land is developed, even for ‘soft’ uses such as golf courses, its return to
agriculture as best and most versatile agricultural land is seldom practicable.
3.2.3
Paragraph 6.2.3 - Agricultural land is classified by grades according to the extent to which
its physical or chemical characteristics impose long term limitations on agricultural use for
food production. There are 5 grades of land numbered 1 to 5, with grade 3 divided into two
sub-grades. The best and most versatile land falls into grades 1, 2 and sub-grade 3a and is
the most flexible, productive and efficient in response to inputs.
3.2.4
Paragraph 6.2.4 - The Agricultural Land Classification (ALC) map for Wales is published at
a scale of 1:250,000. This map is produced for use in strategic planning and provides only
a generalised indication of the distribution of land quality. The map is not suitable for use in
evaluating individual sites. In such cases a resurvey at a larger scale is necessary to obtain
a definitive grade.
3.2.5
Paragraph 6.2.5 - The nature of other development and its proximity to farms can influence
the type of farming and the extent to which inherent land quality can be exploited. Certain
locations may have agricultural advantages such as accessibility to markets, processing
plant and certain industries associated with agriculture. Farms with development close to
them tend to suffer from trespass and other forms of disturbance which may affect the
efficiency and upkeep of holdings. It may be possible to reduce any detrimental effects of
development by locating compatible uses adjacent to farm land, by landscaping or by
detailed provision of amenity space and green corridors in the layout of residential
development. Technical Advice Note 6: Planning for Sustainable Rural Communities 32
3.2.6
Paragraph 6.2.6 - Farms vary considerably in size, type of farm business and layout. The
loss of part of a holding can have important implications for the remainder. The effect of
severance and fragmentation upon the farm and its structure may be relevant.
3.3
Technical Advice Note 8 – Planning for Renewable Energy (July 2005)
3.3.1
Paragraph 2.16 - Experience has shown that there are opportunities to achieve community
benefits through major wind farm development. Some benefits can be justified as mitigation
of development impacts through the planning process. In addition, developers may offer
benefits not directly related to the planning process. Annex B provides further information
and examples about the types of community benefit which have been provided. Local
planning authorities, where reasonably practical, should facilitate and encourage such
proposals. The Welsh Development Agency, and others can support and advise on
community involvement in developing renewable energy and benefiting from it. Local
planning authorities should make clear in their development plans the scope of possible
“planning contributions”. However, such contributions should not enable permission to be
given to a proposal that otherwise would be unacceptable in planning terms.
3.3.2
Paragraph 3.15 - Other than in circumstances where visual impact is critically damaging to
a listed building, ancient monument or a conservation area vista, proposals for
appropriately designed solar thermal and PV systems should be supported.
3.3.4
Annex B of TAN 8
Paragraph 2.1 - It is perfectly acceptable for a business to enter into a legally binding
agreement with third parties to deliver particular and agreed benefits to the community.
Many local planning authorities would be more comfortable with this approach as it
separates, more clearly, community benefits from the planning decision. It is important that
the developer is able to identify suitable local representative people or organisations with
whom it can negotiate. If there are funds to be administered then an appropriately
constituted and regulated body must be identified or created.
3.4
Practice Guidance – Planning Implications of Renewable Energy and Low Carbon Energy
(February 2011)
Paragraph 8.4.16 - In view of the national policy support for farm diversification and the
relatively large area of land required for solar PV arrays it is likely that a significant
proportion of proposals for solar PV arrays will be on agricultural land. Both the use of
natural resources (such as high quality agricultural land) and the reversibility of a
development are factors in determining if EIA is required.
Paragraph 8.4.17 - In addition to avoiding the best and most versatile agricultural land,
other possible mitigation includes taking steps to enhance the reversibility of the
development (e.g. by use of removable mats rather than permanent access tracks and use
of ground screws rather than buried concrete foundations to anchor solar arrays) and
avoiding soil compaction or contamination during construction and maintenance.
3.5
ADOPTED NEWPORT LOCAL DEVELOPMENT PLAN 2013-2028
Policy
SP1
Sustainability
Text
Proposals will be required to make a positive contribution to sustainable
development by concentrating development in sustainable locations on brownfield
land within the settlement boundary. they will be assessed as to their potential
contribution to:
ii) the reuse of previously developed land and empty properties in preference to
greenfield sites;
iv) reducing energy consumption, increasing energy efficiency and the use of low
and zero carbon energy sources;
SP5
Development in the countryside (that is, that area of land lying beyond the
Countryside
settlement boundaries shown on the proposal and inset maps) will only be
permitted where the use is appropriate in the countryside, respects the landscape
character and biodiversity of the immediate and surrounding area and is
appropriate in scale and design. Housing development, rural diversification and
rural enterprise uses, beyond settlement boundaries, will only be appropriate
where they comply with national planning policy.
SP8
Special Landscape Areas are designated as follows within which proposals will be
Special Landscape required to contribute positively to the area through high quality design, materials
and management schemes that demonstrate a clear
Areas
appreciation of the area’s special features:
vi) Wentwood
SP21
The plan will fulfil its contribution to the regional demand by:
Minerals
i) safeguarding hardrock and sand & gravel resource blocks;
GP1
General
Development
Principles – Climate
Change
Development proposals should:
ii) be designed to minimise energy requirements and incorporate appropriate
renewable, low or zero carbon energy sources, including on-site energy provision
where practicable;
GP2
General
Development
Principles – General
Amenity
Development will be permitted where, as applicable:
i) there will not be a significant adverse effect on local amenity, including in terms
of noise, disturbance, privacy, overbearing, light, odours and air quality;
ii) the proposed use and form of development will not be detrimental to the visual
amenities of nearby occupiers or the character or appearance of the
surrounding area;
GP3
General Development will be permitted where, as applicable:
Development
i) necessary and appropriate service infrastructure either exists or can be provided;
Principles – Service
Infrastructure
GP5
General Development will be permitted where, as applicable:
Development
ii) the proposals demonstrate how they avoid, or mitigate and compensate negative
Principles – Natural impacts to biodiversity, ensuring that there are no significant
Environment
adverse effects on areas of nature conservation interest including international,
European, national, Welsh Section 4233 and local protected habitats and species,
and protecting features of importance for
ecology;
v) there would be no unacceptable impact on landscape quality;
GP6
General
Development
Principles – Quality
of Design
Good quality design will be sought in all forms of development. the aim is to create
a safe, accessible, attractive and convenient environment. in considering
development proposals the following fundamental design
principles should be addressed:
i) context of the site: all development should be sensitive to the unique qualities of
the site and respond positively to the character of the area;
iv) scale and form of development: new development should appropriately reflect
the scale of adjacent townscape. care should be taken to avoid over-scaled
development;
GP7
General Development will not be permitted which would cause or result in unacceptable
Development
harm to health because of land contamination, dust, instability or subsidence, air,
Principles
– heat, noise or light pollution, flooding, water pollution, or any other identified risk
Environmental
to environment, local amenity or public health and safety.
Protection
and Public Health
CE10
Renewable Small scale micro-generation will be encouraged within the settlement boundary.
Energy
Large scale proposals may be more appropriately located outside of the defined
settlement boundary if no appropriate brownfield sites exist.
T7
Any public footpath, bridleway or cycleway affected by development proposals will
Public rights of Way require retention or the provision of a suitable alternative. Provision of additional
and
New routes, where appropriate, will be sought in new developments, with linkages to
Development
the existing network.
3.6
OTHER LOCAL DOCUMENTS
3.7
Renewable and Low Carbon Energy Assessment (May 2013)
This report has been produced by Verco as a joint study for Torfaen County Borough
Council and Newport City Council on behalf of the Carbon Trust in Wales. The purpose of
the study is to provide an evidence base for the potential development of renewable and
low carbon energy within the two local authorities, to examine the low carbon potential for
strategic development sites and explore strategic leadership opportunities. Chapter 12 There is a significant resource potential for land based solar PV systems across the
authority. The coastal areas have the best levels of irradiation, however all plots are 3km or
more from the coast primarily due to ecological and agricultural constraints.
Areas of the City Council’s Administrative Area are identified that have good potential for
ground mounted solar PV arrays. Only land in agricultural grades 4 and 5 were included
and then areas which suffered from other constraints such as sites designated for their
landscape, ecological or heritage value were excluded as were areas of common land.
Other considerations were made in regard to aspect, slope, competing landuses and the
viability of grid connection to arrive at an area of viable solar development.
Figure 57 identifies areas with good potential for Ground Mounted Solar PV. It is not clear
if the application site is within such an area due to quality.
3.8
Special Landscape Areas Background Paper (April 2012)
3.8.1
The Background paper identifies areas of local landscape significance within the Local
Authority Area and was written to inform the adopted LDP. The areas identified are:
• The Wentlooge and Caldicot Levels;
• The River Usk corridor;
• The Wentwood escarpment;
• Land North of Bettws;
• Land West of Rhiwderin
• Tredegar Park.
These Special Landscape Areas are identified in the Proposals Map of the Newport Local
Development Plan 2011-2026.
3.8.2
The relevant Local Development Plan policy is SP8 (Special Landscape Areas) which
reads as follows:
Special Landscape Areas are designated as follows within which proposals will be required
to contribute positively to the area through high quality design, materials and management
schemes that demonstrate a clear appreciation of the area’s special features:
vi) Wentwood
The Policy amplification states at Paragraph 2.32 of the adopted Local Development Plan
(January 2015):
Developers will be required to ensure that proposals do not impact or affect the intrinsic
character, quality, feature or conservation value of the SLA. Designs will be required to be
of a high standard, appropriate in scale and massing, integrated sympathetically into the
landscape as well as ensuring long term management. Supplementary Planning Guidance
will provide detail concerning the value, management and maintenance of the areas.
3.8.3
The site of the proposal is outside any identified SLA and is not considered to have any
adverse effect upon any of the identified SLAs.
4.
4.1
CONSULTATIONS
CYFOETH NATURIOL CYMRU / NATURAL RESOURCES WALES (CNC/NRW): No
objection but comments on protected species (bats) and landscape issues.
4.2
CADW: The proposed development is located in the vicinity of the scheduled ancient
monuments known as: MM188 Moated Site 200m South West of Court Farm
MM298 Ford Farm Roman Villa
The above two designated monuments are both located some 650m to the southwest of
the application area. They are both at a lower level than the development area and
theoretically the solar panels would be visible from the designated monuments. However,
there a number of exiting hedges and a road between the monuments and the application
area that will significantly screen the views from the monument and it is understood that
further planting is also proposed as part of the development. As such in the opinion of
Cadw the impact on the designated monuments will be negligible.
4.3
LLYWODRAETH CYMRU / WELSH GOVERNMENT (TRANSPORT DIVISION): The
impact of glare and glint on users of the M4 is considered to be insignificant.
4.4
YMGYRCH DIOGELU CYMRU WLEDIG / CAMPAIGN FOR THE PROTECTION OF
RURAL WALES: The development of this solar farm would have a significant impact on
open countryside on rising land adjacent to the Magor road.
We believe that great care needs to be taken to maintain the visual and environmental
quality of all countryside. Areas adjacent to urban areas are especially vulnerable. Newport
is very fortunate in having areas of attractive countryside adjacent to its built up areas and it
is important to preserve these for everyone’s benefit now and for future generations.
We believe that at a UK level the number of solar farm developments now exceeds the
government target requirements. The Renewable Energy Foundation which maintains data
on renewable energy developments has stated that the level of such investment has
already exceeded government targets and that further developments in the planning
system will considerably exceed the subsidy budget for such developments.
The site of this proposed development is on agricultural land is of high quality, being a
mixture of grade 2 and 3b. Such land should be retained for agricultural purposes.
Consideration should be given to the cost of removal of the solar farm panels when they
reach the end of their economic life. In our view it is not sufficient to simply assume that the
structures are of a temporary nature and the land will return to agricultural use. If it is
believed that the cost of removal will be adsorbed into the cost of further development, then
the proposal should be treated in the same way as an urban extension into open
countryside. Failure to take consideration of this issue and anticipate future problems
suggests this proposal is not sustainable.
4.5
SOUTH GWENT RAMBLERS: The land in question is of too high a quality to be taken out
of agricultural use and to be used for semi industrial purposes.
Southerly views across the Gwent Levels to the Severn Estuary from the fields will be lost if
this development takes place, which is a pity considering it is one of the reasons
Newport City Council chose this area to be included in one of their leafleted walks - the
Langstone to Penhow Circular Walk.
The three metre margin of land allocated for the Public Right of Way running inside the
northern boundary is insufficient to ensure free passage to walkers as the hedges will be
allowed to grow unchecked as a foil to help hide the solar panels and there is no room for
machines for mechanical trimming. Long spindly grasses and weeds will grow from under
the panels searching for light and at 600 mm high, the panels will preclude grazing by any
animals. In a couple of years time the footpath will become unusable.
For the above reasons, I object to this proposal on behalf of Ramblers. (formerly the
Ramblers Association).
4.6
WESTERN POWER DISTRIBUTION: Advise of equipment in the area and safe working
practices.
5.
5.1
INTERNAL COUNCIL ADVICE
HEAD OF STREETSCENE & CITY SERVICES (HIGHWAYS): The proposal is acceptable
subject to conditions regarding:
• Full details of track construction and ‘portatrack’ details;
• A requirement for advanced signage during construction works;
• Condition surveys of the greenlane prior and post development with a requirement for
the developer to make good any damage;
• The submission of a Traffic Management Plan;
o Traffic must be able to enter and leave the site in forward gear
o Deliveries must not be off-loaded in the highway
o Details of any temporary traffic lights / lane closures
o Contractor parking
o Wheelwash details
5.2
HEAD OF STREETSCENE (DRAINAGE MANAGER): The environmental report submitted
in support of the application acknowledges an addition of 326m2 of impermeable surfaces
and proposes SUDS infiltration methods to manage the surface water run-off, reference is
made to swales and filter strips. This is acceptable in principle but detailed layouts and
designs would need to be provided to confirm their suitability.
The access tracks proposed, along with the topography of the site, appear to provide a
continuous link for surface water to flow on to Magor Road in peak rain fall events. It will
have to be demonstrated that a system is in place for the capture and disposal of surface
water, along with associated particulates/debris that might be transported in surface runoff,
to prevent these flows discharging on to Magor Road.
5.3
HEAD OF STREETSCENE & CITY SERVICES (PUBLIC RIGHTS OF WAY):
Perimeter fence: a 1.8m high green mesh fence will be installed to the perimeter of the field
boundaries. The fencing will be setback approximately 3m from the existing hedgerow site
boundary, with the solar panels some further 4 to 5m from the fence. The fence will be
installed behind any already existing planting and any further soft landscaping that is
proposed.
This is acceptable, but should any changes be proposed/considered we would need to be
informed immediately.
Access Track: Construction/maintenance vehicles will be accessing the site from the Green
Lane, situated to the Eastern boundary of the site. The condition/surface of this lane must
not be adversely affected by the use of construction/maintenance vehicles.
If any damage is caused to the surface it must be repaired promptly. Also, if any mud etc. is
discarded onto the lane from the construction vehicles it must be removed immediately.
In addition to these points, general stipulations will also apply:
i.
ii.
iii.
iv.
No structures (including walls or fencing) are to be erected that cross through the
line of any of the Public Rights of Way/Green Lane (as shown on the Definitive
Map).
The lines of the Public Rights of Way (as shown on the Definitive Map) and the
Green Lane must not be obstructed in any way and must remain clear at all times
(including during construction – unless a temporary closure/diversion is applied for
and granted).
The users of the Public Rights of Way/Green Lane must not be disadvantaged in
any way by the construction (during the works and following completion).
The surface of the Public Rights of Way/Green Lane must not be adversely affected
in any way. Any damage or mud etc. caused by the construction vehicles or any
other vehicles associated with the development must be repaired/cleaned promptly.
5.4
HEAD OF STREETSCENE & CITY SERVICES (ECOLOGY): Environmental
enhancements promised in the application should be conditioned to ensure they accrue.
5.5
HEAD OF STREETSCENE & CITY SERVICES (LANDSCAPE): Lowering the panels in the
western area of the site alongside the provision of the wattle fencing will reduce the overall
impact of the scheme. The Public Right of Way along the site boundary will have its views
to the south disrupted by the proposal (the solar arrays and new hedging). The sunken
lane should not be used for access purposes. The proposal would be acceptable subject to
appropriate mitigation in regard to the above points.
5.6
HEAD OF STREETSCENE & CITY SERVICES (TREES): No objection following
assurances over the methodology to be used on construction works within the tree root
protection areas and the low likelihood of tree pruning / felling in the future.
5.7
HEAD OF LAW & REGULATION (NOISE): No objection subject to conditions controlling
piling and background noise levels.
6.
6.1
REPRESENTATIONS
NEIGHBOURS:
All properties within 100m of the application site were consulted as well as known
addresses that commented on application 13/1203 (101 properties), site notices were
displayed at 4 locations:
• At the junction of the greenlane that runs adjacent to the site by its junction with the
B4245.
• Adjacent to the bus stop in Llanmartin.
• Adjacent to the shops in Underwood.
• Near to the junction of Shepherd Drive and the B4245.
A press notice published in South Wales Argus on the 10 January 2015.
72 representations were received, 29 objecting (including 4 proforma letters), 34 supporting
(including 14 proforma letters) and the balance making general comments, observations or
queries on the application. Representations were made by email and did not always
include postal addresses. In most instances the observations were generalised and not
related to the address of the consultee and the lack of address details did not invalidate the
comment.
Comments against noted the following:
• The site is not brownfield and is not sustainable
• Adverse impact on landscape character and visual amenities
• Damage to the green lane
• Increased traffic on local highways
• Adverse impact on local ecology
• The fencing and cameras are inappropriate in the countryside
• The site will become brownfield and could be further developed in the future
• The development will cause more flooding on the B4245 (Magor Road)
• Approval of this development will set a precedent
• The land is greenbelt
• Local footpaths will be adversely affected
• Wales is too rainy for solar developments
• Tidal power is preferable
• The profits will accrue outside of Wales
• The panels will cause glare affecting neighbours and the M4 motorway
• There is no overriding need for the development meaning it contravenes national policy
• The land is best and most versatile agricultural land and it will be lost from cultivation
long term
• There is already a solar farm in the area – cumulative effects are unacceptable
• Developing the farm will unacceptably disrupt traffic on the Magor Road
• There will be no meaningful use of the land for agriculture under solar
• End of life conditions may not be effective and there is nothing to stop the applicant
seeking a new permission 25 years from now meaning that the loss of agricultural land
could be permanent.
• The footpath to the north of the site will be constrained between the existing hedging
and the new hedge – its attractiveness and utility will be unacceptably reduced
• Provision of the grid connection would be unacceptably disruptive
• The development is out of character in a rural context
• Subsidy for solar farms is being reduced, they no longer enjoy Government support
• Land of lower agricultural grade is available, for example on the Gwent Levels
• Herbicides will be used to control plant growth on the site adversely affecting water
quality and ecology
• Heavy metals will leach from the panels and will contaminate the ground
• The character of local villages will be eroded
• The City Council must refuse applications when local people have objected
• This site is different from Llanvapley in Monmouthshire and that planning appeal should
be given little weight in this case
Comments in support noted the following:
• The proposal will be good for the local area and is a better development than
alternatives (housing)
• The scheme will benefit the immediate locality ecologically – flowers and animals
• There is a need for renewable energy
• Renewable energy is better for the environment
• Solar energy is cheap and sustainable
• The site cannot be accessed by modern agricultural machinery, solar is a good
alternative
• The applicant is offering Community Benefits
• The additional revenue will help secure the future of the farm / horse business to the
benefit of the local economy creating jobs and income
• The development will enhance the local area
• Disruption during the development will be minimal
• Bishton Community Council has changed its stance on this application and is not
representative of local opinion
• Renewables should be developed to reduce reliance on overseas energy sources
which are unreliable (Russian gas).
• Langstone Community Council has pre-judged the application and is not representing
everyone in the area
• Flooding will get worse if renewable energy generation isn’t pursued
• There will be ecological enhancement of the site
• The development will be well screened by new and existing vegetation
• The development will not be noisy
• The land is retained for agriculture long term
6.2
COUNCILLOR ATWELL: Objects for the following reasons:
• The effect of the proposed scheme on the character and appearance of the landscape
is of concern. The criteria of the policy clearly state that there should be no
unacceptable impact upon the landscape, or townscape.
• The solar farm is of a texture and colour that will differ from the surrounding farm land
and hedging/treeline and there has been no evidence supporting any restriction of glare
or reflection from the panels.
• This proposal is equivalent to a new build in the Countryside which is against NCC
policy and also against National policy in relation to the Agricultural Land Values. The
existing UDP and proposed LDP which could be in force shortly, clearly indicates that
the proposal site is outside of the settlement boundaries while TAN 6, Planning for
Sustainable Rural Communities provides support for farm diversification but makes it
clear every effort should be made to protect the best quality agricultural land.
• Planning Policy Wales is quite clear that BMV land should be conserved as a finite
resource for the future unless there is an overriding need and that lower quality land is
not suitable or available. There has been no evidence that the application has
researched the subject of lower quality land being available and in addition, the
application is within a kilometre of the adjacent Solar Farm near to Langstone Church.
• The UK Government has moved to curtail the growth of solar farms and it was
announced in the autumn that subsidies for large scale solar farms would end in April
(2015). The Minister or Environmental Secretary Lizz Truss has labelled them a blight
on the countryside, taking up land that could be used for crops, and subsidies
from these fields would be withdrawn.
• This action also applies to the Welsh Government and the UK as a whole.
• It could well be the case that the resubmission of the application is as the result of the
appeal
decision
by
the
Inspectorate
with
regard
to
Appeal
Ref:
APP/E6840/A/14/2212987 Land at Manor Farm, Llanvapley, (Monmouthshire County
Council). The proposals at Court Farm differ, on several fronts as the BMV Land values
are of a marginally higher value to that of Llanvapley. The application site is also
adjacent to several settlements and communities and is significantly close to the
settlement off the Magor road and the south west side of the A48.
6.3
COUNCILLOR KELLAWAY: Objects
• Adverse impact on the rural landscape
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
Loss of valuable farmland
Chemical pollution of soils on the site from the solar panels
Increased flooding
No need for the development
Glare from the panels would affect the residents in Waltwood Park Drive (Underwood)
Development of this type should be directed to brownfield sites
The Developer’s sequential assessment is weak failing to consider a sufficiently wide
selection of sites;
Submitting a new application is undemocratic and the applicant should have appealed
the earlier planning refusal. The Welsh Government should not bully people in this
way.
6.4
LANGSTONE COMMUNITY COUNCIL: Objects:
• a full life cycle analysis of the development is needed;
• solar panels utilise toxic chemicals in their manufacture and poise a risk to human
health and risks of land contamination;
• It is not clear who will own the development in the future;
• The applicant should have appealed against the refusal of planning permission and not
have submitted a new application;
• The land is needed for agriculture now and will be more needed in the future as global
population grows;
• The land will be industrial after 25 years and will be developed for housing
• The grant of planning permission at Llanvapley in Monmouthshire is not a precedent
since there is more agricultural land in Monmouthshire than Newport;
• The development will adversely affect landscape character and visual amenity
• Glare from the panels will affect residents in Langstone
• The greenlane will be damaged by the proposal
• The amenity of users of the public right of way passing to the north of the site will be
adversely affected by interruption of views and containment of the path. Other
footpaths will also be adversely affected.
• The site is in the view of residents of Langstone, Underwood and Llandevaud as well as
Llanmartin.
• Brownfield sites are available
• There is another solar farm at Hazel Farm leading to adverse cumulative impact in
landscape and visual terms
• The site is remote from any grid connection (3.5Km)
• Adverse impact on ecology and water quality and use of herbicides
• Increased risk of flash flooding
• Manufacturing solar panels creates pollution and uses rare earth metals, the panels are
not sustainable
• Use of concrete foundations will prevent site restoration
• The local community will not benefit financially as profits will not stay in the area
• The Community Benefits offered cannot be guaranteed
• BE Renewables might sell the site to someone else
• Granting permission will further erode the character of Langstone
• Councils are obliged by instructions from National Government to favour local opinion
over commercial interests, the Council is obliged to refuse the application
• The Community Council wishes to speak at the Planning Committee when the
application is heard
6.5
BISHTON COMMUNITY COUNCIL: Reiterate its comments in regard to application
13/1203, as follows:
• Adverse environmental and social impact on the community
• This development will allow other solar schemes to come forward
• The development will cause flooding
• The development will adversely affect rural character and appearance
• Part of the site is agricultural land of Grade 3a or better
• Brownfield sites are available for developments of this sort
• The development will have an adverse landscape impact
7.
7.1
ASSESSMENT
The Key issues relevant to the determination of this application are:
• The landscape and visual impact of the proposal;
• The effect of the proposal on protected trees;
• The effect of the proposal on local public rights of way including the Green Lane;
• The effect of the proposal on the wider public highway network;
• Community Benefits offered by the developer.
• Impact on the agricultural potential of the site over the lifetime of the development and
thereafter;
• Reversibility of the Scheme
• Impact on U.K. protected species, badgers;
• Other Issues
7.2
The Landscape and Visual Impact of the Proposal
7.2.1
The Landscape and Visual Impact Assessment (LVIA) submitted with the application
considered a 2Km study area which took in Langstone, Underwood and Llandevaud. Local
character areas were identified in landscape terms and sensitive visual receptors were also
identified, these included occupiers of dwellings, footpath users and users of transport
routes.
Designated landscapes were also considered, these being the proposed
Wentwood Special Landscape Area, Llanwern Park (Grade II historic park & garden) and
Pencoed Castle (Grade II historic park & garden).
7.2.2
The Local Character Areas (LCAs) were defined using site assessments and CNC/NRW
‘Landmap’ tool. Two LCAs were identified in the vicinity of the site. These being:
• LCA A: Langstone / Penhow Rolling Valley Lowland; this is described as comprising an
attractive rural landscape which is occasionally interrupted by the views and awareness
of the noise generated from arterial roads. The cohesive elements of the rural
landscape and the rich cultural history that have influenced the landscape combine to
overcome detracting elements and create a character area of high quality and high
value. While this LCA contains valuable features and a strong character it is considered
to have low sensitivity to change to the type of proposed development. The site is
within this area.
• LCA B: Kemeys Graig / Wentwood Ridgeline; this is described as retaining a strong
character due to its dominance in the landscape, and provides scenic value through its
elevation, recreational paths, the broad long distant views available as well as the
historical aspects retained within the landscape. Although the condition of the
landscape at times deteriorates, and sections of Wentwood are currently being
extensively felled to contain disease, the overall presence of the character area creates
a landscape of good quality and high value. This LCA is considered to have low
sensitivity to development of the type being proposed.
7.2.3
In visual terms the LVIA identifies a Zone of Visual Influence around the development. This
extends north to the ridge of Kemeys Graig and Wentwood, eastward towards Llandevaud,
southwards toward Underwood, south westwards towards the Celtic Manor hotel and south
eastwards to the Severn Estuary. In effect the Zone of Visual influence is the area in which
the development could be seen.
7.2.4
The LVIA considers the visual impact of the development at varying stages. The key
impact is during the operational phase of 25 years given the limited time period of
construction and de-commissioning. The key aspects that were considered were:
• Modification of the existing landscape e.g. hedgerow removal;
• Changes to topography;
• Changes to the existing landuses;
• Impact of new features introduced to the site.
7.2.5
The LVIA considers that in landscape terms the development will not significantly modify
the existing landscape (other than minor tree and hedge removal) or change its
topography. The new landuse will have a visual effect as will the structures that facilitate
that use but it is considered that views are limited and filtered by intervening vegetation and
that only a small part of the identified character areas would be affected.
7.2.6
In terms of the statutorily protected landscape the LVIA considers that the proposal will not
have any significant impact on Llanwern Park or the Pencoed Castle Gardens nor upon the
Wentwood Special Landscape Area identified in the adopted Newport LDP.
7.2.7
The LVIA goes on to consider visual impacts of the proposal and considers a sequence of
representative and agreed viewpoints. Overall the LVIA concludes that the view most
affected will be that from the northern edge of Underwood where the solar farm will
introduce an out of character urban / industrial element to the view which will be out of
place in relation to the cohesive surrounding fields and wider landscape character. Other
affected viewers would be in Langstone and Llandevaud where ‘side on’ views of the solar
farm will be possible. These will be filtered through intervening vegetation. From other
views the farm will be visible but at longer distances and the development will not form a
strong or noticeable part of the view.
7.2.8
The LVIA concludes that there would be a large adverse effect on users of PRoW 394/60
which passes across the northern edge of the site since the farm would be a significant
barrier to the open views to the south for the 25 year duration of the scheme.
7.2.9
Proposed mitigation for the scheme involves a hedgerow and tree planting along the
western edge of the site to break up views of the solar farm from the higher land to the west
(Langstone). Views to the south toward Underwood (the most prominent view) are not
proposed to be mitigated.
7.2.10 The LVIA concludes that the scheme will have a neutral effect on the landscape but that
there would be some slight adverse effects from certain viewpoints. It concedes there
would be significant adverse effect for users of PRoW 394/60 for the lifetime of the
development with other PRoWs in the vicinity being subject to slight adverse or neutral
effects.
7.2.11 Overall it is considered that the LVIA accurately analyses the landscape and visual effects
of the proposal. Views of the proposal from Llandevaud are filtered through the existing
line of trees along the green lane. As such the views are limited, the solar farm will be
visible but it will not dominate views and cannot be considered to have an adverse effect on
the visual amenity of the residents of Llandevaud. Views from Langstone and the higher
ground beyond Langstone will be side on to the development and the panels will certainly
be visible as they curve around the slope of the site. However distance and the impact of
the proposed mitigation will reduce the overall effect on the visual amenities of observers
viewing the site from that direction. Views from Underwood will be directly to the north and
it is clear that the solar farm will be an obvious addition in the landscape. Screening is not
a realistic option due to the shading effect of any planting on the panels. As such this view
cannot be mitigated but it is considered that the change although noticeable will not be
unacceptably harmful to the visual amenity of observers in Underwood due in part to the
separation distance and the intervening motorway corridor.
7.2.12 In terms of the impact on users of PRoW 394/60 this will be lessened by the panels being
turned on their side to reduce the overall height. This means that most users of the path
will be able to see over them and still get partial views of the scenery to the south. The
solar farm will be fenced in by a 1.8m deer (wire) fence which will be more typical of rural
areas and would have no adverse visual impact unto itself. The visual harm generated
cannot be entirely averted and any users of the path will be clearly aware of the presence
of the farm and its visual impact. However the identified harm to this user group on an
identified and promoted circular walk within the City’s rural hinterland needs to be balanced
out against the benefits of the scheme overall. In respect to the users of this PRoW as it
passes close to the site (and to a lesser extent the other PRoWs in the vicinity of the site)
their visual amenity will be significantly reduced. However the entirety of the route will not
be affected, the harm is limited in spatial and absolute terms which limit the overall
significance of the harm.
7.3
The effect of the Proposal on Protected Trees
7.3.1
The green lane and the site are characterised by mature trees of good quality and
hedgerow planting. The trees along the green lane and within the site are the subject of a
Tree Protection Order (TPO). The proposal includes the removal of three trees towards the
centre of the site and the removal of some fragmentary hedgerow remnants again in the
centre of the site. It is considered that this is acceptable and will have a minor impact on
the overall character of the site and is necessary to facilitate the delivery of the solar farm.
7.3.2
The applicant has confirmed that deliveries to the site will be along a new temporary haul
road to be provided to the west of the green lane. This is because the lane is narrow,
sunken and has surfacing which is inadequate to cope with the proposed construction
traffic. There was also concern that use of the lane would prejudice the retention of the
protected trees that line the lane. The temporary lane would be 4m wide and would be
created using a proprietary road mat. The temporary track would incorporate two passing
bays to allow HGVs to pass. There would be a facility for vehicles to turn within the site
and access the Magor Road in forward gear. The proposal also includes the provision of a
trackway around the site to allow access to the panels for maintenance. The applicant
confirms this track will not be constructed using aggregate but does not give details of the
construction. Such details can be sought under condition. In the vicinity of 3 protected oak
trees on the southern edge of the site Geocellular matting will be used within the trees’ root
protection areas. This is acceptable to the Tree Officer since it is non-invasive road
construction technique and protects the roots of the trees from damage via soil compaction.
7.3.3
On the western boundary of the site it is proposed to set the trackway around the site back
from the protected trees that line the sunken lane by 10 metres. The Tree Officer has
confirmed that this is acceptable and that the future of those trees would be protected.
7.3.4
In the light of this it is considered that the interests of the tree and hedge features on the
site can be adequately protected meaning that the scheme is compliant with NLDP Policy
GP5vii (tree retention).
7.4
The effect of the proposal on local public rights of way including the Green Lane
7.4.1
It is considered the provision of the new (temporary) access track to the west of the green
lane will protect the green lane from significant adverse effects although it will be necessary
to ensure the surface and usability of the final section between Magor Road and the new
access track is protected. This could be achieved by conditional control.
7.4.2
In terms of the PRoWs in the vicinity of the site it is considered that the effects upon path
394/59 (to the east of the green lane) are limited and acceptable. The effects on path
394/60 within the site will be significant but as noted in Paragraph 7.2.12 they are
somewhat mitigated by the lowering of the panels in the northern part of the site and given
the duration of the entire circular walk (14Km) only a relatively small portion of the walk is
affected and the overall adverse impact is small. As such the impact on the users of the
public footpath network is considered to be acceptable notwithstanding the harm within this
limited section of the walk.
7.5
The effect of the proposal on the wider public highway network
7.5.1
The Head of Streetscene is satisfied that the access arrangements are acceptable as
proposed but requests the imposition of conditions to secure a ‘Traffic Management Plan’
and a ‘Construction Management Plan’ to ensure the safety and integrity of the highway are
protected. Subject to conditional control the proposal is compliant with NLDP Policy GP4vii
(impact on the highway network).
7.6
Community Benefits offered by the developer
7.6.1
The Community Council notes that it was not directly consulted under the applicant’s
Community Engagement Programme. However the applicant has now made contact with
the Community Council. The applicant offers financial contributions to a ‘Community Fund’.
This would be £500 per Megawatt of installed capacity, that is £5000. TAN 8 is clear that
such non-planning related offers can be made by developers. However they cannot form
any part of the planning consideration. Paragraph 3.7.6 of Planning Policy Wales clearly
states that if an obligation is not:
• Necessary to make a development acceptable in planning terms
• Directly related to the proposed development
• Fairly and reasonably related in scale and kind to the development
Then the offered contribution cannot be taken into account as part of a planning
consideration as a matter of law.
As such the benefit has been offered but it cannot secured under planning legislation and it
is not material to the planning decision. Nor can it be insisted upon as part of the planning
process. As such it is a matter that carries no weight in the determination of this application
and is in effect a private matter between the applicant and the proposed beneficiaries.
7.7
The Agricultural Potential of the Site
7.7.1
The applicant’s initial submission identified the land as being in Grade 3 of the Agricultural
Land Classification (ALC). Policy protects agricultural land at Grade 3a and better.
Consequently the applicant was asked to provide a detailed ALC survey to confirm the
status of the soils on the site. The most recent survey submitted in August 2014 has been
validated by the Welsh Government’s Land Use Planning Unit. It shows the site to consist
of approximately 70% Grades 3a and 2 with the remaining 30% at Grade 3b. The soils are
distributed in coherent blocks with there being no apparent reason as to why they could not
be farmed to their maximum potential should the owner choose to do so.
7.7.2
As such a substantial part of the site benefits from the policy protection afforded by
Planning Policy Wales at Paragraph 4.10.1. Land at Grades 3a and better is considered to
be the best and most versatile agricultural land. For such land to be developed it must be
shown that there is an overriding need for the development and that land at lower grade
was either unavailable or of significant value for its landscape, wildlife or historic /
archaeological interest.
7.7.3
TAN 6 advises at Paragraph 6.2.2 that even ‘soft’ uses such as golf courses often mean
that land cannot be practicably reinstated to a best and most versatile status. The panels
will be either pinned in place or fixed to concrete footings where pinning is impractical. The
development also necessitates the construction of new trackways. The applicant has
described an end of life restoration programme within the ‘Agricultural Land Classification:
Impact and Mitigation Assessment’ submitted with the application.
7.7.4
Some of the cabling will be underground and the developer proposes to separate
excavated soils and carefully backfill trenches to protect soil quality. Shallow cables (less
than 1200mm deep) will be removed with deeper cabling being left in place but electrically
isolated. Once again careful trenching will be carried out to ensure soil quality is protected.
7.7.5
The developer proposes to use specialised vehicles on the site to reduce the risk of soil
compaction during construction and de-commissioning. Other surface structures and their
foundations will be removed unless required to be retained in place by the Distribution
Network Operator (the sub-station).
7.7.6
Following clearance of the site it will be mowed and disturbed areas will be tilled and
prepared for seeding. Further soil restoration works will be carried out as recommended
under a 5 year monitoring programme overseen by an agricultural consultant.
7.7.7
In terms of the on-going use of the site the applicant notes that the submitted Bio-diversity
and Habitat Management Plan allows for minimally two grass cuts per year to keep the
panels clear of grass and to encourage the spread of wildflowers from the proposed
wildflower meadow located at the western end of the site. They also note the site can be
grazed by sheep. The submitted ‘Agricultural Land Classification Impact Assessment and
The Sequential Test’ document notes the grass cut can be taken as silage and that the
sheep grazing allows an on-going agricultural use. Additionally the applicant points to a
potentiality to exercise horses around the perimeter of the site in support of the horse use
at Court Farm. That said the application site is considered to be in agricultural use with
there being no lawful ‘horsicultural use’ on the land. It is officer’s opinion that the main use
of the site if developed will be as a solar farm with any horse use clearly being de minimis.
7.7.8
The applicant has suggested informally that the land will in effect be retained in a mixed
use of solar farm and agricultural use. The applicant notes the existence of specialised
equipment to take silage off constrained sites such as the solar farm. However grass
beneath the panels would need to be strimmed and raked into the aisles between the
panels prior to bailing significantly raising the cost of producing the silage. This incombination with the use of specialist equipment raises significant cost implications and
suggests any silage taken from the site would be a means to subsidise the grass
management on the solar farm rather than a meaningful agricultural endeavour. As such
the agricultural benefits of the scheme are considered to be significantly limited and it is
clear the land would fall out of the best and most versatile category for the lifetime of the
development and in reality the agricultural potential under solar would be highly curtailed.
As such any on-going agricultural use under solar is not considered to be significant benefit
of the scheme and certainly insufficient to consider that the land would remain in
meaningful agricultural production for the lifetime of the development. As such the
proposal is considered to mean the loss of an area of best and most versatile agricultural
land for the duration of the development and potentially beyond that if restoration to full
agricultural use is not meaningfully possible due to practical or cost reasons. The applicant
states the proposal will have a minor impact on the agricultural potential of the site but this
appears to be predicated on the use of the site as pasture land / grazing for horses, rather
than upon its full agricultural potential. Officers consider that the proposal would have a
significant adverse impact on the agricultural potential of the site during the development’s
operational phase and potentially beyond that if restoration was not possible or viable.
7.7.9
The PPW policy objection is not a blanket restriction and implies the application of a
sequential test where sites containing best and most versatile soils (Grade 3a and above)
are proposed for development. The provision of solar farms requires sites that meet the
necessary technical criteria. They must be south facing, be sensibly accessible and
capable of procuring a grid connection. It is considered that should the applicant be able to
show overriding need and no sites of lower ALC grading were available then the use of
sites of higher grade would be possible. In the light of this the applicant has sought to
justify the site selection. They describe a process in which technical constraints were
considered and potential sites outside the constrained areas were identified. These were
winnowed down discounting sites at risk of flooding, that were too close to housing or within
sensitive environments (SSSIs, Special Landscape Areas etc.). A series of possible sites
were identified and scored against a constraint matrix. The applicant reports that the Court
Farm site scored the best despite scoring negatively on land grade (since it was not lower
than grade 3b). The applicant does not give the detailed locations of other sites but does
give reasons for them being discarded, this includes agricultural land grading in the case of
some sites (but not all).
7.7.10 The applicant has submitted a Sequential Test document which points out that the loss of
agricultural land is minor is absolute terms. The applicant also notes that the land is
currently in use as pasture and to produce silage and that this operation can continue
under solar whilst strengthening the overall farm business by enabling a new revenue
stream to be generated. The applicant claims the development will result in no change to
the current land use. As noted above this is not accepted.
7.7.11 The submitted sequential test made a consideration of grid capacity over the whole of
Wales and identified area of surplus grid capacity where solar might be developed. A
further strategic analysis was made discounting areas of significant landscape or ecological
value or where flooding was a constraint. This left two viable areas on a national basis:
• An area east of Newport served by the Magor sub-station
• An area of north east Wales between Wrexham and Queensferry / Broughton
The N.E. Wales option was discarded due to the lower levels of irradiance received,
specific site factors that militated against the proposal or the lack of interest from
landowners
7.7.12 Consequently focus shifted to sites near the Magor sub-station.
considered were:
Factors that were
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
Levels of irradiance (south facing sites)
Viable grid connection
A site of sufficient size and contiguity (30 acres)
Road access
Site available for the required period (25 years)
Flood risk
Other development management considerations:
o Landscape
o Visual amenity
o ALC
o Development Plan allocation
7.7.13 Specific Sites were then analysed for their overall potential being discarded for various
reasons until the Court Farm site was identified as the most appropriate. The site
assessment also included a superficial assessment of brownfield sites and rooftop potential
which concluded that appropriate sites were not available.
7.7.14 The applicant made a further consideration of brownfield potential to accommodate the
development following a request from the Council. The applicant was directed to the areas
of potential for renewable energy identified in the LDP background paper ‘Renewable and
Low Carbon Energy Assessment (May 2013)’ which were also brownfield sites. This was
required to show compliance with adopted NLDP Policy CE10 which directs major
renewable schemes to brownfield sites in the first instance. The Background Paper
identifies two brownfield sites with potential for solar development. These are the Council
tip at site Maesglas and the former tipping area to the south of Llanwern Steelworks. The
applicant has established that Tata Steel who own the former tipping site would not support
an application for solar development on their landholding. Newport Norse has confirmed it
would not support solar development on the Council’s tip site. The Policy allows for the
development of greenfield sites for renewable generation if brownfield sites are not
available. Given the lack of brownfield sites the default to greenfield sites is appropriate and
acceptable under NLDP Policy CE10.
7.7.15 Paragraph 4.10.1 of Planning Policy Wales protects land of Grade 3a and above and
requires that it should only be developed if there is an overriding need for the development
and land of lower grading is not available. The applicant has sought to establish overriding
need and points to Welsh Government support for renewables as evidence of the
overriding need for the development. However notwithstanding the clear policy support for
renewables at national level there is no reason to think the Welsh Government sees the
provision of renewables as an overriding need. In response to a letter from an objector to
the scheme the Welsh Government’s Department for Natural resources commented that:
‘Whilst we are unable to comment on specific cases, national planning policy states that the
Best and Most Versatile (BMV) agricultural land (designated as Grade 1, 2 or 3a) should be
conserved as a finite resource for the future and that in taking decisions on development
proposals considerable weight should be given to protecting such land from development.
The Welsh Government is also committed to playing its part in reducing carbon emissions
as part of our approach to tackling climate change; as such our policy is facilitate the
development of all forms of renewable energy to move towards a low carbon economy.
This forms part of our approach to meet the UKs target to generate 15% of its energy from
renewables by 2020 as required by the EU Renewable Energy Directive.
In making decisions on planning applications decision makers, whether this is Local
Planning Authorities, Planning Inspectors or Welsh Ministers, should seek to balance these
two policy objectives using the evidence available to them on a case-by-case basis’.
7.7.16 Although this is not advice formally provided to the Council it is clear that the Welsh
Government sees renewable provision as consideration to be balanced against other
factors in any planning determination. In short it is not an overriding need. This would be
further confirmed by appeal decision U6925/A/13/2209535 when a proposal for three wind
turbines at Bedlinog was dismissed due to adverse impact on historic landscape and visual
amenity further confirming that renewable energy provision is not an overriding need in the
Welsh context. As such this requirement of Paragraph 4.10.1 of PPW is on its face, not
met.
7.7.17 In regard to the sequential element of the test the applicant has clearly made a wide
consideration of possible sites including on a national basis. Some concerns stem from the
final site selection since for example some sites (WLD005 – Gwent Levels) were discarded
due to their ALC whereas this site (with a protected ALC) was not discarded. Also some of
the reasoning for the discard of other Gwent sites is not well explained, for example
proximity to the River Severn SAC / SSSI / Ramsar site would not necessarily invalidate a
site for solar development. As such some of the reasoning for discarding of sites is not
clear or well-explained. As such there would be some doubt as to whether sites of lower
agricultural grading where genuinely unavailable or undeliverable from the analysis
currently provided.
7.7.18 However appeal E6840/A/14/2212987 determined in October 2014 (Manor Farm,
Llanvapley) gives an indication of how an Inspector appointed by the Welsh Ministers
addressed similar issues on another site in the S.E. Wales area. That site consisted of
Land in Grade 2 (87%) and Grade 3b (13%). As such the proposal would have involved
the loss of land in nationally protected agricultural grades.
7.7.19 The Inspector went on to say that the reversibility of the development was an important
factor to consider relying on Paragraphs 8.4.16 & 8.4.17 of the ‘Practice Guidance –
Planning Implications of Renewable Energy and Low Carbon Energy’ (February 2011).
The Inspector concluded that Planning Policy Wales paragraph 4.10.1 did not require a ‘full’
sequential test but did not elaborate on what he meant by that. He did however conclude
that the work undertaken by the appellant in regard to the appeal was sufficient to
demonstrate that land of lower grading (on suitable) sites was not available meaning that
the sequential arm of the test in paragraph 4.10.1 of Planning Policy Wales would have
been met.
7.7.20 He then went on to address the ‘over-riding need’ element of the test concluding that since
there was no permanent loss of the site and reversibility could be demonstrated (due to
construction techniques and methodology) then that element of the test should be given
very little weight being more appropriate to situations when the land would be permanently
lost. In effect he concluded that solar farm developers did not need to show over-riding
need so long as reversibility could be demonstrated so that any loss would not be
permanent. In effect the long-term retention of the site for agricultural use could be
assured. The inspector concluded at Paragraph 47 of his decision:
‘that the scheme would involve the use of high quality agricultural land, but that it would
only be for a limited period of time and without long-term detriment to the land, such that
any conflict with national policy would be of little weight; and that the scheme would bring
considerable benefit by the generation of renewable energy in support of national policy
and some local benefits’.
7.7.21 In effect the Inspector’s conclusions meant that the policy implications of paragraph 4.10.1
of Planning Policy Wales were significantly weakened in the event that a development was
temporary and reversible. If the applicant could show that the development was reversible
then there was no requirement to show over-riding need and the extent and scope of any
sequential test required would be much reduced since in effect the requirements of the
policy, that higher value agricultural land is retained long-term, were met.
7.7.22 In the light of these findings any objection on agricultural land classification is significantly
weakened (and proportionally reduced in weight in any planning consideration) so long as
the applicant can demonstrate reversibility of the scheme and conditions that would require
site restoration can be applied and enforced.
7.7.23 As such it is concluded that the proposal is compliant with the Llanvapley Inspector’s
interpretation of the application of Paragraph 4.10.1 of Planning Policy Wales to solar
developments since the land could be retained for agricultural use. By extension the
proposal would also be compliant with Policy GP5iv of the adopted NLDP. However this
compliance is predicated on the development being demonstrably reversible and an
acceptance that the Inspector has correctly understood and applied the relevant national
policy. As noted in the introduction the interpretation of Policy is a matter of law, prior to
the Dundee ruling it was enough that the policy had been interpreted and applied in a
reasonable way (the application of the policy not being irrational or perverse). However the
Supreme Court concluded that ‘policy statements should be interpreted objectively in
accordance with the language used, read as always in its proper context’, meaning there is
scope for interpretation of policy but that that lies within relatively narrow parameters.
7.7.24 The Llanvapley Inspector’s decision has not been tested legally and so it cannot be certain
that his interpretation and application of the relevant Welsh national policy in question is
legally correct and beyond challenge. However his decision is certainly a material planning
consideration. What weight to put upon a material planning consideration remains with the
decision maker. In Officer’s opinion the decision is capable of bearing significant weight
since Inspector’s decisions are persuasive (but not binding). There is no indication that the
Inspector’s policy interpretation and application was incorrect in the Llanvapley appeal and
without further clarification on that matter the decision arrived at would be persuasive in
applications for similar developments on similar sites. The Costs Circular notes that it
would be unreasonable not to take into account relevant appeal decisions when
determining applications. This is further confirmation of the materiality of Inspector’s
decisions but it should be borne in mind that although material an appeal decision is not
binding and would remain capable of being outweighed by other considerations.
7.7.25 In this case the initial application was refused permission solely because of the loss of
higher grade agricultural land. The reason for refusal read as follows:
1. The proposal will result in the loss of best and most versatile agricultural land for a period of
minimally 25 years without the applicant having demonstrated an overriding need for the
proposal or that viable sites on land of Grade 3b or lower are not available to accommodate
the proposal. This is contrary to National Policy stated at Paragraph 4.10.1 of Planning
Policy Wales (Edition 7) and TAN 6.
7.7.26 In effect the reason for refusal was predicated around the Policy objection contained in
Paragraph 4.10.1 of PPW. The Llanvapley appeal established that there was no
requirement to show an overriding need for the development so long as it could be
established that there was no permanent loss of agricultural land. Likewise the necessity
for a full sequential test was also reduced in the mind of the Inspector. In effect it was
concluded that temporary and reversible developments meet the Policy requirements of
Paragraph 4.10.1 since the agricultural land is retained long term. The Inspector concluded
that any objection on the basis of Paragraph 4.10.1 would have very little weight so long as
the development was temporary and reversible.
7.7.27 As noted there is no reason to conclude the Inspector has misconstrued the relevant Policy
or accorded the temporary loss of the land an inappropriately low weighting. In the light of
this it can be concluded that the benefits of the scheme outweigh the identified harm, that is
the temporary and reversible loss of higher grade agricultural land.
7.8
Reversibility of the Scheme
7.8.1
The applicant has described an end of life restoration programme within his ‘Agricultural
Land Classification: Impact and Mitigation Assessment’.
7.8.2
Some of the cabling will be underground and the developer proposes to separate
excavated soils and carefully backfill trenches to protect soil quality. Shallow cables (less
than 1200mm deep) will be removed with deeper cabling being left in place but electrically
isolated. Once again careful trenching will be carried out to ensure soil quality is protected.
7.8.3
The developer proposes to use specialised vehicles on the site to reduce the risk of soil
compaction during construction and de-commissioning. Other surface structures and their
foundations will be removed unless required to be retained in place by the Distribution
Network Operator (the sub-station).
7.8.4
Matting will be used instead of gravelled trackways were possible during construction. The
proposed trackway around the site will not be gravelled.
7.8.5
Following clearance of the site it will be mowed and disturbed areas will be tilled and
prepared for seeding. Further soil restoration works will be carried out as recommended
under a 5 year monitoring programme overseen by an agricultural consultant.
7.8.6
Control over the construction and de-commissioning programme can be achieved under
the conditional regime and there appears to be no implicit reason why the site cannot be
developed and restored as described by the applicant. As such restoration is achievable
and any Policy objection under paragraph 4.10.1 of PPW and Policy GP5iv of the NLDP
would fall away.
7.9
U.K. Protected Species; Badgers
7.9.1
No issues were raised in regard to biodiversity in regard to this application but concerns
were raised over badgers under application 13/1203. The Ecology Officer and Gwent
Badger Group confirmed two of the holes in question were in use by rabbits and that the
third showed signs of historic badger activity but was no longer in use.
7.9.2
Given how recent the above site visit was undertaken (September 2014) and the lack of
any objection in regard to this application on protected species grounds there is no reason
to think there would be any adverse impact on the local badger population if the proposal
was to go ahead.
Other Issues
7.10
Glare and Glint, this has been raised as an issue by neighbours. The applicant addresses
the matter in his Environmental Report and concludes that glare and glint are unlikely to be
a significant problem to road traffic, air traffic or dwellings and will be mitigated by planting
proposals. There is no reason to disagree with this assessment. The Welsh Government
Transport Division has not objected and considers there would be no adverse impact on
the operation of the M4.
7.11
Biodiversity (other than badgers): the proposal will have very limited impact on existing
features on the site (removal of three trees and some short isolated sections of hedging),
new hedges will be planted under the landscaping scheme and open areas will be
managed as grasslands. The area within the solar farm could be sheep grazed.
Adherence with the Biodiversity and Habitat Management Plan and the benefits that would
accrue from this can be required under condition.
7.12
Temporary Access Track: the access track is proposed to be temporary. However at the
end of its life the solar farm will need to be removed. The green lane is not considered to
be suitable for this just as it is not suitable for the construction phase. As such it is not
proposed to require the removal of the access track under condition on the basis that it will
be useful for maintenance and decommissioning works. Its ultimate removal can be
required under a conditioned de-commissioning scheme. This will leave the decision as to
whether to remove the track to the applicant, should it be retained for the life of the scheme
it is not considered to be harmful in visual or highway terms.
7.13
Noise: The Head of Law and Regulation has requested a condition that noise generation
from the site should be limited to not more than 5dB above background levels. However
the site is remote from dwellings and the use is not inherently noisy although equipment
such as switch gear or fans will generate some noise. However it is not felt that this is so
noisy that the rural character of the site will be adversely affected to a significant degree or
that a planning condition is necessary. A condition controlling piling has also been
requested, this can be dealt with under a Construction Management Plan condition.
7.14
Flooding: The panels will be underlain by grassland and there is no reason to think that the
run-off from the site will be significantly increased to the extent that offsite flooding will
occur. Cyfoeth Naturiol Cymru / National Resources Wales have been consulted and have
not raised any objection. The Drainage Manager notes the proposal has the scope to
increase run-off particularly via the proposed trackways. The applicant notes that SUDS
methods can be used to reduce run-off during the operational life of the scheme. A
Construction Management Plan can be used to control drainage during the construction
phase. Overall it is concluded that conditions can be used to prevent drainage issues
arising on the site particularly given the small area of the site that will actually be developed
in such a way that permeable surface is lost (the tracks).
7.15
Fencing: The proposed fencing (1.8m high deer fence) is considered appropriate in a rural
context.
7.16
Usability of the Public Footpath: the Public Right of Way will be accommodated by the
scheme and lies outside the application area. There is no reason to consider that the
footpath will be rendered unusable by the scheme. The public rights of way officer has not
objected. The footpath potentially becoming overgrown in the future is not a planning
matter and is a risk that currently exists in any event.
7.17
Grid Connection: the proposed grid connection would be along the Magor Road to the substation at Magor. The works can potentially be achieved under permitted development
(Part 17G of the General Permitted Development Order 1995 as amended) if carried out by
a statutory undertaker. Alternatively permission could be sought in the normal way. There
is no reason to think the running of infrastructure on the proposed route is unacceptable in
highway or landscape terms or that permission would be refused if it was sought.
Concerns have been raised that the installed cable is ‘over-sized’ and would facilitate
further solar developments along the route to the sub-station. It is not considered that this
would amount to a reason for refusal since any other solar developments proposed would
be considered on their own merits and the existence of a grid connection would not make
an unacceptable development acceptable (although it would make it possible). Disruption
to the highway network is possible but there is no reason to think that this would be of such
an extent as to be unacceptable.
7.18
Delivery Route and HGV Generation: There is no reason to think the proposed delivery
route is unacceptable or that HGV generation over the construction phase (3-4 months)
would be unacceptable in the context of the highway network, a two lane ‘B’ road
connecting to the Motorway at Magor.
7.19
End of Life / Enforceability of Conditions: Planning Policy Wales describes previously
developed land (pdl) as:
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.
Officers consider that given an appropriate conditional regime that restricted the life of the
development and required the removal of structures at the end of that life then the land
would not be classed as pdl and would revert to its previous greenfield status.
In terms of the ability to apply conditions Welsh Government Circular 016/2014 (Conditions)
Paragraph 5.29 allows for the restoration of sites subject to temporary conditions. That
Paragraph reads as follows:
If a temporary permission is for development consisting of or including the carrying out of
operations, provision must be made for the removal of any buildings and associated works,
as well as the cessation of the use, and for the reinstatement of the land when the
permission expires.
The suggested conditions provided for Renewable Energy (107-110) also allow for site
restoration as does the advice in regard to mineral development, waste sites and temporary
gypsy permissions. As such there is no reason to think that an appropriate conditional
regime cannot be applied to this site requiring the cessation of use and subsequent
restoration,
This is further reinforced in the Practice Guidance – Planning Implications of Renewable
and Low Carbon Energy (February 2011) which cites at paragraph 20.21 that typical
conditions would relate to removal of equipment and restoration and afteruse of the site.
Although that paragraph relates to wind energy there is no reason to think the same
principles would not apply to ground mounted solar.
Overall Officers are satisfied that the land would not be pdl at the end of the scheme’s life
and that appropriate conditions can be applied and enforced.
7.20
Level of Objection: Planning Policy Wales states at Paragraph 3.1.8 that:
When determining planning applications local planning authorities must take into account
any relevant view on planning matters expressed by neighbouring occupiers, local
residents and any other third parties. While the substance of local views must be
considered, the duty is to decide each case on its planning merits. As a general principle,
local opposition or support for a proposal is not, on its own, a reasonable ground for
refusing or granting planning permission;
As such the level of local objection is not in itself a reason to refuse permission and there is
no guidance that says local objection requires an application to be refused. Relevant
comments made in support of and against the decision are capable of bearing weight in a
planning decision and have been reported.
7.21
Pollution: This application is for the siting of solar panels and is not for a facility that
manufactures solar panels. The pollution implications involved in the manufacture of solar
panels are not relevant to this consideration. In terms of sustainability the development of
solar farms enjoys support in Welsh national planning policy. There is no evidence that the
siting of solar panels on land can lead to contamination of that land.
7.22
Site Management – use of herbicides: The land is in agricultural use and herbicides and
other agro-chemicals can be legitimately used on the site currently. A conditioned
Ecological Management Plan could potentially preclude the use of such chemicals. There
is no reason to think this issue would amount to a reason to refuse planning permission.
7.23
Ownership: Ownership of the site is not a planning matter and is not relevant to the
determination of this application.
7.24
Subsidy: regardless of the U.K. Government’s position on subsidies to solar farms,
planning is a devolved matter and Welsh Government Planning Policy (PPW) remains
supportive of renewable generation. Changes in the subsidy regime would not be a reason
to refuse planning permission.
7.25
Policy SP21 protects the future supply of minerals by safeguarding hardrock and sand and
gravel resources. Since the permission that is sought is temporary the long-term availability
of any mineral resource is protected.
8.0
The Planning Balance
8.1
Overall the changes to the Landscape and Visual Amenity of observers is not considered to
be unacceptably harmful unto itself. No designated landscapes are adversely affected to
an unacceptable level. Although there is clear harm to the visual amenity of users of PRoW
349/60 that runs along the northern edge of the site this is not considered to be so great
that permission should be withheld.
National advice is clear that other than in
circumstances where visual impact is critically damaging to a listed building, ancient
monument or a conservation area vista, proposals for appropriately designed solar thermal
and PV systems should be supported. In this case it is not considered that critical visual
harm is caused and as such the proposal is acceptable in visual terms. The development
will deliver the clear benefit of low carbon electricity generation which outweighs the limited
visual harm of the proposal. In highway terms the development is acceptable and the
protected trees on the site can be preserved. Other issues are not considered to be
harmful to the public interest and the proposed Community Benefit is not material to the
consideration.
8.2
Application 13/1203 was refused since it was concluded that the Policy tests in Paragraph
4.10.1 of Planning Policy Wales were not met. These are that there is an overriding need
for the development and that sequentially preferable land (land of lower agricultural
grading) is not available. In terms of the current application it is concluded that an overriding need has still not been made out. There is nothing in recent appeal decisions or
Welsh Government guidance to indicate that the provision of renewable energy is now
considered to be an overriding need within Wales. In effect renewable generation is a
material consideration to be weighed in the balance against other considerations pertinent
to the application.
8.3
The applicant has also sought to establish that viable sites on land of lower agricultural
grading are not available. A consideration was made of sites on a national basis but
reasons of grid capacity and irradiance levels resulted in a focus on the vicinity of the
Magor sub-station. A further sift was carried out with other sites that were technically viable
being whittled down due to development management criteria such as agricultural land
classification, landscape, visual amenity, conservation designation and other relevant
issues. Whilst some doubts remain over the robustness of the sequential assessment
ultimately those concerns are irrelevant in the face of the Policy interpretation exemplified
in the Llanvapley appeal. In effect the Inspector concluded that in the event a development
was temporary and restoration of the site to its former condition was practically and
economically possible then the aims of Paragraph 4.10.1 were met since the land was
being retained long-term for agricultural use. In effect the Policy was complied with subject
to appropriate conditioning in terms of how the development was undertaken, limiting the
life of the development and requiring the restoration of the site. As such the fact that the
applicant has not shown overriding need nor been particularly compelling in their sequential
testing is irrelevant as the Inspector’s policy interpretation does not require a stringent
compliance subject to the development being reversible.
8.4
In terms of reversibility the applicant has given assurances over the construction
methodology and the restoration of the site. Details of both of these processes can be
required under condition and there is no reason to think the long-term agricultural potential
of the site will be significantly adversely affected if there is an appropriate conditional
regime in place. The construction of solar farms is now a standardised technology and
there is no reason to think there is anything in the particulars of this site which would
prevent an appropriate restoration. As such it can be concluded that Paragraph 4.10.1 of
PPW is complied with if appropriate conditions are applied.
8.5
In terms of local Policy NLDP Policy CE10 directs large scale renewable generation to
brownfield in preference to greenfield sites. However the two principle brownfield sites
identified in the LDP process for ground mounted solar development are not available and
other sites are earmarked for higher value land uses such as housing. As such the
greenfield location of the development is acceptable in principle. Policy CE10 is complied
with.
9.
9.1
OTHER CONSIDERATIONS
Crime and Disorder Act 1998
Section 17(1) of the Crime and Disorder Act 1998 imposes a duty on the Local Authority to
exercise its various functions with due regard to the likely effect of the exercise of those
functions on, and the need to do all that it reasonably can to prevent, crime and disorder in
its area. This duty has been considered in the evaluation of this application. It is
considered that there would be no significant or unacceptable increase in crime and
disorder as a result of the proposed decision.
9.2
Equality Act 2010
The Equality Act 2010 identifies a number of ‘protected characteristics’, namely age;
disability; gender reassignment; pregnancy and maternity; race; religion or belief; sex;
sexual orientation; marriage and civil partnership.
9.3
Having due regard to advancing equality involves:
•
•
•
removing or minimising disadvantages suffered by people due to their protected
characteristics;
taking steps to meet the needs of people from protected groups where these differ
from the need of other people; and
encouraging people from protected groups to participate in public life or in other
activities where their participation is disproportionately low.
9.4
The above duty has been given due consideration in the determination of this application.
It is considered that the proposed development does not have any significant implications
for, or effect on, persons who share a protected characteristic, over and above any other
person.
10.
10.1
CONCLUSION
Overall it is considered that the harm to landscape character, visual amenity and the
amenity of users of the public footpath network is not of sufficient weight to justify a refusal
of permission especially given the benefits of the scheme and the broad policy support
enjoyed by renewable generation at national and local level.
11.
RECOMMENDATION
GRANTED WITH CONDITIONS
Plans Condition
This proposal shall be carried out in accordance with the following plans and documents:
Planning Statement (December 2014) inclusive of Appendices 1-29, Environmental Report
(December 2014), Design and Access Statement (December 2014), Email from Amy
Williams regarding Policy CE10 (10 February 2015 15:01), Drawing 1062403 – Figure 001
(1) – Energy Opportunity Map, Email from John Wood (02 February 2015 17:17) &
Statement of Community Involvement (December 2014).
Reason: to comply with Paragraph 4.16 of Welsh Government Circular 016/2014
(Conditions).
Pre-commencement conditions
01 ROOT PROTECTION DETAILS: No operations of any description (this includes all
forms of development, tree felling, tree pruning, temporary access construction, soil
moving, and operations involving the use of motorised vehicles or construction machinery),
shall commence on site in connection with the development until Root Protection Barrier
fencing has been installed in accordance with details that have been submitted to and
approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. These details shall include information
on the constructional details of the fencing and its positioning clearly shown in plan form.
No excavation for services, storage of materials or machinery, parking of vehicles, deposits
or excavation of soil or rubble, lighting of fires or disposal of liquids shall take place within
the Root Protection Areas defined by the fencing. The fencing shall be retained for the full
duration of the construction phase of the development, and shall not be removed or
repositioned without the prior written approval of the Local Planning Authority.
Reason: To protect important landscape features within the site.
02 ARBORICULTURALIST: No development, to include demolition, shall commence until
an Arboriculturalist has been appointed, as first agreed in writing by the Local Planning
Authority, to oversee the project (to perform a Watching Brief) for the duration of the
development and who shall be responsible for:
• Supervision and monitoring of the approved Root Protection Details;
• Supervision and monitoring of the approved tree felling and pruning works;
• Supervision of the alteration or temporary removal of any Barrier Fencing;
• Oversee working within any Root Protection Area;
• Reporting to the Local Planning Authority;
• The Arboricultural Consultant will provide site progress reports to the Council's Tree
Officer at monthly intervals - commencement to be agreed by the Councils Tree Officer.
Reason: To protect important landscape features within the site.
03 ROAD CONDITION SURVEYS AND REPAIR PROGRAMME: Prior to works
commencing and then within 3 months of the installation of the solar panels, the developer
(or any successor in title) shall undertake condition surveys of the part of the green lane
and its junction with the B4245 used to access the site. The surveys and a programme of
necessary repair works including timings for the completions of those works shall be
submitted in writing to the Council within 4 months of the first export date. Following the
Council’s written agreement the programme of repair works shall be completed fully as
agreed.
Reason: to ensure the public highway is not damaged by the proposal.
04 CONSTRUCTION METHOD STATEMENT: Development shall not be begun until a
construction method statement has been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local
Planning Authority. The construction method statement shall set out details of all on-site
construction works; post-construction reinstatement; drainage; mitigation; and other
restoration, together with details of their timetabling. It shall include details of, and
measures to secure:
(a) the phasing of construction works;
(b) the formation and position of the temporary construction compound;
(c) dust management and suppression;
(d) cleaning of site entrance, facilities for wheel washing and cleaning the adjacent public
highway;
(e) pollution control, including the protection of water courses and ground water; subsoil
surface water drainage; bunding of fuel storage areas; sewage and foul water drainage and
disposal; and emergency procedures and pollution response plans;
(f) temporary site illumination during the construction period;
(g) the methods to be adopted to reduce the effects of noise occurring during the
construction period to the lowest practicable levels and in accordance with BS 5228: Noise
control on construction and open sites;
(h) storage of materials and disposal of surplus materials;
(i) the construction of the access into the site, the erection of any entrance gates and the
creation and maintenance of associated visibility splays;
(j) access tracks and other areas of hardstanding, including areas of temporary road
matting;
(l) the carrying out of foundation works, including the foundation of the solar arrays and any
other structures to be installed on the site;
(m) method of working cable trenches, including soil storage and back-filling;
(n) general soil storage and handling;
(o) post-construction restoration/reinstatement of the working areas, including cable
trenches and area covered by any matting;
(p) the sheeting of all heavy goods vehicles construction materials to, or spoil from, the site
to prevent spillage or deposit of any materials on the highway;
(q) details of the vehicles to be used on the site during construction activities
(r) details of control of surface water to prevent it entering the public highway
The works shall proceed in full accordance with the agreed construction method statement.
Reason: to protect the interests of the rural character of the area, the integrity and safety of
the highway network and to protect the amenity of residents and to ensure the site can be
restored to agricultural use.
05 CONTROL OF RUN-OFF WITHIN THE SITE: No development shall commence on the
site until details have been provided to show how run-off generated within the site shall be
contained and prevented from running into the B4245. Thereafter the agreed scheme shall
be implemented fully as agreed prior to the first export date.
Reason: to prevent flooding of the highway.
Other conditions requiring the submission of information
06 DETAILS OF TRACKWAY CONSTRUCTION: No tracks shall be constructed on the site
until details of their construction have been provided in writing to the LPA. Following the
LPA’s written agreement any tracks shall be constructed fully in accordance with the
agreed details.
Reason: to ensure any tracks are constructed in a fully reversible way in the long-term
interests of restoring the site to agricultural use and to reduce the risk of run-off entering the
highway.
07 DECOMMISSIONING – Decommissioning and restoration: Not later than 12 months
before the expiry of this permission, a decommissioning and site restoration scheme shall
be submitted for the written approval of the Local Planning Authority. The scheme shall
make provision for the removal of the solar panels and all other associated equipment &
paraphernalia and the subsequent restoration of the site. The scheme shall include details
of:
• the extent of equipment and foundation removal and the site restoration to be carried
out;
• the management and timing of any works;
• a traffic management plan to address likely traffic impact issues during the
decommissioning period;
• an environmental management plan to include details of measures to be taken during
the decommissioning period to protect wildlife, habitats and tree features on the site;
• identification of access routes;
• location of material laydown areas;
• full details of the removal of the solar arrays, associated buildings and plant, any
trackways and sub-surface cabling and all associated works of ground restoration
including trench backfilling;
• full details of all works to restore the land to allow for agricultural production following
the removal of structures from the site;
• a programme of implementation.
The approved scheme shall be implemented within 12 months of the expiry of this
permission and then proceed fully in accordance with the agreed details in accordance with
the decommissioning programme.
Reason: to ensure the site is fully restored to allow agricultural use and to maintain the rural
appearance of the area.
08 REPAIR, REPLACEMENT AND REMOVAL OF SOLAR FARM: If the solar farm hereby
permitted fails to produce electricity for supply to the grid for a continuous period of 6
months, a scheme shall be submitted to the Local Planning Authority for its written approval
within 3 months of the end of that 6 month period for the repair or removal of the solar farm.
Where repairs or replacements are required the scheme shall include a proposed
programme of remedial works. Where removal of the solar farm is required the scheme
shall include the same details required under condition 07) of this permission. The relevant
scheme shall thereafter be implemented in accordance with the approved details and
timetable.
Reason: to ensure the solar farm beneficially generates electricity or is otherwise removed
to the benefit of the character and appearance and the agricultural potential of the area.
09 LIFETIME OF THE PROPOSAL: the permission hereby granted shall expire 25 years
from the date when electrical power is first exported (‘first export date’) from the solar farm
to the electricity grid network, excluding electricity exported during initial testing and
commissioning. Written confirmation of the first export date shall be provided to the Local
Planning Authority no later than one calendar month after the event.
Reason: the proposed scheme has a 25 year lifespan.
10 TRAFFIC MANAGEMENT PLAN: No HGV shall access the site until the temporary
access track has been provided and details of a traffic management plan (TMP) have been
submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The TMP shall
include details of:
• Signage;
• Details of temporary traffic management measures, such as traffic lights;
• All other measures to be taken to ensure the site can be accessed safely and with
minimum disruption to the public highway including the green lane.
Reason: to protect the integrity and safety of the highway network.
11 DETAILS OF MARSHALLING CABINETS AND TRANSFORMER: Full details of the
marshalling cabinets and the transformer (including their siting) shall be provided to the
LPA in writing prior to their installation. Following the LPA’s written agreement the
marshalling cabinets and the transformer shall be installed as agreed and retained as such.
Reason: In the interests of visual amenity.
Directive conditions
12 NO USE OF GREEN LANE: No use shall be made of the green lane (Reference No.
100-12) to undertake either the construction or de-commissioning works of the solar farm
other than is necessary to pass between the B4245 Magor Road and the start of the
temporary access track shown in ‘Drawing 1054709-LUD-CF-004D - Additional Drawing C’.
Reason: to prevent damage to the green lane.
13 IMPLEMENTATION OF LANDSCAPING: the landscaping shown in ‘Drawing 1054709LUD-CF-002C - Proposed Soft Landscaping to the Western Field’ (Appendix 23) and all
other proposed new hedging shall be carried out in its entirety by a date not later than the
end of the full planting season immediately following the first export date. Thereafter the
trees and shrubs shall be maintained for a period of 5 years from the date of planting and
any which die or are damaged shall be replaced and maintained until satisfactorily
established. For the purpose of this condition, a full planting season shall mean the period
from October to April inclusive.
Reason: To secure the satisfactory landscaping and visual mitigation of the proposal.
14 WATTLE FENCING: the wattle fencing shall be implemented fully in accordance with
the details of Drawings Appendix 6b (Wattle Fence) and 1054709-LUD-CF-002C
(Proposed Soft Landscaping to the Western Field) within one month of the first export date.
Reason: to ensure the visual impact of the development is mitigated.
15 IMPLEMENTATION OF BIODIVERISTY PLAN: all works and future site management
shall be carried out in accordance with the Biodiversity and Habitat Management Plan
(November 2013).
Reason: to maintain and enhance the biodiversity value of the site.
16 LIGHTING: There shall be no permanent illumination on the site unless otherwise
agreed in writing by the local planning authority.
Reason: to protect the rural character of the site.
17 COMPLIANCE WITH TREE PROTECTION: the access track in the vicinity of trees 65,
66 & 67 shall be provided fully in accordance with the details shown in the Drawing entitled
Appendix 28 – Tree Protection Measures (No drawing number Rev. A). The access track
from the Magor Road to the site shall be provided fully in accordance with the details of
Drawing 1054709-LUD-CF-004D and all constructional details submitted under other
conditions.
Reason: to ensure the future health of protected trees.
NOTE TO APPLICANT
01 The development plan for Newport is the Newport Local Development Plan 2011 – 2026
(Adopted January 2015). Policies SP1, SP5, SP8, SP21, GP1, GP2, GP3, GP5, GP6, GP7,
CE10 & T7 were relevant to the determination of this application.
02 As of 1st October 2012 any connection to the public sewerage network (foul or surface
water sewerage) for the first time will require an adoption agreement with Dwr Cymru
Welsh Water. For further advice contact Dwr Cymru Welsh Water on 01443 331155.
03 The proposed development (including any demolition) has been screened under the
Environmental Impact Assessment Regulations and it is considered that an Environmental
Statement is not required.
_______________________________________________________________________________________
Penderfyniad ar yr Apêl
Appeal Decision
Ymchwiliad a agorwyd ar 13/08/14
Inquiry opened on 13/08/14
Ymweliad â safle a wnaed ar 14/08/14
Site visit made on 14/08/14
gan Clive Nield BSc(Hon), CEng,
MICE, MCIWEM, C.WEM
by Clive Nield BSc(Hon), CEng, MICE,
MCIWEM, C.WEM
Arolygydd a benodir gan Weinidogion Cymru
an Inspector appointed by the Welsh Ministers
Dyddiad: 24 Hydref 2014
Date: 24 October 2014
Appeal Ref: APP/E6840/A/14/2212987
Site address: Land at Manor Farm, Llanvapley, Monmouthshire, NP7 8SW
The Welsh Ministers have transferred the authority to decide this appeal to me as the
appointed Inspector.
•
•
•
•
•
The appeal is made under section 78 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 against a
refusal to grant planning permission.
The appeal is made by Cambourne Energy Investments (8) Ltd against the decision of
Monmouthshire County Council.
The application Ref DC/2013/00006, dated 4 January 2013, was refused by notice dated 13
September 2013.
The development proposed is the construction of a solar park to include the installation of solar
panels to generate up to 10 MW of electricity with transformer housings, security fencing and
cameras, landscaping and other associated works.
The inquiry sat for 5 days on 13 August, 29 & 30 September, and 2 & 7 October 2014.
Decision
1. The appeal is allowed and planning permission is granted for a solar park, to include
the installation of solar panels to generate up to 10 MW of electricity with transformer
housings, security fencing and cameras, landscaping and other associated works, on
land at Manor Farm, Llanvapley, Monmouthshire, NP7 8SW, in accordance with the
terms of the application, Ref DC/2013/00006, dated 4 January 2013, and the plans
submitted with it, subject to the conditions in the attached Annex.
Procedural and Background Matters
2. The original planning application proposed 45,000 solar panels in 7 fields covering an
area of some 27 hectares. However, a revised scheme for 38,000 solar panels in 6 of
the 7 fields (24 hectares) was subsequently submitted and refused by the Council. It
is the revised scheme that is the subject of this appeal, as indicated on drawing
C.0444_04-F (i.e. revision F).
3. In comparison with the original proposal, the revised scheme involves the omission of
solar panels and security fencing from the field in the south-eastern part of the site,
replacement of the proposed security fencing over the remainder of the site with a 2.1
metres high “deer fence” with wooden posts, and enhanced tree planting and
hedgerow reinforcement for visual screening.
www.planningportal.gov.uk/planninginspectorate
Appeal Decision : APP/E6840/A/14/2212987
4. The solar panels would be arranged in rows running east-west, with transformers in
each field and a substation near the south eastern corner of the site to allow
connection to a 66 kV overhead power line that crosses the site in that area. The
panels would be supported on steel frames driven into the ground and would be
angled at 20 degrees towards the south. The bottoms of the panels would be 800 mm
and the tops 1400 mm above ground level. For security reasons the areas of panels
would be surrounded by deer fencing with wooden posts some 2.1 metres high, and
this would be supplemented with a CCTV and infrared security system mounted on
poles within the site.
5. The fields in question already benefit from mature boundary hedges but these would
be further reinforced to improve screening of the site, and temporary poplar
plantations would be planted in the north-eastern corners of the 2 northern fields,
where the ground level begins to fall away. Access into the site would be from Firs
Road, which runs between the B4233 main road at Llanvapley to the south and the
B4521 main road to the north.
Application for costs
6. At the Inquiry an application for costs was made by Cambourne Energy Investments
(8) Ltd against Monmouthshire County Council. This application is the subject of a
separate Decision.
Main Issues
7. The main issues in this case are: the effects of the proposed scheme on the character
and appearance of the landscape, including the effects on the setting of White Castle,
a Grade I listed building and scheduled ancient monument; the effects on the
availability of high quality agricultural land; and the benefits of the scheme in the
generation of renewable energy.
Reasons
Landscape Character and Appearance
8. The Council refused the proposed development solely because it considered it “would
significantly harm the visual amenity of the area and the wider landscape qualities”
due to its scale and location. It referred to 2 Unitary Development Plan policies in its
refusal. However, the Monmouthshire Local Development Plan (2014) has been
adopted since that date, and several LDP policies are particularly pertinent to this
matter.
www.planningportal.gov.uk/planninginspectorate
2
Appeal Decision : APP/E6840/A/14/2212987
9. Policy SD1 permits renewable energy subject to several criteria being met, including
“no unacceptable impacts upon the landscape, townscape and historic features and
there is compliance with Policy LC5 with regard to protection and enhancement of
landscape character”. Policy LC5 permits development provided it would not have an
unacceptable adverse effect on the special character or quality of Monmouthshire’s
landscape in terms of its visual, historic, geological, ecological and cultural aspects
(i.e. the 5 character aspects defined in Landmap) by causing significant visual
intrusion, significant adverse change in the character of the landscape, unsympathetic
siting within the landscape, introduction of a use incompatible with its location, failing
to harmonise with the landscape, or failing to incorporate important traditional
landscape features or patterns. In addition, Policy S13 aims to safeguard the
landscape, green infrastructure and natural environment by, amongst other things,
maintaining the character and quality of the landscape and maintaining the integrity
and connectivity of the green infrastructure network.
10. Other relevant policies include: Policy LC1, which provides a presumption against new
built development in the open countryside unless justified by national or other
development plan policies, including Policy RE3, which supports agricultural
diversification; and Policy LC3 which aims to preserve the landscape setting of the
Brecon Beacons National Park and avoid serious adverse effects on significant views
into and out of the National Park.
11. It is generally agreed that these policies do not oppose the principle of renewable
energy development in the open countryside and that the acceptability of such
schemes should be assessed against the measure of avoiding significant or
unacceptable harm to the character or visual quality of the landscape or to the setting
of important features. In making this assessment I have taken into account the fact
that the solar panels would be no more that 1.4 metres above ground level, the
security fencing would be little more than 2 metres high, the present field patterns
and boundary hedges would be maintained, and screening of the site would be further
improved by reinforcing the hedges and allowing them to grow higher and by planting
additional fast-growing trees for screening purposes in the north-east corner of the 2
northern-most fields.
12. This part of the County was not designated as a Special Landscape Area in the Unitary
Development Plan but the newly adopted Local Development Plan uses the principles
detailed in Policy LC5 to provide protection for the County’s landscapes. It is
acknowledged that the landscapes in most of the County are of an important high
quality, and it is not disputed that the appeal site lies within a landscape of
considerable importance. It is a sparsely developed, undulating rural landscape with
scattered villages and farmsteads and a patchwork of generally medium-sized fields in
pastoral or arable use. The scheme would have no direct affect outside the appeal site
and, even within the site, it would have no permanent affect on the landscape, which
would be reinstated at the end of the term of the development (25 years operation).
13. The dispute is essentially about the wider indirect effects on the landscape and visual
amenity, and I deal with these separately. So far as landscape character is concerned
the key Landmap Character Aspect Areas (AAs) are: the Northern Hills Visual and
Sensory AA; the East Bergavenny Historic Landscape AA; and the Upper Gwent
Cultural Landscape AA. However, the proposed development would only be seen from
parts of these areas and, even when visible, only parts of the site would usually be
seen due to the undulating topography, intervening wooded areas and the screening
and limited physical attributes described above.
www.planningportal.gov.uk/planninginspectorate
3
Appeal Decision : APP/E6840/A/14/2212987
(a) Visual and Sensory Landscape Character
14. With regard to the Northern Hills Visual and Sensory AA, it is argued that the solar
farm would be of a texture and colour type different from the present patchwork of
agricultural fields, and to some extent that would be so. However, the existing field
structures would be maintained with strong boundary hedging so that the solar farm
would not appear as a single, continuous area, and I consider the panels would not be
as intrusive as claimed. Nor do I consider the scheme would have any material effect
on the tranquillity of the area.
15. Clearly, the scheme would have a major effect on the character of the site itself and
on the setting and views from its immediate surroundings, including public footpaths
through and alongside the site, but that detrimental effect would be partially mitigated
by the boundary hedges which would significantly limit views from close to the site.
Furthermore, I consider the effects on the character of the wider area would be, at
most, moderate and generally low, and this conclusion is reinforced by the temporary
nature of the development. Thus, even though the Northern Hills Visual and Sensory
AA is of high scenic quality, I conclude that, apart from the site itself and its
immediate surroundings where the development would have a major adverse effect,
the wider impact on the landscape would generally be minor detrimental.
(b) Historic Landscape Character
16. The East Bergavenny Historic Landscape AA refers to the medieval Lordship of
Bergavenny with its well preserved field and settlement patterns surviving in good
condition and the presence of several scheduled ancient monuments and listed
buildings. Although it is valued as an outstanding landscape aspect area, my
conclusions on impact are similar to those above.
17. The landscape value is considered to be outstanding due to the integrity of the field
and settlement pattern, the good survival and condition of historic buildings and
historic landscape elements, and the presence of nationally rare and unique features,
including scheduled ancient monuments and listed buildings. The scheme would retain
the existing field pattern and field boundary hedges and have little effect on that
factor.
18. There are no known heritage or archaeological assets within the appeal site. The
nearest to the site is New House, a Grade II listed farmhouse and listed curtilage
buildings 0.5 km to the south east of the appeal site. The most important element of
their setting is their relationship with one another as a group of buildings comprising a
post-medieval farmstead. Part of the proposed development would be visible from
New House (the rest being effectively screened), but it would alter only a small area
within the wider view and would have only a minor adverse impact on the wider
setting of the listed buildings. The significance or understanding of the heritage assets
would not be materially harmed.
www.planningportal.gov.uk/planninginspectorate
4
Appeal Decision : APP/E6840/A/14/2212987
19. The scheme would be visible from 2 important scheduled ancient monuments, White
Castle some 1.8 km to the north east and Ysgyryd Fawr 3.2 km to the north west.
White Castle gains its significance mainly from the evidential value of its historic fabric
and its aesthetic value. The wider agricultural landscape contributes to its aesthetic
appreciation but has already been subject to extensive change since the medieval
period. The appeal scheme would be partially visible in long distance views from the
twin-towered gatehouse and some lower parts of the Castle but would be relatively
unobtrusive in the wider landscape. It would not detract from appreciation of the form
and structure of the Castle, the key features in its significance, or significantly affect
its setting or appreciation of its defensive siting on a slight rise. The scheme would not
materially detract from the experience of visitors to the Castle.
20. Ysgyryd Fawr Defensive Enclosure, with the remains of St Michael’s Chapel, derives its
significance from its evidential value of the remains of a prehistoric settlement, though
its hilltop setting and extensive views contribute towards its function as a defended
enclosure. Much of the appeal scheme would be visible in distant views from Ysgyryd
Fawr but would appear as an unobtrusive small part of the very extensive views. It
would not detract from the setting of the historic asset or detract from the ability to
understand and appreciate the historical importance of the asset.
21. The appeal scheme would have no, or very little, visibility from other heritage assets
in the landscape character aspect area. My conclusion is that the proposal would not
conflict with development plan or national policies to safeguard heritage assets and
their settings, and the very limited harm caused to their significance would meet the
statutory requirement to have special regard to the desirability of preserving listed
buildings and their settings or any features of special architectural or historic interest
(Section 66 of the Planning (Listed Buildings and Conservation Areas) Act 1990).
(c) Cultural Landscape Character
22. Finally, the Upper Gwent Cultural Landscape AA is valued highly for its rich mix of
evidence of long-term occupancy, including White Castle. I have assessed the impact
on White Castle in more detail above. However, for the landscape aspect area as a
whole my conclusions are similar to those above, i.e. even though the landscape is of
high sensitivity, the generally low adverse impact would be of low significance for the
character of the landscape.
(d) Landscape Visual Amenity
23. Turning now to consider effects on the visual amenity of the area, both the Appellant
and the Council have submitted assessments from a range of viewpoints, some being
specific key locations and others being representative of more general views. I have
also visited many of these locations and made my own assessment of the likely visual
effects of the proposed scheme.
24. Because of the topography and other intervening screening, most views of the site
would only be of parts of it, for example parts of the 2 northern fields or parts of the 2
southern fields but rarely both. Where larger areas of the site would be seen the
viewpoint is generally at a lower level so that the perspective would be compressed. 2
exceptions to these generalisations are the short distance view from a single upper
floor window at Chapel Farm, next to the southern corner of the site, and long
distance views from Ysgyryd Fawr, high ground some 3.2 km to the north west.
www.planningportal.gov.uk/planninginspectorate
5
Appeal Decision : APP/E6840/A/14/2212987
25. Ysgyryd Fawr lies within the Brecon Beacons National Park, and the Beacons Way Long
Distance Path runs past its summit and along its crest. There are extensive views over
the site from Ysgyryd Fawr but the site is only a small part of the extensive and
panoramic views, and the proposed development would not have a significant effect
on those views. As for Chapel Farm, the proposed development would be detrimental
to the short-distance view over the site’s southern fields from one upper floor window
but the predominant views from the property would not be significantly affected.
26. Views from the road past the site would be substantially screened by the hedgerows,
though glimpses of the solar panels and security fencing would be gained through
occasional gaps and entrances. Views of parts of the site would be possible from a
small number of residential properties and farms but these would generally be
partially screened and at some distance. Long distance views would also be possible
from lengths of the Three Castles and Offa’s Dyke National Trails, from the higher
parts of White Castle 1.8 km to the north east, and from several locations along the
B4233 road to the south east and south west of the site. However, I do not consider
the development would be a prominent feature in any of these views and would not
affect them significantly.
(e) Overall Conclusion on Landscape and Visual Impact
27. The main parties have criticised the methodologies used by the others’ expert
witnesses in landscape and visual impact assessment, and to some extent this has
depended on when the assessments were done and which edition of the standard
guidance document was used. The main disagreement has been on the visual impact
assessments. However, these are really only tools to aid the assessment, and I have
had the benefit of an extensive site visit which included visiting all of the key
viewpoints. Whilst I have found the main parties’ assessments helpful, I have been
able to draw my own informed conclusions.
28. My overall conclusion on this issue is that the proposed development would not have
an unacceptable adverse effect on the character of the wider landscape area or the
visual amenity of the area. By retaining the existing field boundary hedges it would
meet the policy requirement to incorporate the traditional landscape patterns, and as
a result of its screening by topographical features, hedges and trees it would be
sympathetically sited within the landscape. I consider it would maintain the character
and quality of the landscape and would be satisfactorily assimilated into it. It would
also have no serious adverse effect on views into or out of the national park or on the
settings of listed buildings or scheduled ancient monuments.
29. I conclude it would not conflict with the aims of the relevant LDP policies in these
respects, particularly policies SD1, LC1, LC3, S10 and S13.
www.planningportal.gov.uk/planninginspectorate
6
Appeal Decision : APP/E6840/A/14/2212987
Quality of Agricultural Land
30. The Statement of Common Ground between the Appellant and the Council states that
the Provisional Agricultural Land Classification Map (1977), published by MAFF,
indicates the appeal site comprises a mix of Grade 3 and Grade 4 agricultural land
(i.e. good/moderate and poor). However, a more detailed assessment was carried out
for the Appellant in May 2014 which concluded that some 87% of the land is Grade 2
(very good) and the rest is Grade 3b (moderate). The 2 landowners concerned do not
agree with this assessment and have submitted sworn affidavits describing the
condition of the land, the uses to which it is generally put, and an opinion that it is
generally Grade 3a or 3b agricultural land (i.e. good or moderate). Nevertheless, there
seems little doubt that the majority of the land falls within the definition of Best and
Most Versatile (BMV) agricultural land.
31. Several local residents have submitted that the use of such high quality agricultural
land would be contrary to policy. Whilst it was not a matter that lead to the Council’s
refusal of the application, the May 2014 report has provided new information not
available at the time of the Council’s determination, and the Council has now also
argued this ground against the proposal.
32. Technical Advice Note 6: Planning for Sustainable Rural Communities (TAN6) provides
support for farm diversification but makes it clear every effort should be made to
protect the best quality agricultural land. Paragraph 4.10.1 of Planning Policy Wales
(PPW) says that BMV land should be conserved as a finite resource for the future and
that such land should be protected from development unless there is an overriding
need and lower quality land is not suitable or available. In addition, the Welsh
Government’s Practice Guidance on the Planning Implications of Renewable and Low
Carbon Energy, February 2011, refers to the PPW policy and advises that the use of
high quality agricultural land and the reversibility of a development are relevant
factors.
33. Although some local residents are sceptical of the practicality, the Appellant and 2
landowners say the land would be used for seasonal sheep grazing underneath and
amongst the rows of solar panels. Thus, some agricultural use would continue. It is
also relevant that the development would be for a temporary 25 years period and,
under the terms of any permission granted, would then be removed and the land
would be reinstated for agricultural use. The development would temporarily change
the use of the land rather than its quality and would not affect its long-term potential
for resumed agricultural use. In fact, the Appellant even submits that the quality of
the land would be improved by the end of the 25 years period. The development itself
would be substantially reversible as the framework for the solar panels would be
driven into the ground and would not involve any permanent foundations.
www.planningportal.gov.uk/planninginspectorate
7
Appeal Decision : APP/E6840/A/14/2212987
34. The Council maintains that the proposal should be subject to a sequential test (of
suitable and available land) to meet the requirements of PPW paragraph 4.10.1 and
has referred to recent changes in policy in England to support this. In England the
National Planning Policy Guidance requires a sequential test to be carried out for any
solar farm development to demonstrate that there is no alternative land of lesser
quality available, and the Council has referred to a recent appeal decision near Ipswich
to illustrate this. However, English planning policy has little relevance in Wales, where
planning is a devolved matter. Even UK-wide energy policy has to be viewed in the
context of Welsh planning policy, as confirmed by the Welsh Minister in his letter of
July 2011 on renewable energy projects, where he said “I would remind you that in
relation to those consents which are devolved matters in Wales the Welsh Government
policy provides the primary basis for consideration by local planning authorities …… in
making decisions on individual planning applications”. Thus the key to this matter lies
primarily within PPW paragraph 4.10.1 itself.
35. The Council argues that it specifies 2 tests for the use of BMV land for development:
whether or not there is an overriding need for the development; and whether or nor
previously developed land or land of lower agricultural quality is available. However,
whilst these matters are clearly relevant to consideration of this policy, I do not
consider the policy to be so explicit as to require a full sequential test. It must also be
remembered that it is a general policy applicable to all types and forms of
development, many of which would involve permanent loss of the agricultural land.
The 2011 Practice Guidance mentioned above makes it clear that the use of high
quality agricultural land and the reversibility of the development are both relevant
factors to be considered. With this in mind, it is more appropriate to consider the
matters described in paragraph 4.10.1 in the round and in the context of the aim to
conserve high quality agricultural land as a resource for the future.
36. In response to the Council’s late reliance on the question of agricultural land quality,
the Appellant has undertaken a Sequential Analysis Study (dated September 2014).
This study considered possible alternative sites throughout the County and within 10
km around it, and lying within 2 km of the 33 kV or 66 kV electricity distribution
network for a viable connection to the grid. Although one might argue about whether
the correct criteria were used, those that were seem to be entirely reasonable, and
the conclusion of the study was that only 1 other suitable site was identified. That was
outside the County and still subject to uncertainty about detailed assessment of the
land quality and the willingness of the landowner. Taken as a whole, the Study
indicates the general dearth of lower grade land available in the area and suitable for
the development of a solar farm.
37. Returning to PPW paragraph 4.10.1, I consider the general aim expressed in the first
sentence would be met, i.e. the temporary nature and reversibility of the scheme
would conserve the land quality resource for the future. As to the more detailed
criteria in the body of the paragraph, I consider the unavailability of alternative lower
quality land to have been adequately addressed by the Appellant’s recent study, and
only the question of overriding need remains in doubt. In view of the nature of the
proposal and my conclusion that the general aim of the paragraph would be met, that
requirement must be set much lower than for other developments more harmful to
the land. In so far as any conflict with that element is concerned, I consider it
warrants little weight in the balance of arguments.
www.planningportal.gov.uk/planninginspectorate
8
Appeal Decision : APP/E6840/A/14/2212987
Benefits of Scheme
38. Finally, I turn to the benefits of the proposed scheme. It is not disputed that the
scheme would generate renewable energy that would contribute towards the national
objective of promoting renewable energy supplies and combating climate change. An
extensive list of policy documents and position reports has been referred to in this
regard.
39. At the European level the EU Climate and Energy package was approved in 2009, and
individual targets for each member state were set. The UK’s legally binding obligation
is for 15% of all energy to be generated from renewable sources by 2010. The UK
Renewable Energy Strategy was published by DECC in 2009 with objectives to tackle
climate change and promote security of supply, including the EU obligation. The
Strategy indicates that renewables should provide more than 30% of our electricity
consumption by 2020, and the National Renewable Energy Action Plan 2010 confirmed
the Government’s support for this target and outlined measures to achieve it.
40. In Wales support for renewable energy has been confirmed in One Wales: One Planet
(2009), the Climate Change Strategy for Wales (2010), A Low Carbon Revolution –
The Welsh Government Energy Policy Statement (2010), and Energy Wales: A Low
Carbon Transition (2012). Capacity potential for each sustainable energy technology
was established in the 2010 Energy Policy Statement, and these are still referred to in
the latest edition of Planning Policy Wales. However, all of the various technologies are
currently falling short of their projections towards achieving the 2020 targets in Wales,
and solar generation (installed or being installed) amounts to only about 0.3 MW
compared with its 2 MW 2020 target. Increased installation rates are needed if the
2020 renewable energy obligations are to be achieved in Wales.
41. Some third parties have drawn my attention towards UK-wide figures which indicate
that the total large-scale solar PV capacity target for 2020 is already provided for by
existing installations, installations currently under construction and those that have
already received planning permission. Amongst several references, particular
inferences are drawn from the Table: Large-scale solar PV deployment in the UK in
paragraph 59 of the UK Solar PV Strategy Part 2, dated April 2014. It is argued that,
as schemes in the pipeline would already be sufficient to meet the 2020 target for
large-scale solar PV, there is no need for any more to be granted planning permission.
However, that is clearly not the UK Government’s expectation, as paragraph 60 goes
on to say (in the context of its financial incentives budget) “Given the finite nature of
this budget it will be necessary for the Department to continue to monitor the overall
pipeline of projects, including large-scale solar PV, against our ambitions for a diverse
mix of renewable technologies and achieve value for money for customers”. Clearly
the UK Government still expects more schemes to be brought forward.
42. The same document also includes the warning that “the public response to large-scale
solar farms which have sometimes been sited insensitively has begun to erode the
otherwise record levels of public acceptability the solar PV sector as a whole enjoys”.
The Council has asserted that this should be interpreted to mean that solar farms are
“unpopular”, which is clearly an interpretation step too far. The warning is that solar
farms should not be insensitively sited, and I have reached clear conclusions on that
above.
www.planningportal.gov.uk/planninginspectorate
9
Appeal Decision : APP/E6840/A/14/2212987
43. Third parties also draw attention to aspirations in the same strategy document to
move more towards small and medium scale solar PV installations and argue that the
appeal proposal is out of step with this strategy. However, whilst these are options to
be considered by the UK Government and the strategy document is a material
consideration, it carries little weight in comparison with Welsh planning policy.
Planning Policy Wales has recently been revised and Edition 7 was issued in July 2014.
It did not include any changes in response to the April 2014 solar PV strategy
document. The Welsh Government’s commitment to sustainability is unchanged.
44. Paragraph 12.8.8 of PPW says that the Welsh Government is committed to using the
planning system to optimise renewable energy generation. Whether or not arbitrary
targets are close to being met, the commitment to counter climate change remains,
albeit subject to environmental safeguards. Welsh planning policy is the primary policy
in this regard.
45. The benefits of the scheme are assessed against national and international obligations,
the rate of progress towards them achieved so far, and the climate change and carbon
reduction requirements. I conclude that the scheme would bring benefits of
considerable weight in terms of renewable energy.
46. The scheme would also bring several other benefits. The reinforcement of the existing
hedgerows and additional trees would provide long-term benefits to the character of
the landscape in line with the guidelines detailed in LANDMAP. It would also enhance
the ecological corridors along the hedgerows and improve biodiversity. As a farm
diversification initiative it would also stabilise the viability of 2 marginal traditional
farm holdings, whilst complementing their continued use of the land for an element of
grazing. The ability of the farmers to undertake other improvements to the holdings as
a result of the improved financial positions would also have local economic and social
benefits. LDP Policy RE3 recognises the benefits of farm diversification, and the
proposal would meet the aims of that policy.
Overall Conclusion
47. I have taken into account all matters raised, including concerns about the adequacy of
local roads, long-term reinstatement of the land and lack of direct benefits to the local
community, but nothing outweighs the considerations that have led me to my main
conclusions: that the proposed development would not have an unacceptable adverse
effect on the landscape character or visual amenity of the area and would not conflict
with the various development plan policies in this respect; that the scheme would
involve the use of high quality agricultural land, but that it would only be for a limited
period of time and without long-term detriment to the land, such that any conflict with
national policy would be of little weight; and that the scheme would bring considerable
benefit by the generation of renewable energy in support of national policy and some
local benefits. On balance, I consider any (arguable) limited policy conflict in respect
of agricultural land quality to be far outweighed by the benefits of the scheme and, on
balance, I conclude it would meet the aims of development plan and national policy.
48. For the reasons given above I conclude that the appeal should be allowed. I shall
grant planning permission subject to several necessary conditions. A draft set of
conditions was put forward in the Statement of Common Ground and, subject to a
number of modifications, I consider those to be suitable.
www.planningportal.gov.uk/planninginspectorate
10
Appeal Decision : APP/E6840/A/14/2212987
49. Conditions for detailed approval of several matters are necessary in order to control
their environmental impact, and detailed approvals of a Landscape and Ecological
Management Plan and a Construction Method Statement are needed for the same
reason. In the interests of safeguarding visual amenity conditions are also necessary
to ensure the boundary hedges would be of a suitable height, the public right of way
across the site would be adequately maintained and there would be no external
lighting. In addition, conditions are needed to ensure transportation of equipment to
the site is adequately control to minimise risks to highway safety and inconvenience to
other road users. And finally, in view of the temporary nature of the proposal,
conditions are necessary to ensure the plant is decommissioned and removed from the
site in due course and that the land is reinstated.
Clive Nield
Inspector
www.planningportal.gov.uk/planninginspectorate
11
Appeal Decision : APP/E6840/A/14/2212987
APPEARANCES
FOR THE LOCAL PLANNING AUTHORITY:
Mr Emyr Jones of Counsel
Instructed by the Council’s Solicitor.
He called:
Mr Graham Carlisle, BA,
MSc, MRTPI
Director, CDN Planning (Wales) Ltd.
Ms Fiona Cloke,
BSc(Hon), MPhil,
CMLI
Associate, TACP.
FOR THE APPELLANT:
Ms Morag Ellis QC
Instructed by Marrons Shakespeares LLP
She called:
Dr Richard Massey, MA,
PhD, MIfA
Senior Heritage Consultant, Cotswold
Archaeology.
Mr Andrew Cook,
BA(Hon), MLD,
CMLI, MIEMA, CEnv
Director, Pegasus Group.
Mr Tony Kernon,
BSc(Hon), MRICS,
FBIAC
Director, Kernon Countryside Consultants Ltd.
Mr Paul Burrell,
BSc(Hon), DipUP,
MRTPI
Director, Pegasus Group.
INTERESTED PERSONS:
Mr Brian Spencer
Chairman of Llanarth Fawr Community Council.
Cllr Sara Jones
Ward Councillor.
Mrs Janet Andrews
Local resident.
Mr Ronald Barns
Neighbouring resident
Mr Peter Marchant
Local resident.
Mr Christopher Lewis
Local resident.
Mr Les Taylor
Local resident and member of CPRW.
www.planningportal.gov.uk/planninginspectorate
12
Appeal Decision : APP/E6840/A/14/2212987
DOCUMENTS SUBMITTED AT THE INQUIRY
1
Appellant’s opening statement.
2
Council’s opening statement.
3
Court of Appeal judgement: Barnwell Manor Wind Energy
Limited v East Northants DC etc, [2014] EWCA Civ
137, submitted by Appellant.
4
Recent appeal decision, APP/Z6950/A/14/2213400, re
solar farm at Treguff Farm, Cowbridge (submitted by
Appellant).
5.1-5.2
Sworn affidavits by Mr Foord of Manor Farm and Mr
Blackwell of The Willows, landowners of the site,
submitted by Appellant.
6
Signed Statement of Common Ground between Appellant
and Council.
7
Letter of Notification of Reconvened Public Inquiry and list
of persons notified.
8
Extract from DECC publication, Energy Trends, September
2014, submitted by Appellant.
9
Extract from BRE National Solar Centre publication,
Agricultural Good Practice Guidance for Solar Farms,
July 2014, submitted by Appellant.
10
Council’s Committee Report for PV Solar Park application
at Rhewl Farm, Shirenewton, submitted by Council.
11
Email and photograph concerning nature of land at
Buckwell Farm, site for another PV Solar Farm
application, submitted by Council.
12
Email from Welsh Government Land Use Planning Unit re
validity of Agricultural Land Classification report for
Rhewl Farm planning application, submitted by
Appellant.
13
Note from Mr Marchant commenting on Inquiry
proceedings.
14
Cllr Jill Featherstone’s statement on behalf of Llanarth
Fawr Community Council, read in her absence by Cllr
Brian Spencer (Chairman).
15.1-15.2
Mr & Mrs Andrews’ statements, read by Mrs Andrews.
16
Mr Barns’ statement.
www.planningportal.gov.uk/planninginspectorate
13
Appeal Decision : APP/E6840/A/14/2212987
17
Extract from adopted Local Development Plan, Policy S10,
submitted by Mr Marchant.
18.1-18.8
Mr Taylor’s statement and accompanying documents:
-
Extract from DECC’s UK Solar PV Strategy Part 2;
-
Renewable Energy Foundation Information Note
analysing DECC’s database, May 2014;
-
Extract from DECC’s Consultation on changes to
financial support for solar PV, dated May 2014;
-
Extract from REEES Addendum report in connection
with Monmouthshire LDP, dated February 2012;
-
Extract from DECC publication, Energy Trends,
September 2014;
-
Papers for public consultation in connection with
planning application for a Solar Park at Rhewl
Farm;
-
Mr Taylor’s summary and conclusions re need for
renewable energy developments.
19
Council’s Closing Submissions.
20
Appellant’s Closing Submissions.
21
Supplement to Appellant’s Closing Submissions detailing
responses to comments made in third party
correspondence.
22
Appellant’s Costs Application.
PLANS
The original application plans and additional plans (some amending the
original plans) are detailed in Tables 3.1 and 3.2 of the Statement of
Common Ground.
www.planningportal.gov.uk/planninginspectorate
14
Appeal Decision : APP/E6840/A/14/2212987
Annex of Conditions
1. The development hereby permitted shall begin no later than 5 years from the date
of this decision.
2. The development hereby permitted shall be carried out in accordance with the
following approved plans: C.0444_01-B, C.0444_04-F, C.0444_06-B, C.0444_07B, C.0444_10-B, GCS0012B, Transformer details (unnumbered) and Danfoss
Inverter Technical Sheets (unnumbered).
3. Notwithstanding the requirements of Condition 2 above, prior to the
commencement of the development final details of the layout of the site shall be
submitted to and approved in writing by the local planning authority. The
development shall be carried out in accordance with the approved details.
4. Notwithstanding the requirements of Condition 2 above, prior to the
commencement of the development final details of the substation structure and
compound shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the local planning
authority. The development shall be carried out in accordance with the approved
details.
5. Prior to the construction phase of development a Landscape and Ecological Habitat
Management Plan shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the local
planning authority. The Plan shall be for the duration of the Solar PV scheme and
shall include but not be limited to:
-
details of existing trees and hedgerows retained;
-
details of proposed tree and shrub planting, including their species, number,
sizes and positions;
-
details of 2 poplar plantations in north east corner of the site, including their
removal when the scheme is decommissioned;
-
details of hedgerow management, including consideration of the timing of
works and the bird nesting season;
-
details of new planting for biodiversity, including hedgerows as indicated on
the plans;
-
grassland management;
-
field buffers including use of wild bird mix seed around field margins;
-
details of fencing of newly planted hedgerow corridors to protect biodiversity
interest from livestock;
-
details of management responsibilities and maintenance schedules.
Any trees or hedgerow plants which within a period of 5 years from the completion
of the development die, are removed, become seriously damaged or diseased, or
become otherwise defective, shall be replaced within the current planting season or
the first 2 months of the next planting season, unless the local planning authority
gives written approval to any variation.
www.planningportal.gov.uk/planninginspectorate
15
Appeal Decision : APP/E6840/A/14/2212987
The development shall be carried out in accordance with the approved Landscape
and Ecological Habitat Management Plan.
The Plan shall be monitored and a review shall be submitted in writing to the local
planning authority before Year 11 of operation of the solar panel scheme; the Plan
shall be reviewed thereafter in accordance with a timetable to be submitted to and
approved in writing by the local planning authority.
6. Notwithstanding the requirements of Condition 5 above, all existing hedgerows
shall be maintained at a minimum height of 3 metres.
7. Prior to the construction phase of development a Construction Method Statement
shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the local planning authority. The
Method Statement shall cover the following principles as outlined in the Ecological
Appraisal (Phase 1 Habitat Survey and Assessment) for the Proposed Solar PV Site
by Abbey Saunders Ecology, dated August 2012:
-
details of a scheme ecologist to monitor the project construction;
-
measures to protect retained features, including hedgerows and trees,
through appropriate fencing to British Standard 5837;
-
measures to protect the pond;
-
details of storage of materials on the site;
-
details of precautions in respect of badgers, including but not limited to a
pre-construction check, construction phase measures, badger gates and
advice for site workers;
-
details of any temporary lighting during the construction phase.
The development shall be carried out in accordance with the approved Construction
Method Statement.
8. The development shall be carried out in accordance with the approved Transport
Method Statement, and construction delivery times shall be managed strictly in
accordance with the approved Transport Method Statement.
9. Other than that permitted during construction under Condition 7 above, no means
of external illumination or lighting shall be installed on the site without the prior
written approval of the local planning authority.
10.Prior to the commencement of development, a Public Right of Way Scheme shall be
submitted to and approved in writing by the local planning authority. It shall cover
the measures to be adopted to maintain Public Right of Way 359/242, which
passes through the site, for the duration of this planning permission. The
development shall be carried out in accordance with the approved Public Right of
Way Scheme.
11.Any fence lines enclosing public rights of way shall be a minimum of 3 metres
apart.
www.planningportal.gov.uk/planninginspectorate
16
Appeal Decision : APP/E6840/A/14/2212987
12.Prior to the commencement of development, a Decommissioning Plan shall be
submitted to and approved in writing by the local planning authority. The
Decommissioning Plan shall include details of the works necessary to revert the site
to its original condition, including the method for the removal from the site of all
the solar panels, sub-stations, transformers, structures, enclosures, equipment and
all other apparatus above and below ground and details of how the site is to be
restored to its original condition. The Decommissioning Plan shall also include a
timeframe for such works.
13.Within one month of commissioning of the solar PV installation the local planning
authority shall be notified of that commissioning date.
14.Following the cessation of use of the site as a solar farm, or 25 years after the
commissioning date, whichever is the sooner, the solar panels and all associated
plant and equipment shall be removed from the land and the site shall be returned
to a state suitable for agricultural use in accordance with the approved
Decommissioning Plan, unless written approval has been granted by the local
planning authority to some alternative use.
www.planningportal.gov.uk/planninginspectorate
17
APPLICATION DETAILS
No:
14/1275
Ward:
LANGSTONE
Type:
Full
Expiry Date:
29 APRIL 2015
Applicant:
ROBERT AYRES, COURT FARM SOLAR LIMITED, SOUTHPORT PR8 1JR
Site:
COURT FARM, MAGOR ROAD, NEWPORT, NP18 2EB
Proposal:
PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT OF SOLAR PHOTOVOLTAIC PANELS (-10MWP) AND
ASSOCIATED WORKS, ACCESS TRACKS, SECURITY FENCING AND CAMERAS,
AFFECTING PUBLIC RIGHT OF WAY 394/59 AND 394/60 LLANMARTIN
(RESUBMISSION FOLLOWING REFUSAL OF 13/1203)
1.
LATE REPRESENTATIONS
1.1
Seven additional proforma objection letters have been received from residents in Waltwood
Park Drive (Underwood) objecting to the development for the following reasons:
• The proposal has an adverse impact on landscape character and is contrary to the
Local Development Plan;
• The solar farm will be highly visible due to its colour and texture and glare and glint will
not be mitigated;
• The development is new build in the countryside which is contrary to policy;
• The development will sterilise ‘best and most versatile’ agricultural land which is
contrary to national policy;
• Subsidies for solar farms are being withdrawn;
• The development is close to and will be visible from several local settlements;
• There is already one solar farm in the area.
1.2
A resident in Langstone has raised the following points:
• The Llanvapley Appeal decision should be given very little weight since the site was
over 20 Ha and the Welsh Government’s Land Use Planning Unit should have been
consulted but wasn’t. Had they been consulted they would have objected and the
Inspector may have made a different decision.
• Further applications could be submitted on this site meaning the land could be lost to
agricultural use for much longer than 25 years. The Welsh Government gives much
greater weight to the protection of best and most versatile agricultural land than is
apparent in the report for this application.
• The applicant has not shown an over-riding need for the development which is
therefore contrary to Welsh Government Policy.
• The Newport site is very different to the Llanvapley site and this difference should be
made clear as per their earlier representations.
1.3
Councillor Atwell has commented as follows:
• The report was not made available in a timely way and residents have not had enough
time to consider it and comment further. The application should be deferred.
• There is no evidence that the Land Use Planning Unit of the Welsh Government’s
Department for Economy, Science and Sport has been consulted.
• It is not clear how site restoration conditions could be enforced.
• National Policy supports the retention of the best and most versatile agricultural land,
this development is contrary to that policy.
1.4
Councillor Kellaway has commented as follows:
• The reasons for approval rely upon flawed information;
• The recently adopted LDP has been ignored;
• The Committee agenda was not properly published and the meeting should postponed.
2.
OFFICER RESPONSE TO LATE REPRESENTATIONS
2.1
The proforma letters raise no new issues. The points raised have been considered and
addressed in the officer’s report and none of the points raised would lead officers to
conclude that the current recommendation to grant conditional planning permission should
be changed.
2.2.1
The Welsh Government’s Land, Nature & Forestry Division was consulted and replied on
the 05 March 2015. The response confirmed the accuracy of the applicant’s Agricultural
Land Classification survey and made no comment on the merits of the application. No
section of the Welsh Government has objected to this application.
2.2.2
Further applications could be submitted for development of the site in the future. This
would hold true for any other piece of land. Such applications would be considered on their
particular merits and judged against the Policy background extant at the time the
application is made. Site restoration conditions mean the consideration of any future
application would be of in effect a greenfield site rather than a previously developed one.
Proposals that would be unacceptable in a rural setting would remain unacceptable.
2.2.3
Officers agree that no overriding need has been shown for the development. However the
implication of the Llanvapley appeal is that such a need doesn’t have to be shown in the
event that a development is reversible and that the land is retained for agricultural use long
term.
2.2.4
Officers consider that both sites were greenfield and contained a high proportion of ‘BMV’
agricultural land. In this sense the sites were similar and the Llanvapley Inspector’s
findings on the application of Paragraph 4.10.1 of Planning Policy Wales (retention of
agricultural land) could be applied in a closely similar way to both sites. This is because
the BMV point is a generalised principle and was not predicated on site specific factors
such as landscape impact.
2.3.1
Legal advice confirms that the report was published to the legally required timescales.
Officers do not consider that any deferment is necessary since this proposal is in no way
exceptional or overly complex.
2.3.2
The Land Use Planning Unit of the Welsh Government’s Department for Economy, Science
and Sport has been consulted and did not object.
2.3.3
There is no reason to believe that site restoration conditions are unenforceable or are not
circular compliant. Welsh Government Guidance in the form of Planning Policy Wales,
Technical Advice Notes and Circulars allows for temporary permissions and site restoration
conditions including renewable energy installations which have a finite life. Even if the site
ownership changes across the lifetime of the development, there will remain a landowner
who will be responsible for the land and therefore compliance with any conditions.
2.3.4
The BMV agricultural land issue has been fully considered in the Officer Report and it is
concluded that the policy is complied with if a development is shown to reversible and the
site can be restored to its prior condition.
2.4.1
In respect to comments relating to the application being flawed, Officers are of the view that
the necessary information to determine the application has been submitted and there is no
reason to consider that the information is flawed.
2.4.2
Full regard has been had to the adopted Local Development Plan in the assessment of the
application.
2.4.3
Legal advice is that the agenda has been correctly published.
procedural matter and not a planning consideration.
In any event this is a
3.
OFFICER RECOMMENDATION
3.1
It is not considered that any of the points raised in the late representations would justify a
change in the officer recommendation which remains:
GRANTED WITH CONDITIONS
APPLICATION DETAILS
No:
15/0078
Ward:
SHAFTESBURY
Type:
FULL (MAJOR)
Expiry Date:
17-MAR-2015
Applicant:
MELISSA MAHAVAR-SNOW, NATURAL RESOURCES WALES
Site:
CRINDAU PILL FLOOD ALLEVIATION SCHEME, EVANS STREET,
NEWPORT
Proposal:
PROPOSED NEW RAISED FLOOD DEFENCES COMPRISING
REINFORCED CONCRETE WALLS, EMBANKMENTS AND GROUND
RAISING 0.2M-1.5M ABOVE EXISTING GROUND LEVELS AND
ASSOCIATED WORKS
Recommendation:
GRANTED WITH CONDITIONS
1.
1.1
INTRODUCTION
Full planning permission is required for flood alleviation works within a large section of area
between the southern boundary of the former Sainsbury’s site to the north of Newport
Castle and the M4 Bridge to the north of Albany Street; this is an area of 3.66ha. The flood
alleviation scheme application has been submitted by Natural Resources Wales to “support
NRW’s stated long-term objectives to provide sustainable flood defences, which prevent
deaths, minimise property damage and reduce distress from flooding as part of NRW’s
remit to develop and deliver flood risk management solutions in support of the Welsh
Government’s long term Outcome – Protecting People. The FAS will provide effective flood
defences and will maintain the integrity of these defences for 100 years.” The submitted
Environmental Report explains that “The Crindau area of Newport has a long history of tidal
flooding and the existing tidal defences at Crindau Pill are in a poor condition, offering a
level of protection of approximately 1 in 10 years. As a result, approximately 650 properties
are at risk of flooding in a 1 in 200 year flood event. The Crindau area was badly affected
by flooding in December 1981 and a number of smaller incidents occurred between 1990
and 1991 as a result of high tide surge levels that originate in the Bristol Channel.” (extract
taken from supporting Environmental Report).
2.
2.1
RELEVANT SITE HISTORY
NONE.
3.
3.1
POLICY CONTEXT
SP1 - SUSTAINABILITY
SP3 – FLOOD RISK
GP1 – GENERAL DEVELOPMENT PRINCIPLES – CLIMATE CHANGE
GP2 – GENERAL DEVELOPMENT PRINCIPLES – GENERAL AMENITY
GP5 - GENERAL DEVELOPMENT PRINCIPLES – NATURAL ENVIRONMENT
CE6 – ARCHAEOLOGY
GP7 – GENERAL DEVELOPMENT PRINCIPLES - ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION
AND PUBLIC HEALTH
4.
4.1
CONSULTATIONS
WELSH WATER – No objections subject to conditions.
4.2
GLAMORGAN & GWENT ARCHAEOLOGICAL TRUST – No objections subject to
conditions.
4.3
GWENT WILDLIFE TRUST – No comments received.
4.4
NATURAL RESOURCES WALES – No objections subject to conditions.
4.5
NEWPORT ACCESS GROUP – No comments received.
4.6
WALES & WEST UTILITIES – No objections.
4.7
WORK BASED LEARNING ACADEMY – No comments received.
5.
5.1
INTERNAL COUNCIL ADVICE
HEAD OF STREETSCENE & CITY SERVICES (DRAINAGE MANAGER) – No objections.
5.2
HEAD OF STREETSCENE & CITY SERVICES (ECOLOGY OFFICER) – No objections
subject to conditions.
5.3
HEAD OF STREETSCENE & CITY SERVICES (HIGHWAYS) – No objections subject to
conditions.
5.4
HEAD OF STREETSCENE & CITY SERVICES (TREE OFFICER) – No objections subject
to conditions.
5.5
HEAD OF STREETSCENE & CITY SERVICES (PUBLIC RIGHTS OF WAY) – There are
no Public Rights of Way within the extents shown on the Applicants drawing, Crindau FAS
– Red Line Boundary.
5.6
HEAD OF LAW & REGULATION (PUBLIC PROTECTION MANAGER) – No objections
subject to conditions.
5.7
HEAD OF LAW & REGULATION (POLLUTION) – No objections subject to conditions.
5.8
PLANNING POLICY MANAGER – The proposal is supported and the result of taking 667
properties out of flood risk is strongly welcomed.
5.9
HEAD OF CONTINUING LEARNING & LEISURE (LEISURE SERVICES MANAGER) – No
objections.
5.10
HEAD OF STREETSCENE & CITY SERVICES (LANDSCAPING OFFICER) – No objection
to these proposals.
5.11
NEWPORT NORSE – No comments received.
5.12
HOUSING & COMMUNITY REGENERATION MANAGER – No comments received.
6.
6.1
REPRESENTATIONS
NEIGHBOURS - 386 neighbours consulted, and four site notices erected. One comment
received stating that as a result of the Compulsory Purchase Order (CPO) to demolish their
building the costs of moving and the expense of setting the business up in the building to
be removed will be detrimental to this not for profit company.
6.2
COUNCILLORS - Councillor Cockeram and Councillor Poole were consulted on the
application but no comments received.
7.
7.1
ASSESSMENT
The area subject to the submission is “The River Usk, downstream of the M4 road bridge,
and is described as a large water body that flows in a southerly direction to its confluence
with the Severn Estuary at Uskmouth. At its confluence with Crindau Pill, the channel of the
River Usk is approximately 120m wide and 10m deep. The river is estuarine in nature and
is characterised by slow southerly freshwater flow, which is reversed during high tide
events. It contains broad mudflat area along both banks, which are exposed during low tide
and dense stands of aquatic and marginal vegetation including salt-tolerant grass species
and reedbeds. The river is designated as a Special Area of Conservation (SAC) and Site of
Special Scientific Interest (SSSI), and supports a range of important fish species and otter.”
7.2
It is proposed to construct new raised defences along the River Usk and Crindau Pill to
exclude tidal flood waters from the urbanised areas of Crindau. It is highlighted that “the
proposed scheme will comprise approximately 2.5km of new flood defences. These will be
located adjacent to the north and south banks of Crindau Pill and the southern extent of
Shaftesbury Park. In addition, these defences will extend for a short distance adjacent to
the western bank of the River Usk from its confluence with Crindau Pill to the M4 road
bridge, and along Pugsley Street and the former Sainsbury’s supermarket site to the
London-Cardiff mainline railway.
The defences will consist of new walls, piling,
embankments and an area of ground raising. The height of the flood defences will typically
vary from between 0.2m to 1.5m.”
7.3
The scheme has been divided into a number of sections in terms of the locations of where
the works are proposed to take place. The following headings set out not only the
applicable areas but also the works proposed, which is taken directly from the submitted
Design and Access Statement.
7.4
M4 to Waterside Court
7.5
A vegetated embankment has been proposed in this location as this would maintain the
cycle route provision in place via an up and over ramp. A new reinforced concrete
cantilever floodwall is proposed along the western bank of the River Usk between the
buildings at Waterside Court and the river. A wall was chosen rather than an embankment
as existing ground levels in this area are very close to the required flood defence design
level and so only a very low wall is needed. The use of a wall, with a much smaller footprint
to that of an embankment, also maintains use of the adjacent day nursery play area
throughout the construction of the scheme, which was a key requirement of the business.
In addition, the existing landscape design of the space to the rear of Waterside Court can
be largely retained with the exception of a limited amount of tree felling. The wall will have
a maximum height of 0.3m above existing ground level and will be clad in yellow brick with
blue brick, double bullnose coping to match adjacent buildings.
7.6
Waterside Court to Lyne Road Bridge
7.7
Short sheet pile wall extending below ground to a depth of 5m and above ground to a
height of 1.5m will be constructed. The wall will be topped with double bullnose, pre-cast
concrete coping units, with a 0.75m high palisade security fence placed on top of the
coping to maintain the security of the industrial units along this section of the scheme and
to discourage fly-tipping. The fence will be offset on the top of the wall to prevent use of the
wall as a step to climb the fence. A vehicle protection barrier would also be placed on the
landward side of the new flood defence wall in trafficked areas to reduce the risk of damage
from vehicle impact. The sheet pile wall will be set back a short (~5m landward) distance
from the existing flood embankments on the left bank of the Pill. Due to large trees on the
boundary of Shaftesbury Park there are only intermittent, glimpsed views of the left bank
from the periphery of the park. For this reason the decision was taken not to clad this wall.
However, to partially screen the flood defence wall in any views from the Shaftesbury Park
and land to the south of the Pill, the existing flood embankment will be retained as an
approximately 0.75m high vegetated bund along the riverside of the wall. The space
between the bund and new flood defences would be re-graded to retain a natural and
stable bank profile and to allow the construction of a permeable gravel access path
alongside the flood wall, enabling pedestrian access to undertake inspection of the
riverward side of the defence. To facilitate inspections and maintenance hardstanding
areas for cranes to lift maintenance equipment over the defences and ladder access points
will be constructed at key locations to provide access to the riverbank. To ensure the longterm stability of the flood defence scheme over its 100 year design life, it will be necessary
to construct the wall with larger sheet piles (12m depth) in some locations where the
defence cannot be set back far enough from the riverbank or where bank stability is
particularly poor. This approach may be required for approximately 300m of this stretch of
the scheme.
7.8
Lyne Road Bridge and adjacent areas
7.9
Vehicular access points into north Crindau are limited and Lyne Road Bridge was identified
as a key gateway during the initial site survey and analysis process. The mix of land use
including commercial, industrial and residential buildings has weakened the character of
the area and it lacks a distinctive style or easily definable ‘sense of place’.
7.10
A series of structural surveys and ground investigations, together with consultation with
NCC’s Bridge Engineer indicated that the long term structural integrity of the bridge cannot
be assured and strengthening works are needed. New reinforced bridge parapet walls will
be constructed and secured to the existing bridge deck.
7.11
Identification of the façade of an earlier bridge (during site surveys) beneath the more
recent red brick parapets inspired the proposal to clad the new bridge parapets and all the
flood defence walls adjoining the bridge with local Pennant stone and blue brick to match
this historic façade. By limiting the palette of material in this area the design will mitigate the
impact of the new flood defence walls and enhance the appearance of this gateway
feature, giving the entrance to north Crindau a clearly defined character and ‘sense of
place’.
7.12
The presence of the National Plastics building immediately adjacent to the river
necessitates its purchase and demolition to enable the construction of the flood defence
wall on the left (northern) bank next to Lyne Road Bridge. NRW are in the process of
agreeing the purchase of the National Plastics building.
7.13
The adjoining scaffolding storage unit on Adelaide Street will need to be demolished to
accommodate construction works. NRW are currently in discussions with the landowner to
compensate for the loss of this building and disruption of the business which will need to be
relocated during construction of the scheme.
7.14
There is a 65m stretch of Crindau Pill between the Lyne Road Bridge and the culvert under
the A4042 where both banks of the river need to be flood protected. The left (northern)
bank is currently the site of the Coronation Club, which is built right up to the top of the
riverbank. It will be necessary to demolish this building and set back the flood defence
away from the over-steep river banks. To this end NRW recently completed the purchase of
this building. The new defence will be built as a standard reinforced concrete wall and set
back approximately 5m from the top of the bank. The finish on the new wall will be pennant
stone on both sides, with blue brick double bullnose capping so as to tie into Lyne Road
Bridge and enhance the landscape character of the area by unifying the style of walls
connecting to the bridge.
7.15
This set back of the defences has created an opportunity for a new public amenity open
space that incorporates much of the Coronation Club site together with an adjacent
highway turning area and grass verge. Further enhancement proposals are being
developed in consultation with NCC and include public art gateway features to further
strengthen the landscape character of this area.
7.16
On the right (southern) bank is a St Johns Ambulance depot where there is insufficient
space available to construct a flood embankment. A garage unit to the rear of the
compound will be demolished and a sheet pile wall will be constructed along the edge of
the car park. The landowners wish to retain the car park and so the defence cannot be set
back any further landward. The sheet pile wall will be clad with pennant stone with blue
brick double bullnose capping to match the proposed new bridge parapets.
7.17
Construction of the sheet pile wall could result in some bank instability and we estimate that
there is a risk that sections of the right bank could slump by between 1m and 2m. Options
for restoration include the use of bio-engineering techniques incorporating natural materials
(e.g. coir matting and/or brush wood fascines) together with planting of native reed bed
species, or it could be left to natural regeneration.
7.18
Lyne Road to Shaftesbury Park
7.19
To maintain access and retain the amenity and landscape value of the green corridor a new
earth embankment has been proposed for this stretch of the defences. The embankment
will be approximately 0.5m higher than the current flood embankment and will be set back
further from the river. The alignment of the embankment was amended as part of the
detailed design process in order to retain trees identified as being of amenity value.
7.20
The existing footpath/cycle path that links Lyne Road to Shaftesbury Park would be
reinstated on the crest of the new embankment and will be constructed to Active Travel
(Wales) standards. Embankment slopes will be shallow (1:3) and cycle and wheelchair
access onto the path will be maintained from the residential streets to the south.
7.21
All embankments will be reseeded with grass seed mix suitable for embankment and
drought conditions. Planting proposals to the north of the embankment include native tree
planting. To the south of the embankment amenity planting beds will be created to enhance
the active travel route and link the landscape to the adjacent housing areas.
7.22
Lyne Road
7.23
For approximately 95m the proposed flood defence passes south along Lyne Road, to the
start of the cycleway and green corridor to Shaftesbury Park. In this area a 1m high wall will
be constructed alongside the road and cycle path. The wall will be clad in red brick with
blue brick double bullnose capping to match existing property/boundary walls in the
surrounding area and tie into the overall scheme palette of materials.
7.24
The wall will be set back from the existing pavement and cycle path to allow space for the
planting of an avenue of trees. The avenue will continue the tree lined character of the
southern section of this road northwards. The trees will mitigate the visual impact of the
proposed flood defence wall, enhance the street scene and further strengthen the
landscape character of the area. This section of Lyne Road currently has open views (north
and north east) of the industrial areas of north Crindau. The avenue of trees and further
trees proposed on the southern bank of the Pill (on the periphery of the Dwr Cymru surface
water storage lagoon) will also help filter views of the flood scheme walls.
7.25
Shaftesbury Park
7.26
The requirements of the landowners (NCC), the needs of existing users including the
resident football club, cyclists and other recreational users, the open character and amenity
value of the existing landscape and a desire to retain as many of the existing mature trees
as possible, are the key drivers which have steered the design in this area.
7.27
At outline design stage the decision was taken that the defences through the park should
take the form of embankments to reduce their visual impact on the character of the park
and to retain as far as possible existing access. The use of embankments also enabled the
layout of the defences to be integrated with existing raised landforms on the southern edge
of the park and surrounding the play area, further reducing their visual impact on the park.
7.28
The proposed flood embankment between Lyne Road and Shaftesbury Park will slope
down to tie into existing ground levels as it enters the western edge of Shaftesbury Park;
this will enable the footpath/cyclepath to link with an existing route that heads north looping
around the edge of the park. The flood defence here will continue in the form of a retaining
wall running broadly east-south-east from the end of Wheeler Street to tie into a flood
embankment at the north east corner of the pavilion. Cutting across the garden of The
Lodge, the retaining wall will be a maximum of 1.15m in height.
7.29
The landward side of the wall will be clad in red brick to match the adjacent Lodge, with
blue double bullnose brick capping to tie into the materials palette of the scheme as a
whole. A timber close board fence (1.6m in height) will run on top of the capping to provide
privacy and security to the tenants of The Lodge.
7.30
To the east of the pavilion a flood defence embankment will extend broadly south from the
defence wall passing the front of the existing pavilion. The embankment will have a
maximum height of 1.5m and will be over-widened to enable the creation of grass terraces
formed with concrete retaining walls between level strips of grass. The terracing has been
designed to mitigate the impact of the proposed embankment by combining its flood
defence function with public amenity provision. The proposed terraces are to provide
informal seating and standing areas for football spectators, public and community events. A
single set of formal access steps will provide access to sports pitches from the existing
adult and junior changing facilities.
7.31
The alignment of the embankment has been adjusted to minimise the extent to which the
existing football pitch will need to be re-located (approximately 1m to the east of its existing
position) and also to allow for the 3m wide open buffer strip around the pitch required for
safety reasons.
7.32
As it curves around the southern edge of the existing sports pitches, the embankment will
tie into the existing area of raised ground, but to meet engineering standards it has been
designed to act independently of this structure. A further area of terracing will be created on
the northern facing flank of the embankment (on the southern boundary of the football field)
and a level area will be provided at the top of this terracing to enable viewing for wheelchair
users.
7.33
The footpath/cyclepath will run along the toe of the seating terraces to the east of the
pavilion before ramping up the embankment to run along the crest connecting with the
vehicular access at the south east corner of the park. A further access path, designed to
comply with the Environment Agency Access For All Design Guide (September 2012) has
been created from Wheeler Street. This path will curve and ramp up through the area of a
former bowling green to the wheelchair viewing space on the crest of the embankment.
7.34
Vehicular access into the southern end of the park will be maintained by the provision of a
gradual up and over ramp. As the embankment approaches the River Usk and playground
area it will transition into a wall again. This is to keep the formal flood defence set back
from the river bank as much as possible. As the existing ground levels of the embankments
in this area are close to the defence height the ground levels will be raised enabling the
defence wall to be buried below ground level for a section of its length. Where it is visible it
will be clad in red brick to match the existing low retaining wall surrounding the play area.
7.35
Access steps will be provided over the defence on the path through the play area towards
the River Usk and the existing footpath/cycle path along the bank on the river will be
extended north-north-east ramping up to connect with the vehicular access.
7.36
In order to facilitate construction of the wall and embankment a number of mature trees will
need to be felled. Remedial works detailed in an Arboricultural Method Statement and Tree
Protection Plan has been developed in order to retain existing trees where possible.
Mitigation planting proposals shown on the Mitigation Planting Plan include the planting of a
number of specimen trees. Enhancements proposed include the creation of amenity
planting beds to enhance the parkland landscape.
7.37
Pugsley Street allotments
7.38
An early decision was taken not to provide flood protection to the allotments. Hence the
evolution of the design in this area was a response to the need to provide a flood defence
along the western boundary of the site whilst maintaining existing vehicular and pedestrian
access.
7.39
An arboricultural survey identified that seven existing trees along the western boundary
were in terminal decline and recommended their removal and the removal of an existing
hedge to enable construction of a flood defence wall. Outline design proposals included
replacement of the hedge and construction of a wall which would not be clad as in time it
would be screened by the hedge. The detailed design has evolved in response to the
distinctive style of the Victorian housing on the east side of Pugsley Street, which is
constructed of Pennant stone with yellow brick detailing. Through consultation with NCC
and NRW the proposal to mitigate the impact of the proposed wall with more immediate
effect by cladding rather than a hedge was developed. A number of designs and cladding
options were considered and the final design has sought to strengthen the character of the
area by reflecting the distinctive vernacular style of the adjacent housing.
7.40
The proposed height of the wall at 1.5m is slightly above the height required to deliver the
flood defence requirement and has been designed to discourage the use of the wall as a
step to climb over the boundary. During consultation with NCC the requirement to raise the
height of this boundary to 2.3m (as there is 2.3m palisade fencing on all other boundaries
of the allotments) was raised. In response to this the design was refined to incorporate
yellow brick pillars with railings mounted on top of the flood defence wall between them
(taking the overall height of the boundary to 2.3m). This design provided the boundary
height required whilst breaking up the visual expanse of the new wall.
7.41
Seven moribund pear trees will be felled to facilitate construction of the flood defence wall.
To mitigate this impact, a new avenue of street trees will be planted in bays within the
highway. Access provision will include a new vehicle access ramp on the north east
boundary of the adjacent MUGA. This ramp will also provide disability access and retain
connectivity with the riverside footpath/cycle path at this point. Further pedestrian steps and
a ramp will be provided at the northern corner of the allotments adjacent to Pugsley Street
and the Shaftesbury Park play area.
7.42
Pugsley Street MUGA
7.43
A need to maintain access to the public recreation facility and the development of a design
that will discourage current anti-social behaviour were key drivers for the design evolution
process in this area. There was also a desire to retain as many existing mature trees as
possible on the boundary between the allotments and the MUGA.
7.44
Ground levels in this area are generally higher and only a low wall is needed to form the
flood defence. Access steps will be provided over the defence at both ends of the site.
Disability access and access for prams and cyclists will be afforded by an up and over
ramp on the north east boundary of the MUGA, which will also provide vehicular access to
a new compound within the allotments.
7.45
To integrate the flood defences with the surrounding street scene, the wall on the Pugsley
Street side will be clad with yellow brick to match that used on the allotments boundary wall
and will be capped with double bull nose blue brick. Walls which are orientated away from
the road will have a smooth concrete finish.
7.46
The existing, disused floodlights and associated electrical systems building will be removed
from this area and an amenity planting bed including trees will be created on the existing
verge between the MUGA and Pugsley Street. A vehicle barrier and pedestrian gate on the
Pugsley Street boundary will prevent unauthorised vehicular access. Mitigation planting will
regenerate the amenity planting bed adjacent to the MUGA with perennial planting and
columnar trees (e.g. tall and narrow) to maintain the open aspect.
7.47
Pugsley Street garages
7.48
The wall along Pugsley Street will terminate at the site of the Newport City Homes garages.
The garages are semi-derelict and form a target for anti-social behaviour. The proposal to
demolish and not replace them was broadly supported in the public consultation. In
consultation with Newport City Homes the decision was taken that the site should be
ground raised as part of this scheme to provide the necessary flood protection.
7.49
To maintain community safety, access to the site will be prevented by palisade fencing
around the site, until a future use of the site is determined by the landowner.
7.50
The ground raising in this area will necessitate the felling of a number of mature trees,
several of which have a TPO. There is insufficient space to provide mitigation planting
within the immediate area and so it is proposed that off-site planting proposals will be
developed with NCC to contribute to the city’s Tree Planting Strategy.
7.52
Former Sainsbury’s Supermarket site
7.53
The proposal included within this planning application will provide NRW with a robust and
deliverable option should the redevelopment plans for the site be delayed. It is likely that
further planning applications for this site will be submitted over the next six months.
7.54
The current proposal is for a flood embankment across the rear car park of the former
store. This embankment will tie into the floor level of the store building using the finished
floor level as part of the flood defence, but not the building itself. The earth embankment
will be approximately 0.6-0.85m above the existing ground levels. South of the building,
there will be a small retaining wall with ground raising used to tie in the line of defence to
high ground immediately adjacent to the railway line.
7.55
From the very outset it is important to ascertain whether the principle of development can
be established or not. This is achieved by examining national and local planning policy in
the form of Planning Policy Wales (Edition 7) along with Technical Advice Note 15
(Development and Flooding) and the Newport Local Development Plan.
7.56
Planning Policy Wales (PPW) (Edition 7)
PPW highlights that “Development proposals in areas defined as being of high flood hazard
should only be considered where:
• new development can be justified in that location, even though it is likely to be at risk from
flooding; and
• the development proposal would not result in the intensification of existing development
which may itself be at risk; and
• new development would not increase the potential adverse impacts of a flood event.”
7.57
Technical Advice Note (TAN) 15
7.58
The development is defined as being Less Vulnerable Development. TAN15 explains that
“new development should be directed away from zone C and towards suitable land in zone
A, otherwise to zone B, where river or coastal flooding will be less of an issue. New
development should only be permitted within zones C1 and C2 if determined by the
planning authority to be justified in that location.” Bearing in mind the associated tests in
TAN 15 it is deemed that the development is necessary to sustain an existing settlement in
Newport. Despite this, in most cases the development would be sited in areas that cannot
be defined as previously developed land and therefore not in complete accordance with the
wording of TAN15. However, the overall aim of TAN15 is to protect the built environment
from flooding, which is the overall rationale behind the submission of this application. As a
consequence it is deemed that the principle of development can be established in this
instance and is also broadly in accordance with the aims of policy SP1 of the Newport
Local Development Plan.
7.59
Policy SP3 relates to development and flood risk. It outlines that “Newport’s coastal and
riverside location necessitates that development be directed away from areas where flood
risk is identified as a constraint and ensure that the risk of flooding is not increased
elsewhere. Development will only be permitted in flood risk areas in accordance with
national guidance. Where appropriate a detailed technical assessment will be required to
ensure that the development is designed to cope with the threat and consequences of
flooding over its lifetime. Sustainable solutions to manage flood risk should be prioritised.”
The site is positioned within an area of Flood Zone C1. Technical Advice Note 15 defines
flood zone C1 as “Areas of the floodplain served by significant infrastructure, including flood
defences.” The submitted Flood Consequences Assessment highlights that “Most of the
defences that currently protect Crindau were constructed following the 1981 flood event,
which reportedly affected 430 homes. It is understood that these defences were
constructed as emergency works and were never suitably designed or intended to be a
long term solution. Recent flood modelling suggests that these defences offer a level of
protection up to the 10% AEP event. As a result 667 properties are at risk of flooding from a
0.5% Annual Exceedance Probability (AEP). A major tidal event in January 2014 caused
the flood defences to fail in a number of locations and emergency repairs have been
undertaken by NRW.” It further notes that “the main source of flood risk to the proposed
development site is tidal flooding. The proposed development is by its nature water
compatible. The defence structures are designed to withstand all events up to and over its
target standard of protection (0.5% AEP including an allowance for climate change up to
2064). The defences will have a 100 year design life…There are no other significant
sources of flood risk to the Crindau area and the proposal will have no adverse impacts on
surface water and groundwater flood risks…Raised defences such as those proposed can
still be overtopped or even fail. However unlikely this risk, in some situations the presence
of the defences may slightly increase the flood hazard within Crindau as, if overtopped, the
area will flood very rapidly.”
7.60
As a matter of course the Local Planning Authority has sought comment from Natural
Resources Wales, which has resulted in no objections being received concerning flooding
subject to conditions being imposed on any consent granted. NRW explains that “we are
satisfied that the FCA is appropriate to the size and scale of the proposal. The
development will only be acceptable if the measures as detailed in the FCA are
implemented and secured by way of planning condition.”
7.61
Policy GP1 outlines that “development proposals should:
i) be designed to withstand the predicted changes in the local climate and to reduce the risk
of flooding on site and elsewhere by demonstrating where appropriate that the risks and
consequences of flooding can be acceptably managed, including avoiding the use of nonpermeable hard surfaces;
ii) be designed to minimise energy requirements and incorporate appropriate renewable,
low or zero carbon energy sources, including on-site energy provision where practicable;
iii) be designed to reuse or recycle existing construction materials present on the site;
iv) meet the relevant Breeam or code for sustainable homes level.”
7.62
Design
7.63
Good quality design will be sought in all forms of development. The aim is to create a safe,
accessible, attractive and convenient environment. In considering development proposals
the following fundamental design principles should be addressed:
i) context of the site: all development should be sensitive to the unique qualities of the site
and respond positively to the character of the area;
ii) access, permeability and layout: all development should maintain a high level of
pedestrian access, connectivity and laid out so as to minimise noise pollution;
iii) preservation and enhancement: where possible development should reflect the
character of the locality but avoid the inappropriate replication of neighbouring architectural
styles. The designer is encouraged to display creativity and innovation in design;
iv) scale and form of development: new development should appropriately reflect the scale
of adjacent townscape. Care should be taken to avoid over-scaled development;
v) materials and detailing: high quality, durable and preferably renewable materials should
be used to complement the site context. Detailing should be incorporated as an integral
part of the design at an early stage;
vi) sustainability: new development should be inherently robust, energy and water efficient,
flood resilient and adaptable, thereby facilitating the flexible re-use of the building. Where
existing buildings are present, imaginative and sensitive solutions should be sought to
achieve the re-use of the buildings.
7.64
The design of the scheme is clearly well thought out and is considered to have taken this
element into account at every stage. The heights of the flood walls and embankments are
deemed to sit comfortably within the surrounding context and would not appear to be
incongruous features. The choice of materials are also deemed acceptable and in most
cases attempts to replicate matching materials found within the streetscene.
7.65
Amenity
7.66
Policy GP2 relates to general amenity. It highlights that “development will be permitted
where, as applicable:
i) there will not be a significant adverse effect on local amenity, including in terms of noise,
disturbance, privacy, overbearing, light, odours and air quality;
ii) the proposed use and form of development will not be detrimental to the visual amenities
of nearby occupiers or the character or appearance of the surrounding area;
iii) the proposal seeks to design out the opportunity for crime and anti-social behaviour;
iv) the proposal promotes inclusive design both for the built development and access within
and around the development;
v) adequate amenity for future occupiers.”
7.77
The area of the scheme is a mixture between industrial, residential and retail. Originally
there were concerns with regards to the proposed works around Hoskins Street for reasons
that to the north of the residential units it is proposed to raise the level of the cycle/footpath
by 1 metre. Due to the separation distance in some cases of less than 10 metres there is
concern with regards to the potential to overlook into the rear gardens of 48 and 48a
Hoskins Street. This matter was raised with the agent in order to find an acceptable
solution. There is some merit given to the argument that unless the land is raised the
dwellings above could remain susceptible to flooding, which is deemed to carry significant
weight in comparison with matters concerning occasional overlooking. Despite this, the
agent has agreed intervention measures in the form of planting, which will be conditioned
on any consent granted. There are also incorporated within the scheme streetscene
improvements to form attractive areas through additional landscaping, planting, demolition
of unsightly structures and the use of materials such as Blue Pennant Stone for flood walls.
7.78
Ecology
7.79
Policy GP5 relates to development and the natural environment. It notes that “development
will be permitted where, as applicable:
i) the proposals are designed and managed to protect and encourage biodiversity and
ecological connectivity, including through the incorporation of new features on or off site to
further the UK, welsh and/or Newport biodiversity action plans;
ii) the proposals demonstrate how they avoid, or mitigate and compensate negative
impacts to biodiversity, ensuring that there are no significant adverse effects on areas of
nature conservation interest including international, European, national, welsh section 4232
and local protected habitats and species, and protecting features of importance for ecology;
iii) the proposal will not result in an unacceptable impact on water quality;
iv) the proposal should not result in the loss or reduction in quality of high quality
agricultural land (grades 1, 2 and 3a);
v) there would be no unacceptable impact on landscape quality;
vi) the proposal includes an appropriate landscape scheme, which enhances the site and
the wider context including green infrastructure and biodiversity networks;
vii) the proposal includes appropriate tree planting or retention where appropriate and does
not result in the unacceptable loss of or harm to trees, woodland or hedgerows that have
wildlife or amenity value.”
7.80
As a matter of course the Local Planning Authority has sought advice from the Head of
Streetscene & City Services (Ecology) and Natural Resources Wales. NRW have noted
that “we consider that the proposals would not be likely to have a significant effect on the
River Usk SAC. However, we recommend that your Authority, in consultation with your
Ecologist, include conditions to any permission granted to ensure works and measures to
avoid adverse impacts on the designated site are carried out and implemented as
proposed.” NRW further note that “the applicant has assessed there is a risk that
installation of the 12m long piles could cause localised slippage of the river bank adjacent
to the piles. We are of the opinion this work is unlikely to have a significant effect on the
otter feature of the River Usk SAC.” No objections are raised by the Council’s Ecology
Officer.
7.81
Archaeology
7.82
Policy CE6 explains that “development proposals will normally be required to undertake an
archaeological impact assessment before the proposal is determined:
i) where groundworks and/or the installation of services are proposed within the
archaeologically sensitive areas of Caerleon, the levels, lower Machen and the city centre ,
or;
ii) within other areas of recognised archaeological interest.”
7.83
As a matter of course the Local Planning Authority sought comments from the Glamorgan
& Gwent Archaeological Trust (GGAT) resulting in no objections being received subject to
conditions. The consultee noted that “ground disturbance can therefore be expected to
encounter archaeological remains, although the nature of these is not clear and may be
disturbed, and may also be more deeply buried. This impact will need mitigation to ensure
the identification and recording of archaeological material and we therefore recommend the
attachment of a condition to any consent granted. The mitigation can comprise an
archaeological watching brief, via the submission and approval of a written scheme of
investigation, which will ensure that a tailored and appropriate scheme is implemented
during the works.”
7.84
Environmental protection
7.85
Policy GP7 outlines that “development will not be permitted which would cause or result in
unacceptable harm to health because of land contamination, dust, instability or subsidence,
air, heat, noise or light pollution, flooding, water pollution, or any other identified risk to
environment, local amenity or public health and safety.” As a matter of course the Local
Planning Authority has sought advice from the Head of Law and Regulation (Public
Protection) resulting in no objections being received subject to a condition being attached
to any consent granted for a Construction Environmental Management Plan to be
submitted.
7.86
Highways
7.87
As a matter of course the Local planning Authority has sought advice from the Head of
Streetscene & City Services (Highways), which has resulted in no objections being
received subject to a number of conditions being adhered to on any permission granted.
Specifically it was noted that “the principle of carrying out works on the bridge at Lyne Road
is acceptable. The details of the proposed works could be secured via a condition which
states that full engineering/construction details must be submitted for approval prior to
commencement of works. The applicant has been made aware of our concerns regarding
the reduction in width of the footway and therefore the details should reflect this. The
principle of carrying out enhancement works at Albany Street is also acceptable however
full design details will also be required for the proposed Albany Street enhancement works.
These again can be secured via condition and must be submitted and approved prior to
commencement of works. The details should include provision of a pedestrian access.”
The consultee has further noted that “the applicant is aware that part of these works will be
within the adopted highway. This may require a ‘stopping up’ order but this could be
discussed and determined following submission of the information required under condition.
7.88
Other matters
7.89
The matter raised by one objector concerns the issue of displacement as a result of the
Compulsory Purchase Order (CPO) to demolish a number of buildings. This is not
considered to be a planning matter but a civil one instead and therefore cannot be taken
into account in the determination of this application. Another matter concerns the
sterilisation of land focusing on the former Sainsbury’s site. This is an important gateway
site into the Newport City Centre and is defined as allocated land in the Local Development
Plan. Policy H1 is applicable. Therefore any scheme of flood protection should not have
an adverse impact on the redevelopment of the site.
7.90
The proposed works that will be undertaken in this site are not envisaged to cause a
detrimental or adverse impact on the site being redeveloped. The proposed crest running
through the centre of the site can be covered, enhanced and raised to create a new
ground level should any future and separate permission be required to do so.
8.
8.1
OTHER CONSIDERATIONS
Crime and Disorder Act 1998
Section 17(1) of the Crime and Disorder Act 1998 imposes a duty on the Local Authority to
exercise its various functions with due regard to the likely effect of the exercise of those
functions on, and the need to do all that it reasonably can to prevent, crime and disorder in
its area. This duty has been considered in the evaluation of this application. It is
considered that there would be no significant or unacceptable increase in crime and
disorder as a result of the proposed decision.
8.2
Equality Act 2010
The Equality Act 2010 identifies a number of ‘protected characteristics’, namely age;
disability; gender reassignment; pregnancy and maternity; race; religion or belief; sex;
sexual orientation; marriage and civil partnership.
8.3
Having due regard to advancing equality involves:
• removing or minimising disadvantages suffered by people due to their protected
characteristics;
• taking steps to meet the needs of people from protected groups where these differ
from the need of other people; and
• encouraging people from protected groups to participate in public life or in other
activities where their participation is disproportionately low.
8.4
The above duty has been given due consideration in the determination of this application.
It is considered that the proposed development does not have any significant implications
for, or effect on, persons who share a protected characteristic, over and above any other
person.
9.
9.1
CONCLUSION
It is deemed that the principle of development can be established in this instance for
reasons that the scheme would allow many dwellings to be protected against the
consequences of flooding. In addition, the development would not cause an adverse
impact in terms of flooding elsewhere. The scheme would also bring about streetscene
enhancements, while not creating a situation that would lead to any land becoming sterile
from development potential. As a result the development adheres to the aforementioned
policies as noted above.
10.
Recommendation
GRANTED WITH CONDITIONS
01 The development hereby permitted shall not be carried out otherwise than in complete
accordance with the approved plans and documents. The approved plans and documents
for this development are:Design and Access Statement dated January 2015 produced by JBA Bentley, Bat Survey
dated January 2015 produced by JBA Bentley, Piling Risk Assessment dated January 2014
produced by JBA Bentley, Flood Consequences Assessment dated November 2014
produced by JBA Bentley titled Crindau Flood Alleviation Scheme, Environmental Report
dated January 2015 and produced by JBA Bentley including associated Appendices A-N,
2014s1341-121, 2014s1341-123, 2014s1341-101, 2014s1341-111 P2, 2014s1341-102,
2014s1341-124, 2014s1341-112 P2, 2014s1341-103, 2014s1341-125, 2014s1341-113 P2,
2014s1341-104 A, 2014s1341-126, 2014s1341-114 P2, Sheet 1, 2014s1341-114 P2 Sheet
2, 2014s1341-114 P2 Sheet 3, 2014s1341-114 P2 Sheet 4, 2014s1341-127 Rev A,
2014s1341-105, 2014s1341-115 P3 Sheet 1, 2014s1341-115 P3 Sheet 2, 2014s1341-106
Sheet 6, 2014s1341-128 Sheet 6, 2014s1341-116 P2 Sheet 1, 2014s1341116 P2 Sheet 2,
2014s1341-129 Sheet 7, 2014s1341-107 Sheet 7and 2014s1341-117 P2 Sheet 1.
Reason: To ensure that the approved development is carried out in complete accordance
with the approved plans.
Pre commencement conditions
02 No work shall be commenced on the construction of the approved scheme until
details/samples of materials and finishes to be used on the external surfaces have been
submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The development
shall then be carried out using the approved materials.
Reason: To ensure that the development is completed in a manner compatible with its
surroundings.
03 No development, to include demolition, shall commence until a Construction
Management Plan (CMP) has been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local
Planning Authority. The CMP shall include details of the following during development:
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
Contractor Parking
Dust and Vibration Suppression
Wheel Wash facilities
Road Sweep (if necessary)
Description of how the construction will be managed
Noise mitigation measures
Details of temporary lighting
Development works shall be implemented in accordance with the approved CMP.
Reason: To protect the amenities of nearby residents and highway matters.
04 Prior to the commencement of development full engineering construction details shall
be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority regarding the
hereby approved cycleway and footpaths along with the access to the allotments. The
development shall only be carried out in accordance with the approved details and retained
in perpetuity.
Reason: To protect the amenities of nearby residents.
05 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.
06 No development, to include demolition, shall commence until a tree planting and
maintenance specification has been submitted and approved in writing by the Local
Authority.
Reason: To protect important landscape features within the site.
07 No development, to include demolition, shall commence until the Tree Protection Plan
as submitted by Mackley Davies Associates (11/12 February 2014 and Revision B) has
been implemented. The development shall be carried out in accordance with the approved
Tree Protection Plan.
Reason: To protect important landscape features within the site.
08 No operations of any description (this includes all forms of development, tree felling, tree
pruning, temporary access construction, soil moving, temporary access construction and
operations involving the use of motorised vehicles or construction machinery), shall
commence on site in connection with the development until the Root Protection Barrier
fencing has been installed in accordance with the approved Tree Protection Plan. No
excavation for services, storage of materials or machinery, parking of vehicles, deposits or
excavation of soil or rubble, lighting of fires or disposal of liquids shall take place within the
Root Protection Area. Erect all weather notices on Heras fencing, 1 per 10 panels, stating
‘CONSTRUCTION EXCUSION ZONE NO ACCESS’. The fencing shall be retained for the
full duration of the development, and shall not be removed or repositioned without the prior
written approval of the Local Planning Authority.
Reason: To protect important landscape features within the site.
09 No operations of any description, (this includes all forms of development, tree felling,
tree pruning, temporary access construction, soil moving, temporary access construction
and operations involving the use of motorised vehicles or construction machinery), shall
commence on site in connection within the development, until the Arboricultural Method
Statement has been implemented in accordance with Mackley Davies Associates (11/12
February 2014 and Revision B)
Additional details will be required for the following :(a) Special engineering requirements including ‘no dig construction’ for retained trees
within the RPA (trees nos 19, 22, 23, 32, 33, 50, 53 & 54 within the Mackley Davies
Associates report)
The development shall be carried out in full compliance with the Arboricultural Method
Statement unless otherwise first agreed in writing by the Local Planning Authority.
Reason: To protect important landscape features within the site.
10 No development, to include demolition, shall commence until an Arboriculturalist has
been appointed, as first agreed in writing by the Local Planning Authority, to oversee the
project (to perform a Watching Brief) for the duration of the development and who shall be
responsible for:
(a)
(b)
(c)
(d)
(e)
(f)
Supervision and monitoring of the approved Tree Protection Plan;
Supervision and monitoring of the approved tree felling and pruning works;
Supervision of the alteration or temporary removal of any Barrier Fencing;
Oversee working within any Root Protection Area;
Reporting to the Local Planning Authority;
The Arboricultural Consultant will provide site progress reports to the Council's Tree
Officer at intervals to be agreed by the Councils Tree Officer.
Reason: To protect important landscape features within the site.
11 Prior to the erection of any proposed lighting both during and post construction details of
this shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. All
lighting shall conform to the details submitted and thereby approved.
Reason: To protect the designated areas of the SAC and SSSI.
12 Prior to the commencement of development details of the ecologist watching brief shall
be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The development
shall only commence with these approved details, which shall be carried out in full.
Reason: To protect ecological interests.
13Prior to the commencement of development a reptile method statement shall be
submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority and shall include a
search of all areas of the development site and a proposed translocation scheme. The
works shall conform with the details submitted.
Reason: To protect ecological interests.
14 No development shall take place until a landscaping scheme for a tree screen not less
than 20 metres in length along to the north/north east boundary of 48a Hoskins Street
Newport the site has been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning
Authority. Thereafter this screen planting shall be implemented in the first planting season
following commencement of development. Any trees, which are removed or found to be
dead, dying or diseased, shall be replaced with similar species during a period of five years
following the completion of the screen planting scheme.
Reason: To protect residential amenity.
15 Prior to the commencement of development full engineering/construction details
regarding the bridge at Lyne Road shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the
Local Planning Authority. The development shall then be carried out using the approved
details.
Reason: To protect highway safety.
16 Prior to the commencement of development full design details of the hereby approved
enhancement works at Albany Street shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the
Local Planning Authority, which shall include details of pedestrian access.
The
development shall then be carried out using the approved details.
Reason: To protect highway safety.
17 No development shall commence until the developer has prepared a comprehensive
scheme showing how foul sewers, surface water sewers and any other Welsh Water asset
will be protected during construction while ensuring future access is afforded and this
scheme has been approved by the Local Planning Authority.
Reason: To ensure that we are able to carry out our statutory duties as sewerage
undertakers and that no adverse impact occurs to the environment or the existing public
sewerage system.
General
18 The scheme of tree planting hereby approved shall be carried out in its entirety by a
date not later than the end of the full planting season immediately following the completion
of the development. Thereafter the trees and shrubs shall be maintained for a period of 5
years from the date of planting and any which die or are damaged shall be replaced and
maintained until satisfactorily established. For the purpose of this condition, a full planting
season shall mean the period from October to April.
Reason: To secure the satisfactory implementation of the proposal.
19 The scheme permitted by this planning permission shall only be carried out in
accordance with the approved Flood Consequences Assessment (FCA) produced by JBA
Bentley Ltd, Revision 1.1 dated January 2015, and the following plans detailed within
Appendix A ‘Flood Alleviation Scheme Proposals’ of the FCA: The proposed crest levels of
the flood defence scheme must be set to 9.15metres Above Ordnance Datum for the hard
defences and 9.3metres Above Ordnance Datum for soft defences.
Reason: To reduce the risk of flooding to the existing properties and businesses within the
Crindau Area.
20 If, during development, contamination not previously identified is found to be present at
the site then no further development (unless otherwise agreed in writing with the local
planning authority) shall be carried out until the developer has submitted, and obtained
written approval from the local planning authority for, a remediation strategy detailing how
this unsuspected contamination shall be dealt with. The remediation strategy shall be
implemented as approved.
Reason: Given the size/complexity 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.
21 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 within 2 days to
the Local Planning Authority, all associated works must stop, and no further development
shall take place unless otherwise agreed in writing until a scheme to deal with the
contamination found has been approved. An investigation and risk assessment must be
undertaken and where remediation is necessary a remediation scheme and verification
plan must be prepared and submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning
Authority. Following completion of measures identified in the approved remediation scheme
a verification report must be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning
Authority. The timescale for the above actions shall be agreed with the LPA within 2 weeks
of the discovery of any unsuspected contamination.
Reason: To ensure that any unacceptable risks from land contamination to the future users
of the land , neighbouring land, controlled waters, property and ecological systems are
minimised, and to ensure that the development can be carried out safely without
unacceptable risks to workers, neighbours and other offsite receptors.
22 Any topsoil [natural or manufactured],or subsoil, to be imported shall be assessed for
chemical or other potential contaminants in accordance with a scheme of investigation to
be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority in advance of its
importation. Only material approved by the Local Planning Authority shall be imported. All
measures specified in the approved scheme shall be undertaken in accordance with the
relevant Code of Practice and Guidance Notes.
Subject to approval of the above, verification sampling of the material received at the
development site is required to verify that the imported soil is free from contamination and
shall be undertaken in accordance with a scheme agreed with in writing by the LPA.
Reason: To ensure that imported materials do not present any unacceptable risks from
contamination to the future users of the land, neighbouring land and controlled waters.
23 Any aggregate (other than virgin quarry stone) or recycled aggregate material to be
imported shall be assessed for chemical or other potential contaminants in accordance with
a scheme of investigation to be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning
Authority in advance of its importation. Only material approved by the Local Planning
Authority shall be imported. All measures specified in the approved scheme shall be
undertaken in accordance with the relevant Code of Practice and Guidance Notes.
Subject to approval of the above, verification sampling of the material received at the
development site is required to verify that the imported aggregate is free from
contamination and shall be undertaken in accordance with a scheme agreed with in writing
by the LPA.
Reason: To ensure that any imported materials do not present any unacceptable risks from
contamination to the future users of the land, neighbouring land and controlled waters.
24 In order to reuse any materials excavated as part of the approved development they
need to be chemically assessed to ensure that they do not present any unacceptable risks
from contamination to the future users of the land, neighbouring land and controlled waters.
Excavated materials with levels of contamination which are deemed to be unacceptable
must be removed off site and either be disposed of or treated at an appropriately permitted
or exempt facility.
Reason: To ensure that there are no unacceptable risks from contamination to the future
users of the land, neighbouring land and controlled waters.
25 A monitoring scheme to monitor groundwater conditions before, during and after the
construction programme to verify that groundwater conditions have not altered significantly
as a result of the proposed works, must be submitted to the local planning authority and the
agreed scheme undertaken by the developer. Following completion of the monitoring a
report that demonstrate the effectiveness of the monitoring must be produced, and
submitted to the Local Planning Authority.
Reason: To ensure that any unacceptable risks from land contamination to the future users
of the land, neighbouring land, controlled waters, property and ecological systems are
minimised.
NOTE TO APPLICANT
01 The development plan covering Newport is the Newport Local Development Plan 20112026 (Adopted January 2015). Policies CE6, GP1, GP2, GP5, GP7, SP1 and SP3, were
relevant to the determination of this application.
02 The proposed development (including any demolition) has been screened under the
Environmental Impact Assessment Regulations and it is considered that an Environmental
Statement is not required.
03 Any new cycleway/footpaths must be provided in accordance with the Active Travel
Design Guidance (http://wales.gov.uk/topics/transport/walking-cycling/active-travel-designguidance/?lang=en).
04 A Section.111/278 Agreement will be required in order for works to be carried out
within the adopted highway.
05 The proposed works will affect he existing adopted highway which may require road
closures/temporary diversions. The Council’s Streetscene department must be contacted
in regard to this matter.
06 There shall be no alteration or diversion of the existing footpaths until the precise route
of any diversion has been agreed by the Local Planning Authority. Please contact the
Public Rights of Way Officer on 01633 656656 for further information.
07 The amended Wildlife and Countryside Act 1981 protects bird species whilst nesting in
the UK. This protection extends to a bird, its nest, eggs, and young until such time as the
young have fledged. Vegetation clearance should proceed outside the peak bird-breeding
season (generally considered to be March through August inclusive) or within the breeding
season only if a pre-clearance survey shows no breeding birds to be present, nesting or
commencing nesting within the vegetation to be affected.
08 Where there is a risk that bat roosts may be present, it is incumbent upon the owner to
commission a specialist bat survey to identify bat roosts before instructing tree surgery to
commence. Failure to do so and in the event of disturbing a roost site and upon conviction
is an offence. Maximum penalties for committing offences relating to bats or their roosts
can amount to imprisonment for a term not exceeding six months or fines of up to Level 5
on the standard scale under the Criminal Justice Act 1982/1991 (i.e. £5000 in April 2001)
per roost or bat disturbed or killed, or to both.
APPLICATION DETAILS
No:
14/0908
Ward:
MARSHFIELD
Type:
FULL
Expiry Date:
24-MAR-2015
Applicant:
S. EVANS
Site:
MARSHFIELD VILLAGE HALL, WELLFIELD ROAD, MARSHFIELD,
CARDIFF, CF3 2UB
Proposal:
PROPOSED SINGLE STOREY REAR EXTENSION
Recommendation:
GRANTED WITH CONDITIONS
1.
1.1
INTRODUCTION
This application seeks permission for the erection of a single storey rear extension to
Marshfield Village Hall.
1.2
This application is being considered by Planning Committee as requested by Councillor
White.
2.
RELEVANT SITE HISTORY
None.
3.
3.1
POLICY CONTEXT
Newport Local Development Plan, 2011-2026 (Adopted January 2015)
Policy SP12 (Community Facilities) states the devlopment of new community facilities in
sustainable locations will be encouraged including:
i)
Places of worship and church halls, cemeteries, community centres, health centres,
day nurseries, clinics and consulting room;
ii)
Museums, public halls, libraries, art galleries, exhibition halls, education and training
centres;
iii)
Cinemas, music and concert halls, theatres, dance and sport halls, swimming baths,
skating rinks, gymnasiums;
iv)
Outdoor and indoor sport and leisure uses including allotments and community/city
gardens.
Development that affects existing community facilities should be designed to retain or
enhance essential facilities.
Policy GP2 (General Amenity) states that development will be permitted where:
i)
There will not be a significant adverse effect on local amenity, including in terms of
noise, disturbance, privacy, overbearing, light, odours and air quality;
ii)
The proposed use and form of development will not be detrimental to the visual
amenities of nearby occupiers of the character or appearance of the surrounding
area;
iii)
The proposal seeks to design out the opportunity for crime and anti-social
behaviour;
iv)
The proposal promotes inclusive design both for the built development and access
within and around the development;
v)
Adequate amenity for future occupiers.
Policy GP6 (Quality of Design) requires good quality of design for all forms of development.
The following fundamental design principles should be addressed:
i)
Context of the site: all development should be sensitive to the unique qualities of the
site and respond positively to the character of the area;
ii)
Access, permeability and layout: all development should maintain a high level of
pedestrian access, connectivity and laid out so as to minimise noise pollution;
iii)
Preservation and enhancement: where possible development should reflect the
character of the locality but avoid the inappropriate replication of neighbouring
iv)
v)
vi)
architectural styles. The designer is encouraged to display creativity and innovation
in design;
Scale and form of development: new development should appropriately reflect the
scale of adjacent townscape. Care should be taken to avoid over-scaled
development;
Materials and detailing: high quality, durable and preferably renewable materials
should be used to complement the site context. Detailing should be incorporated as
an integral part of the design at an early stage;
Sustainability: new development should be inherently robust, energy and water
efficient, flood resilient and adaptable, thereby facilitation the flexible re-use of the
building. Where existing buildings are present, imaginative and sensitive solutions
should be sought to achieve the re-use of the buildings.
4.
4.1
CONSULTATIONS
GLAMORGAN GWENT ARCHAEOLOGICAL TRUST: Advises that as the development lies
within the area of Marshfield known as Blacktown, which is known to have pockets of
earlier habitation which originated in the medieval period, there is potential to uncover
previously undetected archaeological resource in the area. It is recommended that a
watching brief during groundworks is conducted to sufficiently mitigate any potential
impacts to the archaeological ground works.
4.2
NATURAL RESOURCES WALES: Advises that the proposed development is within flood
zone C1 and considers that the risk of flooding could be acceptable subject to the
developer being made aware of the potential flood risks and advised to install floodproofing measures.
4.3
NEWPORT ACCESS GROUP: No comments received.
5.
5.1
INTERNAL COUNCIL ADVICE
HEAD OF STREETSCENE AND CITY SERVICES (HIGHWAYS): Has no objection to the
proposal due to the village hall having a large existing car park. Additional plans were
submitted indicating an overflow parking area on playing fields to the north west of the
village hall. Head of Streetscene (Highways) has suggested that the use of the overflow car
park would be limited as any wet weather would be likely to make the ground unsuitable for
vehicles. The principle of providing overflow parking on the playing field is acceptable on
the basis that access arrangements to the site would remain unchanged.
6.
6.1
REPRESENTATIONS
NEIGHBOURS:All properties with a common boundary with the application site were
consulted (two properties). One response was received objecting to the proposals on the
following grounds:
• Traffic – Wellfield Road is a relatively quiet local road,used primarily for access by
residents, which is narrow single-track and without pavements for much of its
length. The Village Hall site is obviously an attraction for young children, in that it
contains football pitches and 2 playgrounds, not to mention the Village Hall itself.
• Parking – Marshfield Village Hall provides parking for vehicles using the site.
However, this is clearly not sufficient even for current requirements, when some 30+
people arrive for a football match, more than that for kids' football training and
sometimes considerably more for events in the village hall itself. Vehicles are
regularly double-parked up and down Wellfield Road, along verges and side streets.
This clearly increases the risk for pedestrians using the road and could cause a very
serious problem should emergency vehicles require access. It is not uncommon for
parked cars also to block access to fire hydrants. Any increase in the capacity of the
hall, will inevitably lead to more vehicles and an increased parking problem. It
should also be noted that the 2 childrens' playgrounds lie on opposite sides of the
car park, meaning that children often cross through the car park, between parked
cars, etc.
• Size of Extension – The proposed extension is clearly of considerable size, being
approximately 105sqm. It would appear that the original building was approximately
315sqm, with a previous extension being added already of some 80sqm. The
proposed extension would represent an 'extension on an extension', and a total
•
•
•
increase over the original size of almost 60%, which would seem excessive, even
given the space available.
Loss of Light and Amenity – As described, the proposed extension is of
considerable size, and located very close to the boundary of my property. As such,
it would be overbearing. Indeed, the council's '45 degree rule' is well and truly
breached by this proposal. The current building already projects to approx. 50
degrees from the study window at the rear of my property. The proposed extension
would take the building beyond 65 degrees.
Design and Architectual Integrity – It is noted that the original application, containing
a flat roof, was altered after submission. However, the subsequent roof pitch is still
not sympathetic to that of the main building. Given that the previous extension did
not match the original building, this leads to a 'jumble' of roof styles and pitches
which clearly show little 'consistency of architectural detailing', to quote the council's
Design Guidelines. In addition the westerly part of the proposed extension (the new
committee room) is not set back from the side wall, which would appear at odds
with the council guideline of setting back by a minimum of 1 metre 'to achieve a
satisfactory relationship between the old and new building'.
Purpose of Extension – As a public building, funded by the community, I feel it is
appropriate to consider the reasons and justification for the proposed extension.
Whilst I admire the aims of the Marshfield Village Hall Committee, and Marshfield
Community Council, to improve services for the community, I do not believe there is
actually a need for the proposed extension. Although perhaps not current, the
Village Hall website shows that the facility is regularly booked for approx 32.5 hours
of the 84 hours available for booking each week. Whilst I understand that the
extension is designed to cater for concurrent bookings requiring separate toilet
facilities, I strongly doubt that this small number of potential bookings would justify
the significant proposed expenditure. I believe there must be ways to spend, or
save, the proposed budget to better serve the community as a whole.
6.2
COUNCILLORS: Councillor White requested that the application be determined by
planning committee if recommended for approval following concerns raised by a local
resident.
6.3
MARSHFIELD COMMUNITY COUNCIL: No observations.
7.
7.1
ASSESSMENT
Marshfield Village Hall is located on Wellfield Road in the area of Marshfield known as
Blacktown. The existing building is detached and includes meeting rooms, changing rooms
and provides a facility for a variety of community based activities. The site also has a large
car park, playing fields and children’s play equipment.
7.2
The proposed extension would be located at the rear of the building to the end nearest
Wellfield House. It would project 6.1 metres from the rear elevation of the existing building
and be 8.0 metres wide. This part of the extension would provide a new committee room.
The extension would then step out a further 3.9 metres, 8.0 metres in total. This section of
the proposed extension would be 9.4 metres wide. The proposed extension would have a
pitched roof measuring 2.6 metres to the eaves. The ridge of the roof over the committee
room would measure 4.0 metres to the ridge with the remainder of the extension measuring
5.5 metres to the ridge.
7.3
It is proposed to insert 2no. windows in the rear elevation of the proposed committee room
with a further 3no. sets of glazed double doors in the rear elevation of the larger element of
the extension. There would also be windows at first floor level in the gable end of this part
of the extension.
7.4
It is proposed that the extension would be constructed from materials to match those of the
existing building. The walls would be cream render with brown concrete tiles to the roof. As
such it is considerd that there would not be an unsatisfactory bonding of new and old
materials. The comments received by a neighbouring resident refer to the previously
adopted Supplementary Planning Guidance for House Extensions where a set back of 1
metre from the front elevation of a building is desirable for side extensions. This allows side
extensions to appear subordinate to the main building and assists in the bonding of old and
new brickwork. As the proposed extension would be located to the rear of the building and
have a rendered finish, it is not considered that a setback would be required.
7.5
The neighbouring resident draws attention to the House Extensions SPG which was in
place prior to the recent adoption of the Newport LDP. It is suggested that the existing
building fails the horizontal 45 degree test and the proposed extension would exacerbate
an existing issue relating to overbearing and loss of light. Taking into account both the
horizontal and vertical 45 degree tests, the proposed extension passes the vertical 45
degree test and fails the horizontal 45 degree test only marginally. Whilst it is
acknowledged that the proposed extension is substantial, as the extension is single storey
with the roof sloping away from the boundary where its height would be 2.6 metres to the
eaves, it is not considered that the extension would be unacceptably overbearing.
7.6
The Village Hall benefits from a large car park which provides off street parking. No
objection has been received from Head of Streetscene and City Services in relation to
parking provision. The neighbouring resident has highlighted issues relating to parking at
the site when events such as football matches are held at the Village Hall. Whilst it is
appreciated that some occassions will create a large demand for parking, the parking
provision is considered to be sufficient. The applicant has provided details of additional
overflow parking within the wider village hall site. Whilst Head of Streetscene (Highways)
has no objections to the use of the oveflow carpark in principle, as it would be located on
an existing playing field, use would be limited to dry weather conditions. As the existing car
park is considered to meet an acceptable level of parking, additional parking has not been
sought.
8.
8.1
OTHER CONSIDERATIONS
Crime and Disorder Act 1998
Section 17(1) of the Crime and Disorder Act 1998 imposes a duty on the Local Authority to
exercise its various functions with due regard to the likely effect of the exercise of those
functions on, and the need to do all that it reasonably can to prevent, crime and disorder in
its area. This duty has been considered in the evaluation of this application. It is
considered that there would be no significant or unacceptable increase in crime and
disorder as a result of the proposed decision.
8.2
Equality Act 2010
The Equality Act 2010 identifies a number of ‘protected characteristics’, namely age;
disability; gender reassignment; pregnancy and maternity; race; religion or belief; sex;
sexual orientation; marriage and civil partnership.
8.3
Having due regard to advancing equality involves:
• removing or minimising disadvantages suffered by people due to their protected
characteristics;
• taking steps to meet the needs of people from protected groups where these differ
from the need of other people; and
• encouraging people from protected groups to participate in public life or in other
activities where their participation is disproportionately low.
8.4
The above duty has been given due consideration in the determination of this application.
It is considered that the proposed development does not have any significant implications
for, or effect on, persons who share a protected characteristic, over and above any other
person.
9.
9.1
CONCLUSION
It is considered that the proposed extension would not have an unacceptable impact on the
character and appearance of the existing building or wider area, nor would it have an
unacceptable impact on residentail amenity or highway safety. The proposed use would
allow increased space for the provision of community related activities. It is therefore
considered that the proposal complies with policies SP12, GP2 and GP6 of the Newport
Local Development Plan 2011-2026 (Adopted Janaury 2015)
10.
RECOMMENDATION
GRANTED WITH CONDITIONS
01 The development shall be implemented in accordance with the following plans and
documents: 2014/03/02, 2014/03/05 Rev B and 2014/03/06 Rev B.
Reason: In the interests of clarity and to ensure the development complies with the
submitted plans and documents on which this decision was based
Pre- commencement conditions
02 The developer shall ensure that a suitably qualified archaeologist is present during the
undertaking of any ground disturbing works in the development area, so that an
archaeological watching brief can be conducted. The archaeological watching brief shall be
undertaken to the standards of the Institute for Archaeologists. The Local Planning
Authority shall be informed, in writing, at least two weeks prior to the commencement of the
development of the name of the said archaeologist and no work shall begin until the Local
Planning Authority has confirmed, in writing, that the proposed archaeologist is suitable. A
copy of the watching brief report shall be submitted to the Local Authority within two months
of the fieldwork being completed by the archaeologist.
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.
General conditions
03 The external surfaces of the extension hereby permitted shall only be of materials to
match those of the existing building.
Reason: To ensure the development id completed in a manner compatible with its
surroundings.
NOTE TO APPLICANT
01 The development plan for Newport is the Newport Local Development Plan 2011 – 2026
(Adopted January 2015). Policies SP12, GP2 and GP6 were relevant to the determination
of this application.
02 The developer is advised to install flood proofing measue. Futher information can be
obtained for Natural Resources Wales.
03 Due to the minor nature of the proposed development (including any demolition) and the
location of the proposed development, it is considered that the proposals did not need to be
screened under the Environmental Impact Assessment Regulations.
APPLICATION DETAILS
No:
14/1287
Ward:
BETTWS
Type:
FULL (MAJOR)
Expiry Date:
17-MAR-2015
Applicant:
STUART JONES, MORGANSTONE
Site:
THE MERRY MILLER, MONNOW WAY, BETTWS, NEWPORT, NP20 7DB
Proposal:
RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT OF 19NO. UNITS AND ASSOCIATED
EXTERNAL WORKS, INCLUDING DEMOLITION OF EXISTING PUBLIC
HOUSE AND BETTING OFFICE
Recommendation: Granted with Conditions subject to S.106 Legal Agreement
1.
1.1
INTRODUCTION
This application seeks consent for the residential development of 19no units and associated
external works including the demolition of existing public house and betting office at the Merry
Miller in Bettws.
1.2
The Merry Miller pub has stood vacant for several years and is on the Council’s vacant and
derelict commercial properties list being sited in a prominent location and in a poor state or
repair. The Council has prioritised properties on this list for redevlopment. As such the
redevelopment of the site is welcomed in principle. In addition to this, the site is located within the
settlement boundaries and is allocated as a housing site within the Local Development Plan.
1.3
The development would comprise a three storey apartment building fronting Monnow Way
providing 9no 1 bed units with a side access road leading to a mews type 2 bed apartment to the
rear (with access to rear parking underneath) and 9no two storey dwellings (5no three bed and
4no two bed) off a cul-de-sac formation.
2.
RELEVANT SITE HISTORY
None.
3.
3.1
POLICY CONTEXT
Newport Local Development Plan - SP1 Sustainability: seeks to ensure the development takes
into account sustainable development principles.
SP3 Flood Risk: There is a need to locate development outside of flood risk.
SP13 Planning Obligations: Proposals of this scale will be required to provide or make
contributions to infrastructure.
GP1 General Development Principles: Climate Change: This policy seeks to ensure that the
development is to withstand climate change over the lifetime of the development.
GP2 General Development Principles – General Amenity: There is to be no significant adverse
effect on the amenity of the existing or new community.
GP3 General Development Principles – Services Infrastructure: This policy requires justification
as to the suitability of the service infrastructure required by the proposal e.g. sewerage.
GP4 General Development Principles – Highways and Accessibility: The proposal must not
detrimentally affect the highway capacity. There must be adequate public access and any new
roads must be compliant with the Councils design scheme.
GP5 General Development Principles – Natural Environment: As a brownfield site there may be
some element of ecological value on the site, this is to be considered by the Council’s ecologist.
The proposal must ensure that is has an appropriately design landscape scheme.
GP6 General Development Principles – Quality of Design: All new development must ensure that
they are to achieve good quality design. This is ensuring that the proposal creates a safe,
accessible and attractive environment taking into account the context, scale and materials of the
design.
GP7 General Development Principles – Environmental Protection and Public Health: This policy
seeks to ensure that there is no unacceptable harm to health from a development.
H1 Housing Sites: The proposed development has been allocated within the LDP as a housing
site for 10 units. The site will therefore be supported as to its ability to fulfil part of the housing
supply for the plan period.
H2 Housing Standards: Housing developments will be required to be built to high standards of
environmental and sustainable design.
H3 Housing Mix and Density.
H4 Affordable Housing: This policy requires sites of 10 or more units to provide on-site affordable
housing provision.
T4 Parking: This policy requires adequate level of parking to ensure there is no detrimental
impact on the new site or existing community.
4.
4.1
CONSULTATIONS
DWR CYMRU – WELSH WATER: Request conditions to ensure that foul water discharges are
drained separately from the site and to prevent surface water from connecting to the public
sewerage system.
4.2
NEWPORT ACCESS GROUP: No response.
4.4
WALES AND WEST UTILITIES: Provide details of their apparatus and offer no objection.
4.5
SENIOR FIRE PREVENTION OFFICER: No response.
4.7
NATURAL RESOURCES WALES: Flood Risk - The application site lies entirely within Zone B,
as defined by the Development Advice Map (DAM) referred to under Technical Advice Note
15: Development and Flood Risk (TAN15) (July 2004). NRW therefore offer no objections to
the proposals.
European Protected Species – Bats- Note the findings of the Ecology Report dated October
2014. Therefore have no further comments to make on this report and refer to the Local
Authority’s Ecologist for further comment.
4.8
ARCHITECTURAL LIAISON OFFICER: Discussions with the applicant have already taken place
in respect of the layout of the site and the Secured by Design award and no objections are
offered.
4.9
WESTERN POWER DISTRIBUTION: Provide details of apparatus. Safe working procedures
should be practiced.
4.9.1
GLAMORGAN GWENT ARCHAEOLOGICAL TRUST: The application site lies within the
mill pond and curtilage of Malpas Mill. This mill is likely to have medieval origins and was
certainly extant in 1708 when it was mentioned in a deed of allotment. The mill is shown on
the 1st Series Ordnance Survey map of 1833 and the mill and its pond and cut features
relating to the water management of the mill are clearly shown in in the 1st Edition Ordnance
Survey map of 1883. Therefore recommend that a condition be attached to any permission
requiring the applicant to submit a detailed written scheme of investigation, which will lead
to the undertaking of a programme of archaeological work which should allow identification
of the archaeological resource and should include a programme of sampling, allow for the
recording of features and the proper recovery and conservation of any artefacts and include
a contingency for specialist analysis if necessary.
4.9.2
WESTERN POWER DISTRIBUTION: Provide details of equipment in the area.
5.
5.1
INTERNAL COUNCIL ADVICE
HEAD OF STREETSCENE AND CITY SERVICES (HIGHWAYS): The site must be constructed
to an adoptable standard. A condition would therefore be required which states that full
engineering/construction details must be submitted for approval.
A condition will also be required for a Construction Environmental Management Plan (CEMP)
must be submitted for approval. This must include such details as contractor compound,
contractor parking, dust suppression and wheel wash facilities.
5.2
HEAD OF STREETSCENE AND CITY SERVICES (ECOLOGY OFFICER): Does not object to
the application subject to appropriate conditions being attached if permission is granted.
5.3
HEAD OF STREETSCENE AND CITY SERVICES (TREE OFFICER): Offers no objection to the
proposals as replacement tree planting has been agreed. Requests conditions relating to tree
protection.
5.4
HEAD OF STREETSCENE AND CITY SERVICES (LANDSCAPE OFFICER): Offers no objection
to the proposals.
5.5
HEAD OF REGENERATION, INVESTMENT AND HOUSING (ESTATES): No response.
5.6
PUBLIC PROTECTION MANAGER: Offers no objection to the proposals but requests conditions
relating to unforseen construction, dust mitigation and unforseen contamination.
5.8
HEAD OF REGENERATION, INVESTMENT AND HOUSING (PLANNING CONTRIBUTIONS
MANAGER): Whilst it is recognised that no education or leisure contributions are currently
requested for affordable housing dwellings it is necessary to build-in safeguards to ensure that if
any of the currently proposed social housing units are sold on the ‘open market’, the relevant
contributions requirements are satisfied. Prior to commencement of the development, the Owner
and/or Developer will notify the Council in writing of the number and type of dwellings which are
to be ‘open market’ dwellings.
Should the developer decide to sell the properties on the open market there would also be a
requirement for 10% on-site affordable units at 50% of the ACG.
A Monitoring Fee of £940 will be required to cover the Council’s cost incurred in entering into
early negotiations and on-going monitoring of the planning obligations. Payment will be due upon
signing of the S106 legal agreement
5.9
HEAD OF REGENERATION, INVESTMENT AND HOUSING (LEISURE): There is a surplus of
Formal and Informal Open Space in the Bettws ward. However, there is a deficit of Equipped
Open Space.
5.9.1
HEAD OF REGENERATION, INVESTMENT AND HOUSING (EDUCATION): The development
falls within the catchment area of Newport High School (surplus capacity of 36 pupil places, as at
January 2014) and Millbrook Primary School (surplus capacity of 13 pupil places, as at January
2014).
5.9.2
HEAD OF REGENERATION, INVESTMENT AND HOUSING (HOUSING MANAGER): Fully
supports the application for the provision of affordable housing in this location. The current site is
a disused public house which has been a magnate for anti-social behaviour. The site is in a very
sustainable location, opposite is a petrol filling station with convenience store, the bus stop is
immediately in front of the development and local schools are easily accessible on safe routes.
The proposed mix of apartments and family housing appropriately addresses the housing need
for the area. The properties will be neutral tenure, and allocated through the Common Housing
Register and are fully supported by Welsh Government in the form of social housing grant.
5.9.3
HEAD OF STREETSCENE AND CITY SERVICES (DRAINAGE MANAGER): The proposed
drainage plan is acceptable in principle subject to NRW having no objection to the conclusions of
the Flood Risk Assessment.
Attenuated discharge to the water course would be an acceptable method of disposing of surface
water run-off, there is currently some uncertainty over the status of the water course which we
are seeking to clarify with NRW. If it is classed as an ordinary water course, discharge consent
and approval of the outfall detail will need to be sought from the NCC (Streetscene), as the lead
local flood authority. For ordinary water discharge consent it would normally be required that
discharge is limited to greenfield runoff rates. It should be noted also that Newport City Homes
are the riparian land owner of the water course and permission will also be needed from them to
construct any sewers/outlets on their land.
Input data and calculations will have to be provided to show the assessment greenfield runoff
rates and volumes, calculation of attenuation volumes and sewer designs.
Further drawings will need to be provided clarifying pipe sizes, layouts, gradients, surface and
invert levels. Details of gullies, manhole, inspection chambers, rodding eyes etc are required as
well as details for proposed attenuation pipes/tanks and flow control devices.
Confirmation should be provided of the extents of surface water sewers intended for adoption,
along with details of any Section 104 Agreement with Welsh Water or correspondence showing
confirmation of their intention to adopt.
This information could be conditioned for future approval if required.
6.
6.1
REPRESENTATIONS
NEIGHBOURS: All properties within 50m of the application site were consulted (70no properties),
a site notice was displayed and a press notice published in South Wales Argus. Two responses
received from neighbouring occupiers. The responses offer no objections to the proposals but
one asks that the building be checked for bats prior to demolition and the other asks that the
existing perimeter fence that already runs along their boundary be retained and extended the full
length of their boundary to the same specification as has been proposed on the opposite
boundary.
6.2
COUNCILLORS WHITEHEAD AND DELAHAYE: Offer support to the proposals with Councillor
Whitehead stating it is exciting that this eyesore of a site will be developed as proposed.
7.
7.1
ASSESSMENT
The site has an area of 0.38 hectares and is located within a predominantly residential area with
existing residential development flanking the eastern and southern boundaries of the site. To the
west the site is bordered by woodland whilst to the north the site is separated by further
residential development by Malpas Brook. The site has a slight gradient increase of 3m from east
to west.
7.2
The character and design of neighbouring development is varied with the existing neighbouring
dwellings to the south west of the site being early period bay fronted semi-detached dwellings. To
the south of these units are three storey flats, which typifies the remainder of the Bettws estate,
constructed mid-centuary. Opposite the site lies a petrol station. Dwellings to the east of the site
again are typical Bettws estate facades, with concrete tiled roofs, flat facades and typical window
sizes. A mixture of facing brickwork and render dominate the street scene.
7.3
As stated above, the layout would comprise a three storey apartment building fronting Monnow
Way containing 9no one bed apartments. The apartment building would be set back from the
road by 5m with landscaping to the front and side elevation and a low wall with decorative railings
above along the frontage of the site with Monnow Way. The front elevation of the apartment block
would be broken up by a projecting render feature which would provide a communal entrance to
the flats. A rear wing would link the apartment building to the dwellings to the rear. Parking
provision serving the occupiers of the apartment block would be located to the rear of the block
and would be accessed via a drive-through under plot 10 which is a mews type unit containing a
two bed unit. This unit would also have a bin storage area and cycle store beneath it as well as a
garage serving the occupants of the unit. Only the apartment block would be highly visible from
outside of the site. There are a variety of finishes in the area and the elevational treatment would
reflect this with use of contrasting render and facing brick and simple fennestration. Further into
the plot some of the units would be finished with coloured weatherboards to make for an
attractive design feature. All of the units would have grey concrete rooftiles in keeping with the
area.
7.4
Highways
The site is well located for local services and public transport links, with a bus stop directly
outside the site, providing a regular bus service into the city centre. The site is sustainable in its
location with the local shops, petrol station, Newport High school and cycle tracks along the
Monmouthshire – Brecon canal. Following the adoption of the Local Development Plan in
January 2014 the Council does not currently have any adopted Supplementary Planning
Guidance on parking. However, the Newport Parking Standards 2012 can carry some weight.
Based on these standards the development generates a parking demand for 34 parking spaces.
Only 19no parking spaces would be provided within the site serve the future occupants. The
applicant has submitted a sustainability assessment to justify a reduction in the number of
parking spaces.
7.5
In response to the proposals the Head of Streetscene and City Services (Highways) confirms the
site’s location justifies a reduction and no objections are offered to the proposals subject to
conditions to require a Construction Environmental Management Plan (CEMP) and full
engineering/construction details of the highways and drainage must be submitted for approval.
7.6
Neighbouring Privacy/Amenity
Due to the proposed layout and the distance of the site from the existing surrounding dwellings
there would be no overbearing impact, nor direct overlooking of these existing properties. The
side elevation of plot 19 which is a two storey dwelling would be within 4m of the rear boundary of
the garden of no’s 14 and 16 Tamar Close to the south-west of the site. These properties have
good sized gardens and the side elevation of the new dwelling would be over 19m away from the
rear elevations of the existing dwellings. Furthermore, the site is 3m lower than the level of the
neighbouring gardens. This relationship is considered to be entirely acceptable subject to a
condition to ensure that the first floor window in the side elevation of the new dwelling (at first
floor) serving a bathroom is obscure glazed. The intervening boundary treatment would be a
1.8m timber close boarded fence which is also considered to be appropriate in this residential
context.
7.7
Whilst the occupants of the proposed apartments would not have any private amenity space, this
is not unusual for this type of accommodation. Bar one two bed apartment all of the apartments
would be one bedroom and it is less likely that they would be occupied by families. The site is
considered to benefit from a good landscaping scheme and so the outlook of the residents would
be improved by this. Furthermore, the ward profile information for Bettws shows that the area has
an abundance of designated open space and indeed there is a recreation area just over 200m
away from the site.
7.8
The occupants of the dwellings would be served by fair sized private rear gardens with timber
sheds, patio areas and drying facilities.
7.9
As stated above, unit 10 would have a bin and cycle store area directly beneath it. It is
considered that this could potentially cause noise and disturbance to the occupiers of the above
unit from other residents using these facilities. In order to ensure that the amenity of the
occupants of unit 10 is protected, it is considered that a scheme of sound insulation should be
submitted to the Council for approval and then implemented prior to its occupation to address
this.
7.9.1
In all, it is considered that by reason of the design and layout of the scheme it would afford a very
good standard of living for the future occupiers. It is considered that the design of the proposed
dwellings reflects the existing residential development in the surrounding area and the materials
selected complement the existing finishes of the surrounding development. The design of the
scheme has been developed in accordance with the requirements of Gwent Police ‘Secure by
Design’ and the Police Architectural Liaison Officer fully supports the proposals.
7.9.2
Comments have been received from a neighbouring resident requesting that the existing wooden
permiter fencing be retained and extended the full length of their property. The proposed layout
plan shows a 1.8m high wooden fence between the site and the neighbouring property. The
proposed boundary treatments as indicated on the layout plan are considered to be acceptable
and full details can be secured by condition.
7.9.3
Trees/Ecology
The wooded area to the north of the site is classified as ancient woodland and is afforded
protection by the Council. There are also mature trees along the boundaries of the site which are
not within the ancient woodland but one of which is protected by a preservation order. A
comprehensive tree report has been submitted with the application. The report identifies several
tree species that should be retained and protected during construction. Whilst the majority of the
trees can be retained, several trees will require removal including a 24m high Oak tree along the
south-western boundary of the site, an Oak on the southern boundary of the site and two large
trees on the north-western boundary. The two trees on the north-western boundary are within the
ancient woodland. To compensate for the removal of these trees, three new mature trees are
proposed to be planted to the rear of the site in the ancient woodland area. The Council’s Tree
Officer has confirmed her agreement to the compensatory planting and offers no objection to the
proposals. Whilst the loss of the trees is regrettable, the value of the trees must be balanced
against the benefit of redeveloping the site. The existing derelict buildings are in a very poor state
of repair and have a detrimental impact on the visual amenity of the area particularly as they
occupy a prominent site at the entrance to the Bettws estate. As such there would be significant
benefit to the character and visual amenity of the area as a result of the proposed development,
despite the loss of the trees. Furthermore, as the site and the trees to be felled are set against
the backdrop of the dense protected woodland to the north and north-west, it is considered that
visually, their loss is more limited than if they were in isolated positions. On balance, it is
considered that by reason of the benefit to the visual amenity of the area due to the
redevelopment of the site, combined with the specific factors of the site and the trees relationship
with it, in this instance the removal of the trees is justified.
7.9.4
The development proposes small pockets of landscaping, along the boundary and frontage of
each dwelling. The site also introduces small, but intensively planted areas between the frontage
of houses and the road which will break up hard surfacing along the street frontage. The
Council’s Landscape Officer offer is in support of the proposals.
7.9.5
Due to the presence of the derelict buildings on site with potential for bats, the application is
accompanied by a Bat Survey. The survey did find evidence of bats in the area but did not find
any evidence of bats within the actual buildings. As such the Council’s Ecology Officer has
confirmed that she offers no objection to the proposals subject to appropriate conditions being
attached if permission is granted. A condition is required to ensure that a licenced ecologist is
present during the felling of any trees in the interests of bats. The Ecology Officer has also
requested conditions relating to the protection of the adjacent brook.
7.9.6
Flooding
The application site lies entirely within Zone B, as defined by the Development Advice Map
(DAM) referred to under Technical Advice Note 15: Development and Flood Risk (TAN15) (July
2004). Zone B relates to areas known to have flooded in the past evidenced by sedimentary
deposits but development in Zone B does not require the application of acceptability tests as with
Zone C1. Development within Zone B can take place subject to site levels being checked against
extreme flood levels. If the site levels are greater than the flood levels used to define adjacent
extreme flood outline there is no need to consider flood risk further. The flood information
submitted by the applicant indicates that the general site levels are consistently and significantly
higher on the site than the bank on the other side of the watercourse. Based on the level disparity
it seems unlikely that the morphology of flood flows in the channel would adversely affect the site.
NRW confirm they offer no objections to the development but recommend that the Council’s
Drainage Engineers are consulted with regards to issues such as localised flooding from drains,
culverts and small watercourses.
7.9.7
Drainage
It is proposed for foul drainage to go to the mains sewer. Due to the specific soil circumstances of
the site the use of soakaway techniques is precluded and it is therefore proposed for surface
water to be discharged to the adjacent brook. The applicant confirms the discharge rates will be
confirmed with Natural Resources Wales but in any event will not be in excess of those
generated by the current use of the site and there would be no impact on the local surface water
drainage infrastructure from the development that might impact on the flood risk elsewhere within
the catchment. Natural Resources Wales confirm they offer no objections to this but advise that
the Council’s Drainage experts are consulted. In response to the proposals the Council’s
Drainage Officers advise that in principle discharge to the water course is an acceptable method
of disposing of surface water run-off. However, input data and calculations must be provided to
show the assessment greenfield run-off rates and volumes, calculation of attenuation volumes
and sewer designs. Further drawings will need to be provided clarifying pipe sizes, layouts,
gradients, surface and invert levels. Details of gullies, manhole, inspection chambers, rodding
eyes etc are required as well as details for proposed attenuation pipes/tanks and flow control
devices. The Drainage Manager confirms that he is happy for this information to be secured by
condition for future approval.
7.9.8
Financial Contributions
Due to the affordable nature of the proposed dwellings no education or leisure contributions are
requested. The Council’s Contributions Manager has been consulted and advises that in terms of
affordable housing it is necessary to build-in safeguards to ensure that if any of the currently
proposed social housing units are sold on the ‘open market’, the relevant contributions
requirements are satisfied. Therefore, prior to commencement of the development, the Owner
and/or Developer must notify the Council in writing of the number and type of dwellings which are
to be ‘open market’ dwellings. This is to be secured via a Section 106 Legal Agreement which the
applicant will be required to enter into. Should the developer decide to sell the properties on the
open market there would also be a requirement for 10% on-site affordable units at 50% of the
ACG together with any relevant leisure and education contributions. The Section 106 Agreement
will provide formulas and address these scenarios. A Monitoring Fee of £940 will be required to
cover the Council’s cost incurred in entering into early negotiations and on-going monitoring of
the planning obligations. Payment will be due if the Council are notified that the dwellings are to
be open market.
8.
8.1
OTHER CONSIDERATIONS
Crime and Disorder Act 1998
Section 17(1) of the Crime and Disorder Act 1998 imposes a duty on the Local Authority to
exercise its various functions with due regard to the likely effect of the exercise of those functions
on, and the need to do all that it reasonably can to prevent, crime and disorder in its area. This
duty has been considered in the evaluation of this application. It is considered that there would
be no significant or unacceptable increase in crime and disorder as a result of the proposed
decision.
8.2
Equality Act 2010
The Equality Act 2010 identifies a number of ‘protected characteristics’, namely age; disability;
gender reassignment; pregnancy and maternity; race; religion or belief; sex; sexual orientation;
marriage and civil partnership.
8.3
Having due regard to advancing equality involves:
•
•
•
removing or minimising disadvantages suffered by people due to their protected
characteristics;
taking steps to meet the needs of people from protected groups where these differ from
the need of other people; and
encouraging people from protected groups to participate in public life or in other activities
where their participation is disproportionately low.
8.4
The above duty has been given due consideration in the determination of this application. It is
considered that the proposed development does not have any significant implications for, or
effect on, persons who share a protected characteristic, over and above any other person.
9.
9.1
CONCLUSION
The proposed development is considered to be acceptable in terms of scale and design, impact
on neighbours and in highway safety terms. It is in accordance with the aims of the LDP,
therefore planning permission is granted subject to the following conditions and Section 106
Legal Agreement.
10.
RECOMMENDATION
GRANTED WITH CONDITIONS AND SUBJECT TO SECTION 106 LEGAL AGREEMENT
01 The development shall be implemented in accordance with the following plans and
documents: LT1429.04.01 Revision B, LT1429.04.102, LT1429.04.102, LT1429.04.105,
LT1429.04.103, LT1429.04.101 Revision A, LT1429.04.06, LT1429.04.05, LT1429.04.04,
LT1429.04.03, LT1429.04.02 Revision A, 09-100/200A1/1.1, SAAC.14.080, 100, LTS1407.01-F,
site location plan, Ecology Report by Sturgess Ecology, Tree Survey by Steve Ambler and
Design and Access Statement.
Reason: To ensure the development complies with the submitted plans and documents on which
this decision was based.
Pre- commencement conditions
02 No development, to include demolition, shall commence until the Tree Protection Plan (in
accordance with BS 5837:2012) has been installed in accordance with Steve Amblers Tree report
29 November 2014. The development shall be carried out in accordance with the approved Tree
Protection Plan.
Reason: To protect important landscape features within the site.
03 No operations of any description (this includes all forms of development, tree felling, tree
pruning, temporary access construction, soil moving, temporary access construction and
operations involving the use of motorised vehicles or construction machinery), shall commence
on site in connection with the development until the Root Protection Barrier fencing has been
installed in accordance with the approved Tree Report by Steve Ambler dated 29th November
2014. No excavation for services, storage of materials or machinery, parking of vehicles, deposits
or excavation of soil or rubble, lighting of fires or disposal of liquids shall take place within the
Root Protection Area and all weather notices shall be erected on the Heras fencing, 1 per 10
panels, stating
‘CONSTRUCTION EXCUSION ZONE NO ACCESS’. The
fencing shall be retained for the full duration of the development and shall not be removed or
repositioned without the prior written approval of the Local Planning Authority.
Reason: To protect important landscape features within the site.
04 No operations of any description, (this includes all forms of development, tree felling, tree
pruning, temporary access construction, soil moving, temporary access construction and
operations involving the use of motorised vehicles or construction machinery), shall commence
on site in connection within the development, until a detailed Arboricultural Method Statement has
been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The Arboricultural
Method Statement shall contain full details of special engineering requirements including ‘no dig
construction’ within the RPAs of the retained trees. The development shall be carried out in full
compliance with the Arboricultural Method Statement unless otherwise first agreed in writing by
the Local Planning Authority.
Reason: To protect important landscape features within the site.
05 No development, to include demolition, shall commence until an Arboriculturalist has been
appointed, as first agreed in writing by the Local Planning Authority, to oversee the project (to
perform a Watching Brief) for the duration of the development and who shall be responsible for (a) Supervision and monitoring of the approved Tree Protection Plan;
(b) Supervision and monitoring of the approved tree felling and pruning works;
(c) Supervision of the alteration or temporary removal of any Barrier Fencing;
(d) Oversee working within any Root Protection Area;
(e) Reporting to the Local Planning Authority;
(f) The Arboricultural Consultant will provide site progress reports to the Council's Tree Officer at
intervals to be agreed by the Councils Tree Officer.
Reason: To protect important landscape features within the site.
06 No work shall be commenced on the construction of the individual plots hereby approved until
details/samples of materials and finishes to be used on the external surfaces have been
submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The development shall then
be carried out using the approved materials.
Reason: To ensure that the development is completed in a manner compatible with its
surroundings.
07 Full details of the proposed boundary treatments shall be submitted to and approved in writing
by the Local Planning Authority prior to development commencing. The boundary treatments
shall be constructed in accordance with the approved details prior to the first occupation of the
associated dwelling and retained in that state thereafter.
Reason: To ensure the development is completed in a satisfactory manner.
08 No development, shall commence until details and plans showing the finished slab level of the
building(s) hereby aproved, together with cross sections through the site, have been submitted to
and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The development shall be undertaken in
accordance with the approved details.
Reason: In the interests of visual amenities.
09 Prior to the commencement of development, full details of the means of surface water
drainage disposal to serve the site shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local
Planning Authority. The system shall be implemented in accordance with the details approved
and retained in this state thereafter.
Reason: In order to ensure that the site can be adequately drained and to prevent overloading of
the public sewerage system.
10 Prior to the commencement of development full details of the layout, width, gradient and
means of construction of the carriageways and footpaths, details of means of access from
existing roads and details of all foul and surface water sewers shall be submitted to and approved
in writing by the Local Planning Authority. With the exception of the final wearing course, the
development shall be completed in accordance with the details as approved prior to the first
occupation of any building. The final wearing course shall be completed prior to the first
occupation of the last building.
Reason: To ensure that the roads shall be constructed and sited to the satisfaction of the Council
so far as to provide a proper means of access for traffic and to ensure that the land can be
adequately drained.
11 Prior to the felling of the agreed trees hereby approved, full details of replacement trees
together with full details of areas of naturalised bulbs shall be submitted to and approved in
writing by the Local Planning Authority. Details shall include the position, species and size of the
replacement tree. The replacement trees and bulbs as approved shall be planted within the first
full planting season (October to April).
Reason: To secure appropriate replacement trees and enhancement in the interests of the visual
amenities of the area.
12 No development, to include demolition, shall commence until a Construction
Environmental Management Plan (CEMP) has been submitted to and approved in writing by the
Local Planning Authority. The CEMP shall include details of the following during development:
- dust suppression measures, having regard to BRE guide ‘Control of Dust from
Construction and Demolition Activities;
- noise mitigation measures;
- details of temporary lighting;
- details of enclosure of working areas;
- a drainage strategy to operate setting out controls of contamination, including controls to
surface water run off, water pumping, storage of fuels and hazardous materials, spill response
plans and pollution control measures;
- pollution prevention and contingency measures.
Development works shall be implemented in accordance with the approved CEMP.
Reason: To protect the amenities of nearby residents and in the interests of ecology including
European protected species and in the interest of safeguarding the features of the Severn
Estuary European sites and SSSI and the River Usk SAC and SSSI.
13 Prior to the commencement of development, full details of hedge planting to be planted along
the top of the brook shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority.
The hedge shall be planted in accordance with the approved details within the first full planting
season (October to April).
Reason: To ensure that a suitable buffer is maintained between the development and the brook
in the interests of European Protected Species.
14 Prior to the commencement of development full details of a scheme for the removal of
Himalayan Balsam shall be submitted to and agreed in writing by the Local Planning Authority.
The Himalayan Balsam shall be removed in accordance with the approved details prior to the
commencement of development.
Reason: To ensure that any Himalayan Balsam is suitably removed from the site.
15 Prior to the commencement of development 3no bat boxes/bat bricks shall be installed within
the new properties in line with the recommendations contained within the Ecological Report. Full
details of the bat boxes together with a scheme for monitoring post construction by a suitably
qualified ecologist will have first been submitted to and agreed in writing by the Local Planning
Authority. The development shall be carried out fully in accordance with the approved details.
Reason: In the interests of bats, a European Protected Species.
16 Prior to the commencement of development full details of a licensed bat ecologist to be
present during the felling of the trees and demolition of the building shall be submitted to and
approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. This person shall be responsible for providing
written confirmation that the works have been undertaken in accordance with best practice
guidelines and reporting any issues that arise.
Reason: In the interests of bats, a European Protected Species.
17 Prior to the commencement of development full details of external illumination and
floodlighting shall be submitted to the Local Planning Authority prior to the erection or installation
of any external lighting on site, and the lighting shall then be installed fully in accordance with the
details as approved. No other external lighting shall be installed without the prior consent in
writing of the Local Planning Authority.
Reason: To ensure that there is no light spill onto the Malpas Brook and the trees that have the
potential for bat roosts.
18 Prior to the commencement of development otter proof fencing shall be erected on the top of
the bank of the Malpas Brook in accordance with details that will have first been submitted to and
approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The fencing shall be retained in accordance
with the approved details for the duration of the construction phase.
Reason: To protect the brook both during and post construction and prevent otters from entering
the construction area.
19 Prior to the commencement of development full details of a scheme for sound insulation for
plot 10 shall be submitted to the Local Planning Authority and written approval received. The
development shall be carried out in accordance with the approved scheme which shall be
implemented prior to the first occupation of the unit.
Reason: In the interests of the amenity of the future occupiers of the unit.
20 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.
Pre – construction conditions
21 The access, parking provision and general arrangement shall be carried out strictly in
accordance with the details shown on the approved plans before the dwellings hereby
permitted are first occupied and then maintained in such a state thereafter.
Reason: In the interests of highway safety.
22 Any unforeseen contamination encountered during development shall be notified to the Local
Planning Authority as soon as is practicable and an appropriate ground investigation and/or
remediation strategy shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning
Authority, and the approved strategy shall be implemented in full prior to further works on site.
Following remediation and prior to the occupation of any building, a Completion/Validation
Report, confirming the remediation has being carried out in accordance with the approved details,
shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority.
Reason: To ensure that any potential risks to human health or the wider environment which may
arise as a result of potential land contamination are satisfactorily addressed.
General conditions
23 No house shall be occupied until roads and footpaths have been laid to provide access to
them and where applicable their related driveways and garages have been completed in
accordance with the plans and details hereby approved.
Reason: To ensure that the development is carried out in a proper and coordinated manner.
24 Foul water and surface water discharges shall be drained separately from the site, no surface
water or land drainage run-off shall be allowed to connect, either directly or indirectly, to the
public sewerage system unless otherwise approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority.
Reason: To protect the integrity and to prevent hydraulic overloading of the public sewerage
system and to protect the health and safety of existing residents and ensure no detriment to the
environment.
25 The first floor window in the side elevation of plot 19 shall be obscure glazed at the time of
installation and shall be remained in that state in perpetuity and no windows other than those
shown in the approved plans shall be installed in the side elevation of plot 19.
Reason: In the interests of neighbouring privacy.
NOTE TO APPLICANT
01 The development plan for Newport is the Newport Local Development Plan 2011 – 2026
(Adopted January 2015). Policies SP1, SP3, SP13, GP1, GP2, GP3, GP4, GP5, GP6, GP7, H1,
H2, H3, H4 and T4 were relevant to the determination of this application.
02 As of 1st October 2012 any connection to the public sewerage network (foul or surface water
sewerage) for the first time will require an adoption agreement with Dwr Cymru Welsh Water. For
further advice contact Dwr Cymru Welsh Water on 01443 331155.
03 The proposed development (including any demolition) has been screened under the
Environmental Impact Assessment Regulations and it is considered that an Environmental
Statement is not required.
04 Prior to the commencement of the development hereby approved, the developer should
contact the Council's Spatial Data Unit on 01633 233263 regarding street naming and numbering.
05 To protect the amenities of existing residents, attention is drawn to the provisions of Section
60 of the Control of Pollution Act 1974 in relation to the control of noise from demolition and
construction activities (i) no construction work involving piling shall be carried out on the site other than between the
hours of 08.00 and 17.00 Mondays to Fridays and no construction work involving piling shall be
carried out on Saturdays, Sundays or Bank Holidays, where it would create noise audible at the
boundary of any residential property.
(ii) Any construction work which does not involve piling shall not be carried out other than
between the hours of 08.00 and 18.00 Monday to Friday and between the hours of 08.00 and
13.00 on Saturdays, where it would create noise audible at the boundary of any residential
property.
06 The amended Wildlife and Countryside Act 1981 protects bird species whilst nesting in the
UK. This protection extends to a bird, its nest, eggs, and young until such time as the young have
fledged. Vegetation clearance should proceed outside the peak bird-breeding season (generally
considered to be March through August inclusive) or within the breeding season only if a
preclearance survey shows no breeding birds to be present, nesting or commencing nesting
within the vegetation to be affected.
07 The applicant is advised on behalf of the Council’s Ecology Officer that it is recommended that
a native wildflower mix is incorporate into the planting schedule and not just a ‘grass’ mix. This
should contain species such as birds foot trefoil, black knapweed, vetches etc. It is also
recommended that climbing species such as honeysuckle and ivy be incorporated into a planting
scheme.
08 The applicant is advised that pursuant to condition no. 8 above input data and calculations
must be provided to show the assessment of greenfield runoff rates. Volumes, calculation of
attenuation volumes and sewer designs must also be provided. Further drawings will need to be
provided clarifying pipe sizes, layouts, gradients, surface and invert levels. Details of gullies,
manhole, inspection chambers, rodding eyes etc are required as well as details for proposed
attenuation pipes/tanks and flow control devices.
09 The developer must contact the Streetscene department of the Council on 01633 656656 to
facilitate the appropriate highways agreement for the works within the public highway.
10 The developer is advised to contact Western Power Distribution concerning equipment in the
area.
APPLICATION DETAILS
No:
15/0125
Ward:
PILLGWENLLY
Type:
FULL (MAJOR)
Expiry Date:
08-APR-2015
Applicant:
K WILLIAMS
Site:
REAR OF UNIT 3, PORT ROAD, MAESGLAS RETAIL PARK, NEWPORT, NP20
2NS
Proposal:
RETENTION OF CHANGE OF USE FROM A1 (RETAIL) TO B8 (STORAGE
AND DISTRIBUTION)
Recommendation:
GRANTED WITH CONDITIONS
1.
1.1
INTRODUCTION
This application seeks planning permission for the retention of a change of use of part of a unit
known as Unit 3, Port Road, Newport. Its former use was as an A1 retail unit, although it has
since been occupied by a local haulage company, operating the unit as a B8 (storage and
distribution) use. The Maesglas Retail Park contains a mixture of uses, although they are
primarily bulky goods retail, DIY stores, furniture stores and builders merchants, and so cater
more for the commercial sector.
2.
RELEVANT SITE HISTORY
1/5574
ERECTION OF BUILDING FOR SALE OF BUILDING
MATERIALS (OUTLINE)
1/11666 DEVELOPMENT OF LAND FOR GARDEN CENTRE AND
RETAIL WAREHOUSE (OUTLINE)
1/11801 ERECTION OF RETAIL WAREHOUSE FOR SALE OF DIY
PRODUCTS AND GARDEN CENTRE (RESERVED MATTERS)
1/13994 EXTENSION OF EXISTING RETAIL UNIT AND CHANGE OF
USE TO AN AUTO CENTRE WITH ADJACENT CAR WASH
90/0501 CHANGE OF USE TO 8 RINK INDOOR BOWLING CENTRE
WITH LOUNGE BARS RESTAURANT KITCHEN FUNCTION
ROOMS SKITTLE ALLEY FAMILY ROOM OFFICES SHOP
AND TOILETS
93/1207 VARIATION OF CONDITION 3 ATTACHED TO PLANNING
PERMISSION NO.1/13994 TO WIDEN RANGE OF GOODS
SOLD
3.
3.1
Granted with
Conditions
Granted with
Conditions
Approved
Granted with
Conditions
Granted with
Conditions
Granted with
Conditions
POLICY CONTEXT
Newport Local Development Plan 2011-2026 (Adopted January 2015)
Objective 1 seeks to ensure that all development makes a sustainable use of land.
Policy SP1 states that proposals will be required to make a positive contribution to sustainable
development by concentrating development in sustainable locations on brownfield land, and that
they will be assessed as their contribution to; efficient use of land, re-use of empty properties in
preference to greenfield sites, minimise the risk of and from flooding and encouraging economic
diversification, in particular improving the vitality and viability of the City Centre and District
Centres.
Policy SP17 identifies that Newport’s economy is expected to grow by an additional 7,400 jobs
over the LDP period and that Newport requires a minimum of 21.5 hectares of employment land
specifically Class B uses, including warehousing, to support the delivery of these jobs.
Policy GP2 considers general amenity issues which may arise from proposals.
Policy GP6 seeks a good quality of design in all forms of development.
3.2
Planning Policy Wales (PPW) (Edition 7, July 2014)
Paragraph 4.2.2 provides a presumption in favour of sustainable development.
Section 4.9 specifies a preference for the re-use of previously developed land, including in and
around existing settlements where there is under-used commercial property.
Paragraph 7.6.1 states that Local Planning Authorities should adopt a positive and constructive
approach to applications for economic development [that being defined as development of land
and buildings for activities that generate wealth, jobs and incomes] and that they should take
account of the likely economic benefits of the development, including the number and types of
jobs to be provided and whether the develoment would help redress economic disadvantage, for
example by enhancing employment opportunities.
Paragraph 10.1.1 states that town, district, local and village centres are the most appropriate
locations for retailing, leisure and other complementary functions.
3.3
Technical Advice Note (TAN) 23 – Economic Development (February 2014)
Paragraph 4.6.7 states that certain industrial and related uses may conflict with other uses,
especially housing, and to operate effectively, these activities usually need dedicated industrial
areas where they can be confident that they will not be a bad neighbour to anyone.
4.
4.1
CONSULTATIONS
WALES & WEST UTILITIES: Advise of apparatus in the area.
4.2
FIRE OFFICER: No response.
4.3
AMBULANCE OFFICER: No response.
4.4
NEWPORT ACCESS GROUP: No response.
4.5
GWENT POLICE: No response.
4.6
DWR CYMRU/WELSH WATER: Recommend advisory.
5.
5.1
INTERNAL COUNCIL ADVICE
PUBLIC PROTECTION MANAGER: No objection.
5.2
HEAD OF STREETSCENE AND CITY SERVICES (HIGHWAYS): Sufficient operational and nonoperational areas are available and I would therefore offer no objection to the proposed change
of use.
5.3
HEAD OF STREETSCENE AND CITY SERVICES (DRAINAGE): No comments.
6.
6.1
REPRESENTATIONS
NEIGHBOURS: All properties within 50m of the application site were consulted (6No addresses),
a site notice displayed and a press notice published in South Wales Argus. No representations
were received.
7.
ASSESSMENT
Site History
The site has a complex planning history, which has been summarised in section 2. Outline
planning permission (1/5574) was granted in October 1978 for the erection of a building for the
sale of building materials. A further outline permission (1/11666) was granted with conditions in
June 1983 for the development of a garden centre and retail warehouse. This granted permission
for 2No blocks, the first block is the property currently in question, which was conditioned to be
used for the sale of DIY builders’ products, home improvement and associated products only.
The reserved matters application (1/11801) to the outline (1/11666) was approved August 1983.
7.1
7.2
7.3
7.4
7.5
An application (1/13994) was then granted with conditions for an extension to the unit and a
change of use to an autocentre in October 1985. A condition attached to this permission
restricted the use of the unit to an autocentre for the sale of car acecssories and components
with 8 car service bays and for no other purpose. This condition was then varied by application
93/1207 to broaden the range of goods which could be sold at the property to ‘DIY products
(including building materials, kitchen and bathroom fittings and garden materials), vehicle goods
and accessories, furniture, carpets and floor coverings, electrical household goods and
household furnishings and for no other purpose (including any other purpose set out in Class A1
of the Town and Country Planning (Use Classes) Order 1987)’, otherwise known as a ‘bulky
goods condition’.
Proposal
The application site relates to only a section of the actual building. As part of application 1/13994
to extend the building and change its use to an autocentre, the unit was partioned to create
separate sections in order to suit the occupier’s operational need. Those partitions remain in
place and this application only relates to an L-shaped section, as illustrated on the floor plan and
denoted by the red line site location plan. The remaining section of the building is occupied by
‘The Carpet and Bed Company’ under the A1 use.
The unit would be used for warehousing, staff facilities and a loading bay. As well as changing
the use of the property to B8, it is also proposed to install an additional roller shutter to the
southern elevation of the property, adjacent to an existing roller shutter door to provide an
additional access point to the loading bay. The roller shutter door measure 4.8m wide and 5.3m
tall.
Policy considerations
Both local and national planning policy seek to locate retail development within existing centres
and consider that retail provision outside of these designated centres can have a detrimental
impact on the vitality and viability of those existing centres. These planning policy contexts also
seek to ensure a sustainable use of land, preferably the re-use of existing buildings in favour of
‘greenfield’ development.
7.6
With the existing unit having a permitted A1 retail use, albeit with a bulky goods condition as a
restriction of the range of goods which can be sold, it is considered that this retail provision
outside of the City or District Centres is undesirable and has the potential to impact on the vitality
and viability of those centres. This proposal, in seeking a change of use for part of the unit would
aid in reducing the provision of out-of-centre retail floorspace and thereby improve the vitality and
viability of the City Centre as well as make use of a vacant commercial property.
7.7
The property is located in Flood Zone B, therefore it is not considered to be at risk of flooding.
7.8
It is stated by the applicant that the property has been vacant since 2010 and that there has been
no real interest in the unit since that time. Since the recession and the erection of more desirable
floorspace elsewhere (such as 28 East Retail Park), the estate has been in decline in terms of
occupation levels and general upkeep/appearance. It is considered that the occupation of the unit
would be benficial to the local economy as well as the estate as a whole. The operation of the
unit by a local haulage firm also brings the benefit of job creation and therefore enhances local
employment opportunities.
7.9
Amenity and design
It is considered that the locality is suited to the proposed use given its isolated location from
residential or sensitive properties. Whilst the applicant has specified that vehicles would be
departing at early hours, there are no residential or sensitive uses in the immediate vicinity which
would be disturbed as a result of these movements, or the operation of the B8 use overall. There
is a residential development further to the north of Port Road at the Mon Bank Development Site
(the former Monmouthshire bank railway sidings site), some of which remains to be built.
However, given the location of the unit on the southern side of Port Road, with an intervening
building between the application site and Mon Bank, plus the presence of a railway line between
Port Road and Mon Bank, it is not considered that the operation of the unit as a B8 use would
have a detrimental impact on residential amenity for the residential units on that development
site.
7.10
7.11
The roller shutter door would be located on the southern elevation of the building, facing on to
overgrown vacant land and Maesglas Industrial Estate at Greenwich Road beyond that. As such,
it is not considered that it would have an unacceptable impact on amenity. The appearance of the
building, the context of the wider commercial area and its limited visiblity from a public vantage
point is such that it is considered that the installation of an additional roller shutter door would be
appropriate on its elevation.
Other matters
The property is located in close proximity to the Southern Distributor Road (SDR), which in turn
links to junctions 24 and 28 of the M4. As a result, it is considered that this property is in a
suitable location for a haulage firm with easy access to the wider transport network. In addition,
the proximity of the SDR would direct HGVs away from less suitable City Centre roads to the
benefit of the City’s transport network. There have been no objections from the Head of
Streetscene and City Services on highways grounds.
7.12
The application’s red line plan has been drawn to reflect the floorspace of the unit which is
considered as part of this application and for operation as a B8 use. There are examples in
planning law where a property subject to a bulky goods condition has been subdivided and then
that condition has not been re-applied to the unit(s), resulting in an open A1 consent. However,
this is not considered to be a concern in this instance as the red line application relates only to
the floor space in question, with the remainer of the retail unit (subject to the bulky goods
condition) outside of the red line, remaining unaffected by this permission. In addition, the fact
that the other unit is already being occupied as a separate property would mean that no
subdivision is granted as part of this application. As a result, no new chapter of planning history
would be created for the adjoining unit which would result in an open A1 permission.
7.13
It is not considered necessary to condition the use of the unit as part of this application. Under
permitted development, a change of use could occur from B8 to B1 use, which by definition as a
business use may also be acceptable in this location. The Council would be more concerned with
a B2 use in this location (with its potential amenity implications), however it is not considered
necessary to exclude this by conddition as there are no allowanced for such a change to take
place without planning permission.
8.
8.1
OTHER CONSIDERATIONS
Crime and Disorder Act 1998
Section 17(1) of the Crime and Disorder Act 1998 imposes a duty on the Local Authority to
exercise its various functions with due regard to the likely effect of the exercise of those functions
on, and the need to do all that it reasonably can to prevent, crime and disorder in its area. This
duty has been considered in the evaluation of this application. It is considered that there would
be no significant or unacceptable increase in crime and disorder as a result of the proposed
decision.
8.2
Equality Act 2010
The Equality Act 2010 identifies a number of ‘protected characteristics’, namely age; disability;
gender reassignment; pregnancy and maternity; race; religion or belief; sex; sexual orientation;
marriage and civil partnership.
8.3
Having due regard to advancing equality involves:
• removing or minimising disadvantages suffered by people due to their protected
characteristics;
• taking steps to meet the needs of people from protected groups where these differ from
the need of other people; and
•
encouraging people from protected groups to participate in public life or in other activities
where their participation is disproportionately low.
8.4
The above duty has been given due consideration in the determination of this application. It is
considered that the proposed development does not have any significant implications for, or
effect on, persons who share a protected characteristic, over and above any other person.
9.
9.1
CONCLUSION
Having regard to the relevant policies of the Newport Local Development Plan 2011-2026
(Adopted January 2015), PPW and TAN23, it concluded that the loss of retail provision in this
location, the re-use of a vacant building and the creation of jobs would be beneficial and the
proposal is therefore acceptable. It is therefore recommended that planning permission be
granted with conditions.
10.
RECOMMENDATION
GRANTED WITH CONDITIONS
01 The development shall be implemented in accordance with the following plans and
documents; 486500CAR/01, 486500CAR/02, 486500CAR/03, 486500CAR/04, 486500CAR/05
rev.A and Design and Access Statement.
Reason: In the interests of clarity and to ensure the development complies with the submitted
plans and documents on which this decision was based
NOTE TO APPLICANT
01 The development plan for Newport is the Newport Local Development Plan 2011 – 2026
(Adopted January 2015). Policies SP1, SP17, GP2 and GP6 were relevant to the determination
of this application.
02 Due to the minor nature of the proposed development (including any demolition) and the
location of the proposed development, it is considered that the proposals did not need to be
screened under the Environmental Impact Assessment Regulations.
03 No net increase of surface water shall be allowed to connect (either directly or indirectly) to
the public sewerage system.
APPLICATION DETAILS
No:
15/0064
Ward:
GRAIG
Type:
FULL
Expiry Date:
06-APR-2015
Applicant:
ALISON WALSH
Site:
22 , PARK VIEW GARDENS, BASSALEG, NEWPORT, NP10 8JZ
Proposal:
FIRST FLOOR SIDE EXTENSION
Recommendation:
REFUSED
1.
1.1
INTRODUCTION
This application seeks the erection of a first floor side extension at the semi-detached property
known as 22, Parkview Gardens, Bassaleg, Newport, situated in the Graig ward.
1.2
The application is reported to Planning Committee as the applicant is related to an elected
member.
2.
2.1
RELEVANT SITE HISTORY
None
3.
3.1
POLICY CONTEXT
Newport Local Development Plan 2011-2016 (Adopted January 2015)
Policy GP2 considers general amenity in all development (including residential and visual
amenity)
Policy GP6 seeks to ensure a high quality of design in all development.
4.
4.1
CONSULTATIONS
No external consultation was undertaken.
5.
5.1
INTERNAL COUNCIL ADVICE
HEAD OF STREETSCENE AND CITY SERVICES (HIGHWAYS): No objection.
6.
6.1
REPRESENTATIONS
NEIGHBOURS: All properties with a common boundary and opposite were consulted (two
addresses). One response was received raising concern regarding the maintenance of the
property and the strength of the existing foundations, questioning whether they would be capable
of supporting the additional load of a first floor extension.
6.2
GRAIG COMMUNITY COUNCIL: No objection.
7.
7.1
ASSESSMENT
This application seeks the erection of a first floor side extension at the semi-detached property
known as 22, Parkview Gardens, Bassaleg, Newport, situated in the Graig ward.
7.2
The property is located within a cul-de-sac which has a mixture of property types, including
terraced, semi-detached and detached properties, although they all have a similar style and
appearance.
7.3
The extension proposed would be atop the existing single storey side extension and would
measure 2.6m wide and 8.1m deep. It would adjoin to the eaves and ridge of the existing
property and be flush with the front and rear elevations. There would be 1No window on the first
floor front elevation and 1No window on the first floor rear elevation. It would be constructed of
materials to match the existing dwelling. It is also proposed to alter the existing ground floor rear
elevation window, replacing it with patio doors.
7.4
Policies GP2 (General Amenity) and GP6 (Quality of Design) of the Newport Local Dvelopment
Plan 2011-2026 (Adopted January 2015) are relevant to the determination of this application.
Established planning practice in Newport advises that side extensions should be set back from
the front elevation of the property by 1m and set down from its ridge, with the intention of
preventing/mitigating any impact on the symmetrical appearance of the property.
7.5
It is noted that the neighbouring property (23 Park View Gardens) has an existing first floor side
extension, closely resembling the scheme under consideration. However, planning permission
was granted for this extension in 2001 (application no 00/1368) before the introduction of the
aforementioned design guidance which was transcribed by the formerly adopted House
Extensions Supplementary Planning Guidance.
7.6
It is considered that the proposed extension, by virtue of its lack of set back from the front
elevation and set down from the ridge, would unbalance the symmetry of the semi-detached pair.
However, it would result in this semi-detached pair matching the adjoining semi-detached
properties (Nos. 23 and 24), mitigating this loss of symmetry. However, by infilling the existing
gap at first floor between the application property and the neighbouring properties (nos 23 and
24) and considering the presence of the neighbour’s flush first floor extension, the proposed
extension would cause an undesired terracing effect, detrimental to the character and
appearance of the properties and the wider street scene. Whilst the impact could be reduced
slightly by introducing a set back and set down, it is not considered that this would overcome this
terracing effect. The application property and the neighbouring properties are prominently
positioned as viewed from the entrance into Park View Gardens.
7.7
In relation to amenity, it is not considered that the proposed extension would result in a
detrimental impact on residential amenity by way of overbearing impact, loss of light or loss of
privacy. There are no windows in the side elevation of the neighbouring property that would be
advesely affected by the proposed extension.
7.8
The neighbour comments are noted but the maintenance of the property is not a consideration for
this application and the suitability of the footings would be assessed as part of a required building
regulations application.
7.9
The proposal would not result in loss of parking. It would result in a 3 bedroom property
becoming a 4 bedroom property, which according to established planning practice, would not
increase parking demand. Parking is currently provided within the driveway to the front of the
property which is considered adequate to the meet the needs of the property.
8.
8.1
OTHER CONSIDERATIONS
Crime and Disorder Act 1998
Section 17(1) of the Crime and Disorder Act 1998 imposes a duty on the Local Authority to
exercise its various functions with due regard to the likely effect of the exercise of those functions
on, and the need to do all that it reasonably can to prevent, crime and disorder in its area. This
duty has been considered in the evaluation of this application. It is considered that there would
be no significant or unacceptable increase in crime and disorder as a result of the proposed
decision.
8.2
Equality Act 2010
The Equality Act 2010 identifies a number of ‘protected characteristics’, namely age; disability;
gender reassignment; pregnancy and maternity; race; religion or belief; sex; sexual orientation;
marriage and civil partnership.
8.3
Having due regard to advancing equality involves:
•
•
•
removing or minimising disadvantages suffered by people due to their protected
characteristics;
taking steps to meet the needs of people from protected groups where these differ from
the need of other people; and
encouraging people from protected groups to participate in public life or in other activities
where their participation is disproportionately low.
8.4
The above duty has been given due consideration in the determination of this application. It is
considered that the proposed development does not have any significant implications for, or
effect on, persons who share a protected characteristic, over and above any other person.
9.
9.1
CONCLUSION
The proposal would result in an unacceptable terracing effect to the detriment of the character
and appearance of the street scene, contrary to policies GP2 and GP6 of the Newport Local
Development Plan 2011-2026 (Adopted January 2015). It is therefore recommended that
planning permission is refused.
10.
RECOMMENDATION
REFUSED
01 By virtue of its design and the presence of the neighbouring extension, the proposed
development would result in an unacceptable terracing effect to the detriment of the character
and appearance of the street scene, contrary to policies GP2 and GP6 of the Newport Local
Development Plan 2011-2026 (Adopted January 2015).
NOTE TO APPLICANT
01 This decision relates to plan Nos: AB02, AB03, AB04, AB06 and AB07
02 The development plan for Newport is the Newport Local Development Plan 2011 – 2026
(Adopted January 2015). Policies GP2 (General Amenity) and GP6 (Quality of Design) were
relevant to the determination of this application.
03 Due to the minor nature of the proposed development (including any demolition) and the
location of the proposed development, it is considered that the proposals did not need to be
screened under the Environmental Impact Assessment Regulations.
_____________________________________________________________________________
BEVERLY OWEN
HEAD OF REGENERATION, INVESTMENT AND HOUSING