Anda di halaman 1dari 222

6th February 2013 20871513 To: Members of the Council Dear Councillor Planning Committee Wednesday 13th February

2013 at Ferrier Hall, City Hall, Cardiff (meeting starts at 2.30.p.m.) I attach a copy of the schedule of Development Control Applications which will be considered at this meeting of the Planning Committee. The plans relating to the applications will be available for inspection at the City Hall, during the whole of Tuesday and Wednesday morning preceding the Committee. Unless otherwise stated in the report, Planning Committee has delegated powers to determine the applications in the schedule. Planning Committee (but not an individual member) can also refer a matter to another committee or to the Council for a resolution. However, Council cannot move an amendment to a recommendation relating to a planning application or make a recommendation relating to a planning application and can only refer a matter back to Planning Committee on one occasion, after which Planning Committee shall decide the matter. Please now note that if any requests for site visits are acceded to by the meeting, such site visits will take place during the afternoon of Wednesday 6th March 2013. If you submit a request for a site visit, you must include in your submission (a) a choice of at least two starting times for the site visit that you are requesting, each of which must be at least 45 minutes apart; and (b) the reasons why you believe that such a site visit is necessary. If you fail to provide any choices of starting times for the site visit that you've requested, it will be assumed that you will be available to attend such a site visit at any time of the day, regardless of what time it starts. The Clerk to the Council will circulate the Agenda for the meeting to the Members of the Planning Committee separately.
Yours sincerely

Head of Planning

CARDIFF COUNTY COUNCIL PLANNING COMMITTEE THE REPORTS OF THE CHIEF STRATEGIC PLANNING AND ENVIRONMENT OFFICER

LIST OF DEVELOPMENT APPLICATIONS FOR CONSIDERATION BY THE PLANNING COMMITTEE ON 13TH FEBRUARY 2013 AT 2.30PM

AREA

PAGES

HOUSEHOLDER INNER OUTER

1 - 10 11 - 126 127 - 214

CARDIFF LOCAL DEVELOPMENT PLAN When regard is to be had to the Development Plan the Councils decision must be made in accordance with the Plan unless material considerations indicate otherwise. The Development Plan for the administrative area of Cardiff remains the City of Cardiff Local Plan (1996), the South Glamorgan (Cardiff Area) Replacement Structure Plan (1997) and the South Glamorgan (Cardiff Area) Minerals Local Plan together with the approved Mid Glamorgan County structure Plan incorporating Proposed Alterations No.1 (September 1989). In accordance with statutory procedures, the Council prepared and placed on deposit a Unitary Development Plan (to 2016) in October 2003. It has never been formally abandoned but agreement was reached with the Welsh Assembly Government in May 2005 to cease work on the UDP and commence work on a new Local Development Plan prepared under the provisions of the Planning and Compulsory Purchase Act 2004. On the 28 April 2009 Cardiff Council placed the Cardiff Local Development Plan 20062021 on deposit for public consultation. From that date, and in accordance with the Councils resolution, it was taken into account in development control decisions. On the 30th November 2009, following consideration of the responses to consultation, the submission draft was submitted to the Welsh Assembly Government for examination. However, in the light of the significant reservations expressed at an Exploratory Meeting by the Inspectors appointed to carry out the examination and their recommendation that the Local Development Plan be with drawn from the examination, the Council duly withdrew the LDP on the 12 April 2010. Unless a draft policy or proposal is a material consideration it should not be taken into account when making decisions: it is strictly irrelevant and if it is given weight in reaching a decision, that decision may be successfully quashed in the High Court. In the general run of cases the withdrawn Local Development Plan will not be a material consideration. If there is an issue in relation to which the withdrawn LDP is relevant, officers will advise the Committee specifically. Otherwise it should not be taken into account. Since the deposited UDP has not been abandoned, its policies and proposals may be a material consideration in a given case, but the weight which can be attached to the

UDP, and any statement of policy including the statutory Development Plan should be determined in the light of the following principal considerations: The degree to which later statements of national policy and the Wales Spatial Plan make the policy out of date and suggest a decision should be taken otherwise than in accordance with it; The degree to which the policy is out of date for any other reason; The level and nature of any objection to a UDP or other draft policy.

Table 1.1: Existing Development Plans covering the Cardiff County Area Cardiff County Area Cardiff Deposit Unitary Development Plan (to 2016)

The Plan was placed on deposit in October 2003 and agreement was reached with Welsh Assembly Government in May 2005 to cease work on the plan and commence work on a new Local Development Plan.

City of Cardiff Area (part of the County of South Glamorgan until April 1996) South Glamorgan (Cardiff Area) Adopted April 1997 Replacement Structure plan 19912011 City of Cardiff Local Plan (including Waste Policies) Adopted January 1996

South Glamorgan (Cardiff Area) Adopted June 1997 Minerals Local Plan Pentyrch Community Area (part of the County of Mid Glamorgan and Borough of Taff Ely until April 1996) Mid Glamorgan County Structure Plan Approved September 1989 incorporating Proposed Alterations No. 1 Mid Glamorgan Replacement Structure Modifications to the Plan including Plan recommendations of the EIP Panel approved by Mid Glamorgan County Council in January 1996 but not adopted in respect of the Pentyrch Community Area. Glamorgan County Development Plan (Area No. 2) Mid Glamorgan Minerals Local Plan for Limestone Quarrying Approved March 1963

In June 1996 Cardiff County Council resolved to approve the Plan as modified by the Inspectors Report, for development control and other planning purposes, but the Plan was not adopted in respect of the Pentyrch Community Area.

Page No.
1

App No.

PLANNING COMMITTEE 13TH FEBRUARY, 2013 Location Description


DEMOLITION OF EXISTING DETACHED DOUBLE GARAGE AND REBUILD (SAME SHAPE) IN REVISED LOCATION

Decision
REF

Officer
OJE

12/02046/DCH 80 FIDLAS ROAD, LLANISHEN, CARDIFF, CF14 0NE

Page No. 11

App No. 12/00691/DCI

60

12/01260/DCI

75

12/02170/DCI

91

12/02171/DCI

96

12/02205/DCI

105

12/02206/DCI

110 119

12/01961/DCI 13/00021/DCI

PLANNING COMMITTEE 13TH FEBRUARY 2013 Location Description BUTE EAST DOCK, USE OF FORMER DOCK FOR WAKEBOARDING AND HEMINGWAY ROAD, WATER SKIING AND INSTALLATION OF CABLE TOW ATLANTIC WHARF SYSTEM 21-27 CITY ROAD, OUTLINE PLANNING FOR THE DEMOLITION OF ROATH EXISTING SINGLE STOREY OFFICES AND WORKSHOPS AND THE PROPOSED MIXED USE DEVELOPMENT (RESIDENTIAL/RETAIL) OF THE SITE COMPRISING OF 26NO. APARTMENTS (14NO. 2 BED AND 12NO. 1 BED) GROUND FLOOR RETAIL SPACE AND ASSOCIATED AMENITY SPACE CAR PARKING CYCLE STORE AND BIN STORE 29 BED NEUROLOGICAL CARE HOME (ALTERNATIVE ST SAVIOURS INTERNAL ARRANGEMENT / ADDITIONAL PORCH VICARAGE, 115 CANOPY AND MINOR EXTENSIONS/MODIFICATIONS SPLOTT ROAD, TO THAT APPROVED UNDER PLANNING PERMISSION SPLOTT 12/299/DCI) WORKS TO FACILITATE29 BED NEUROLOGICAL CARE ST SAVIOURS HOME (ALTERNATIVE INTERNAL ARRANGEMENT / VICARAGE, 115 ADDITIONAL PORCH CANOPY AND MINOR SPLOTT ROAD, EXTENSIONS/MODIFICATIONS TO THAT APPROVED SPLOTT UNDER LISTED BUILDING CONSENT 12/00345/DCI BRITISH HOME DEMOLITION OF NORTH AND WEST FACADES STORES, 50-54 QUEEN REPLACEMENT OF NORTH AND WEST FACADES STREET, CITY CENTRE EXTENSIONS TO FLOORS 1, 2, 3 & 4 BRITISH HOME DEMOLITION OF NORTH AND WEST FACADES STORES, 50-54 QUEEN REPLACEMENT OF NORTH AND WEST FACADES. STREET, CITY CENTRE EXTENSIONS TO FLOORS 1, 2, 3 & 4 115-117 PENARTH RETENTION OF SINGLE STOREY REAR EXTENSION & ROAD, GRANGETOWN PROPOSED AMENDMENTS TO EXISTING SHOPFRONT RETENTION OF ONE NO THREE BED FLAT ON SECOND VEGETARIAN FOOD FLOOR AND CHANGE OF USE OF PART OF FIRST STUDIO, 115-117 FLOOR TO CREATE A SECOND THREE BED FLAT PENARTH ROAD, GRANGETOWN

Decision

Officer OAS

106

OJF

PERU

RJC

PERU

RJC

PER

LAD

PERU

LAD

PER PER

CJE CJE

PLANNING COMMITTEE Page App No. No. 127 12/1454/DCO Location LAND AT RADYR COURT ROAD, DANESCOURT, CARDIFF 56A PLAS MAWR ROAD, FAIRWATER, CARDIFF, CF5 3JX

- 13th FEBRUARY, 2013 Description Decision 106 TW Officer

OUTLINE APPLICATION FOR THE DEVELOPMENT OF 48 DWELLINGS

159

12/1520/DCO

171

12/1850/DCO

177

12/1904/DCO

194

12/2068/DCO

REFURBISHMENT OF EXISTING A1 RETAIL UNIT PER AND CHANGE OF USE TO A3 HOT FOOD TAKEAWAY INCLUDING NEW EXTERNAL FASCIA SIGN NEW GATED ACCESS TO REAR SERVICE YARD REINSTATING EXISTING REAR ACCESS DOOR AND WINDOWS TO REAR SIDE & FRONT ELEVATIONS CARDIFF UNIVERSITY VARIATION OF CONDITIONS 3 AND 4 OF PER SPORTS FIELDS, MENDIP PLANNING PERMISSION 96/00964/N TO INCREASE ROAD, LLANRUMNEY, FLOOD LIGHT USE CARDIFF, CF3 4JN THORNHILL GARAGE, PART CHANGE OF USE FROM A CAR 106 HEOL LLANISHEN FACH, SHOWROOM, ANCILLARY VALETING BAYS AND RHIWBINA, CARDIFF, WORKSHOPS INTO THREE RETAIL UNITS (A1/A2 CF14 6ZA USE) AT GROUND FLOOR LEVEL AND OFFICES (B1) USE AT FIRST FLOOR LEVEL; PROPOSED EXTERNAL ALTERATIONS; PROPOSED PLANT AND EQUIPMENT AND ASSOCIATED LANDSCAPING 77 KIMBERLEY ROAD, CHANGE OF USE FROM RESIDENTIAL PER PENYLAN, CARDIFF, (PREVIOUSLY A1 RETAIL SHOP) TO A D1 BABY CF23 5DP NURSERY ON GROUND FLOOR ONLY FOR A MAXIMUM NUMBER OF 19 BABIES

MCH

APB

APB

JH

LOCAL MEMBER SUPPORT COMMITTEE DATE: APPLICATION No. ED: APP: TYPE: APPLICANT: LOCATION: PROPOSAL: 13/02/2013 12/02046/DCH LLANISHEN Householder Planning Permission Mr G Read 80 FIDLAS ROAD, LLANISHEN, CARDIFF, CF14 0NE DEMOLITION OF EXISTING DETACHED DOUBLE GARAGE AND REBUILD (SAME SHAPE) IN REVISED LOCATION APPLICATION DATE: 06/12/2012

___________________________________________________________________ RECOMMENDATION: That planning permission be REFUSED for the following reason: 1. The proposed garage by virtue of its scale and the design of the roof structure would result in an over dominant and incongruous feature, which would prejudice the visual amenity of the area and is therefore contrary to Policy 11 of the City of Cardiff Local Plan, Policy 2.20 (Good Design) of the Cardiff Deposit Unitary Development Plan, advice contained in the Householder Design Guide Supplementary Planning Guidance (2007) (Chapter 4: Understanding the Character of your Area and Para. 12.4 (Garages)

1. 1.1

DESCRIPTION OF PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT Planning permission is sought for a replacement garage to the rear of 80 Fidlas Road. There is already a large existing garage at the rear of this property. The applicant seeks permission to demolish this structure, to rebuild the garage to a similar scale and roof design as the existing garage but moving the footprint 1m metre back into the plot from the existing building line and its overall height being increased by 300mm. A ramped access into the garage is also proposed. The proposed dimensions are 6m wide by 6.15m deep. The roof is a mono pitch design, 2.5m high to the eaves (garden facing elevation) and 5.15m high to the top of the pitch (rear lane elevation). As mentioned in paragraph 1.1 due to the ramped access the proposed garage will be 300mm higher than the existing garage. A roller shutter (5m wide by 3.35m high) is proposed to the elevation facing the rear lane with a new window arrangement (3.6m wide by 0.9cm high) above. Amended plans were received to show two Upvc casement windows and a door to the garden side elevation. The original application had one window.

1.2

1.3

1.4

The materials proposed are white painted render walls, a grey fibreglass roof and white Upvc windows. DESCRIPTION OF SITE 80 Fidlas Road is located in a busy and predominantly residential street in Llanishen. The garage is proposed to the rear of the dwelling and accessed by a rear lane. As mentioned, there is an existing garage at the dwelling. Directly behind the site across a lane is a modern flat development, with side windows overlooking the application site. There are numerous garages along the lane, with a mix of design styles. The garages immediately to either side of 80 Fidlas Road are single storey in scale. SITE HISTORY No recent planning history. POLICY FRAMEWORK The site lies within an existing area of housing, as defined in the adopted City of Cardiff Local Plan (January 1996). The following Local Plan policies are relevant: 11 17 (Design and Aesthetic Quality) (Parking and Servicing Facilities)

2. 2.1

2.2

3. 3.1 4. 4.1

4.2

The following policies from the deposit Unitary Development Plan (October 2003) are of relevance: 2.20 2.24 2.57 (Good Design) (Residential Amenity) (Access, Circulation and Parking Requirements)

4.3

The following Supplementary Planning Guidance is of relevance: Householder Design Guide (March 2007) Access Circulation and Parking Requirements (2010)

5. 5.1

INTERNAL CONSULTEES RESPONSES The Operational Manager (Transportation) has been consulted and no objections have been raised. EXTERNAL CONSULTEES RESPONSES None.

6. 6.1

7. 7.1 7.2

REPRESENTATIONS Neighbours have been consulted and no comments have been received. Comments have been received from Cllr Garry Hunt. Cllr Hunt is supportive of the application and suggests that the intention is to replicate the existing structure and move it three foot away from where it is now (into the site). The current garage is quite ugly with large slabs of corrugated iron on the frontage. Although the existing garage, and the envisaged one is larger than those around it, the existing garage has been around a long time and the other garages and buildings are a mixture of shapes and sizes. Cllr Hunt has asked for officers to re-consider their initial concerns. He has also asked that the application is referred to Planning Committee ANALYSIS The keys issue is the design of the garage and its effect on the character and appearance of the area. The proposal is to rebuild the garage to the same design as the existing garage at 80, Fidlas Road, albeit sited 1m into the plot and some 300mm taller. The applicant has suggested that the existing garage is believed to have been built in 1922, pre-planning legislation. There would appear to be no formal planning record of permission being granted for the garage on site. The size and scale of the existing garage and its mono-pitch roof, is considerably larger that other garages along the lane and it has a significant visual impact on the surrounding area. It should be noted that although a garage of a similar design and scale already exists at this site, it is the duty of the local planning authority to assess a planning application in accordance with current policy. That policy is highlighted in Section 4 of this report. Policy 11 (Design and Aesthetic Quality) of the Cardiff Local Plan states that:ALL NEW DEVELOPMENT SHOULD BE OF GOOD DESIGN WHICH HAS PROPER REGARD TO THE SCALE AND CHARACTER OF THE SURROUNDING ENVIRONMENT AND DOES NOT ADVERSELY AFFECT THE AESTHETIC QUALITY OF THE AREA.

8. 8.1

8.2

8.3

8.4

8.5

8.6

Policy 2.20 (Good Design) of the Deposit UDP also states that:ALL DEVELOPMENT WILL BE REQUIRED TO DEMOSTRATE GOOD DESIGN BY: A). SATISFACTORILY RESPONDING TO LOCAL CHARACTER AND CONTEXT; E). SATISFACTORILY ADDRESSING ISSUES OF LAYOUT, DENSITY, SCALE, MASSING, HEIGHT, DETAILING AND LANDSCAPING.

8.7

These principles are also embedded in the Householder Design Guide Supplementary Planning Guidance (Chapter 4: Understanding the Character of your Area and paragraph. 12.4 (Garages)) It is considered that all new development must have regard to these policies notwithstanding the possibility of existing examples of poor design within the site or wider locality. Although the flat development (Maberley Court) opposite the site is of a larger scale and higher than the proposed development, the garages to either side of the proposal, are smaller and more domestic in scale. It is noted that these garages are not uniform in design or of a particular attractive appearance, although they are all of a single storey scale which is common within a residential area such as this. The proposed garage is required for domestic use and with this in mind a more appropriately designed structure that reflects the design and scale of the adjoining garages would be more suitable. Having regard to the Councils design policies and the local context, the height of the development and proposed mono-pitch roof structure (5.15m on the east (lane side) facing elevation) is considered to be of poor design, resulting in an overbearing and incongruous development that would have a detrimental affect on the character and appearance of the area. Officers are also concerned that the increase in height of the structure (albeit only 300mm) will add to its prominence within the street scene. The points raised by the applicant and Cllr Hunt have been considered but the fact that a garage of a similar size and design already exists on the site is not considered to be a reason to allow the development, when it is clearly contrary to the Councils design policies as outlined above. Policy 11 is clear that all new development must be of good design. The proposal is for a new garage rather than the maintenance of an existing garage. Therefore any new garage must be appropriately designed to fit within the established context of its surroundings. The proposed garage is higher than the existing, which is already a substantial height and towers over all the other garages and accordingly, officers have formed the opinion that the proposal will be an overbearing and incongruous feature. The applicant has been advised that any new garage at the site must be of a design and scale which reflects the general context of this rear lane. The application is recommended for refusal for the reason stated above.

8.8

8.9

8.10

8.11

8.12

10

MEMBER AND AM OBJECTION


COMMITTEE DATE: 13/02/2013 APPLICATION DATE: 23/04/2012

APPLICATION No. 12/691/DCI ED: APP: TYPE: APPLICANT: LOCATION: PROPOSAL: BUTETOWN

Full Planning Permission

Cardiff Bay Wakeboarding BUTE EAST DOCK, HEMINGWAY ROAD, ATLANTIC WHARF USE OF FORMER DOCK FOR WAKEBOARDING AND WATER SKIING AND INSTALLATION OF CABLE TOW SYSTEM ___________________________________________________________________ RECOMMENDATION 1: That, subject to persons having a relevant interest in the application site securing a signed Unilateral Undertaking under SECTION 106 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 encompassing the matters referred to in section 9 of the Chief Strategic Planning and Environment Officers report, planning permission be GRANTED subject to the following conditions: 1. 2. C01 Statutory Time Limit The facility hereby permitted shall only be used by members of the public between 09:00hrs and 20:00hrs between 25 March and 31 October (inclusive) and shall be discontinued within 5 years of the date of first opening to members of the public. The land shall be restored to its former condition before the development hereby approved was implemented, which shall include the removal of all new structures hereby approved from the application site within six months of the cessation of the use hereby approved. Reason: To ensure that the use of the premises does not prejudice the amenities of the area. Prior to the submission of any application to remove or vary condition 2 above, a noise assessment report based on environmental noise measurements undertaken at the application site during the 5 year trial period shall be submitted to the Local Planning Authority to allow the noise impact to be comprehensively assessed. The noise assessment methodology shall be agreed in writing by the Local Planning Authority prior to the commencement of the assessment and the assessment shall be undertaken in accordance with the agreed methodology. Reason: To ensure that the use of the premises does not prejudice the amenities of the area.

3.

11

4.

In the event that the use hereby approved ceases to operate on a permanent basis prior to the 5 year trial period noted in condition 2 above, the land shall be restored to its former condition before the development hereby approved was implemented, which shall include the removal of all new structures hereby approved from the application site within six months of the cessation of the use hereby approved. Reason: To ensure that the development does not prejudice the amenities of the area. The consent relates to the application as amended by the revised plans numbered 5226-R2 (Site Location Plan), 5226-001 Rev.1 (Site Layout Plan), 5226-002 Rev.1 (Pylon Anchor Installation Sections and Cable Clearance), attached to and forming part of this planning application. Reason: The plans amend and form part of the application. This consent relates to the application as supplemented by the letter from the agent dated 11/07/2012, the email from the Agent dated 30/05/2012 titled East Bute Dock Ecology, the email from the Agent dated 08/11/2012, the email from the Agent dated 12/11/2012, the email from the Agent dated 14/11/2012, Installation Plan (29th March 2012), Operational Plan (29th March 2012), Revised Water Quality Management Statement (July 2012), Transport Statement (June 2012), drawings of Pylon 1 - 5 (stamp dated 11/07/2011), plan of Bespoke Dock Connector (stamp dated 11/07/2011), plan of Mast Food Concrete Ring / Prinzipskizze Mastfub (stamp dated 11/07/2011), plan of Pylonaker HEB (stamp dated 11/07/2011), plan of Starting Platform Water (stamp dated 11/07/2011), drawing of illustration of Boat Pick up Points (stamp dated 11/07/2011), the letter from the Agent dated 21/01/13 and email from the agent dated 21/01/13. Reason: The information provided forms part of the application. The use of Bute East Dock for water skiing and wakeboarding shall not take place until the supporting facilities proposed in The Boat Shed which shall include but not be limited to a reception, equipment storage facility, changing rooms, locker area and shower and toilet facilities have been completed and are available for use by users of the water skiing and wakeboarding facility hereby approved. The supporting facilities noted above shall be available for use by users of the water skiing and wakeboarding facility during the times of operation that are the subject of condition 2 of this consent. Reason: In the interests of the amenities of the area and adjoining residents. Unless otherwise agreed in writing by the Local Planning Authority, no development shall take place until 18 no. car parking spaces in The Wharf car park are available for exclusive use by the operators of the

5.

6.

7.

8.

12

facility hereby approved and their clients and staff during the times of operation specified in condition one of this consent. Reason: To make provision for the parking of vehicles clear of the roads so as not to prejudice the safety, convenience and free flow of traffic. 9. Notwithstanding the plans hereby approved, no development shall take place until a scheme showing details of the land based pylon anchors to include the precise location and fixing detail and allowing for a minimum 3m headroom under the anchor wires and to include details for the reinstatement of the path/land following installation - has been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority and the development shall not be brought into use until the approved scheme is implemented. Reason: To ensure a satisfactory finished appearance to the development and to facilitate access to the cycle/footpath and other infrastructure situated on or adjacent to the path. Where any of the pylon or anchor locations agreed under condition 9 are situated within the adopted public highway, no development shall commence on those elements until the Applicant has secured a stopping up Order under s257 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990, unless otherwise agreed in writing by the Local Planning Authority. Reason: In the interests of pedestrian safety and to allow vehicular access and maintenance. Unless otherwise agreed in writing by the Local Planning Authority, the hydraulic compressor and brake resistor shall be housed inside the Boat Shed and shall be enclosed with sound proofing material prior to their use on the premises in accordance with a scheme which shall first be agreed in writing with the Local Planning Authority. Reason: To ensure that the amenities of the occupiers of adjoining and nearby residential properties are protected. H7G Plant Noise No amplified music shall be played through any public announcement system installed as part of the use hereby approved. Reason: To ensure that the amenities of occupiers of other premises in the vicinity are protected. Notwithstanding the plans hereby approved, no development shall take place until a scheme showing details of the starting platform and associated gate system which shall include details of the colour and materials, details of any alterations to the dockside railings and any

10.

11.

12. 13.

14.

13

start hut / canopy and seating- has been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority and the development shall not be brought into beneficial use until the approved scheme is implemented. Reason: To ensure a satisfactory finished appearance to the development. 15. No development shall take place until a schedule showing details of CCTV cameras to monitor the external areas of the proposed facility has been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The development shall be carried out in accordance with the approved details and shall be maintained thereafter. Reason: To ensure that the amenities of the area are protected, and to prevent crime and disorder problems. No development shall take place until a schedule showing full details of proposals for the external storage of equipment or external display of goods during the installation phase, during the months of operation and outside of the operational period has been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The schedule shall include, but shall not necessarily be limited to, details showing the scale and location of any storage containers, boats, floating work platforms, tables and chairs, parasols, advertisement boards and a timetable for their use and, where applicable, removal from site. The development shall be carried out in accordance with the approved details and shall be maintained thereafter, unless otherwise agreed in writing by the Local Planning Authority. Reason: To ensure that the amenities of the area are protected, and to prevent crime and disorder problems. C7S Details of Refuse Storage No development shall take place until details of access facilities for disabled persons, including ramp to the start platform, chair wakeboards, toilet and changing facilities, have been submitted to and approved in writing by the local planning authority; the development shall not be brought into use until the approved scheme has been completed. Reason: To ensure adequate facilities are available for disabled persons. The five pylons and their running and supporting cables, all of the floating exit platforms, the start hut and ramp, and the motor head and its connecting cables shall not remain within or above the dock water between 1 November and 25 March in any year. For the avoidance of doubt, the starting platform and ground based

16.

17. 18.

19.

14

pylon anchors would not need to be removed between the specified dates. Reason: In the interests of visual amenity. RECOMMENDATION 2: No development should commence until such time as the applicant has secured a license under S178 of the Highways Act 1980 for all overhead cables and other structures where they oversail the adopted highway. Maintenance of the license under s178 of the Highways Act may require a structural certificate to be submitted annually to confirm that the pylons, cables etc are fit for purpose. Further information regarding the s178 license requirements is available from Steve Rees, Cardiff Council on (029) 2078 5363. RECOMMENDATION 3: The contamination assessments and the affects of unstable land are considered on the basis of the best information available to the Planning Authority and are not necessarily exhaustive. The Authority takes due diligence when assessing these impacts, however you are minded that the responsibility for (i) (ii) determining the extent and effects of such constraints and; ensuring that any imported materials (including, topsoils, subsoils, aggregates and recycled or manufactured aggregates / soils) are chemically suitable for the proposed end use. Under no circumstances should controlled waste be imported. It is an offence under section 33 of the environmental Protection Act 1990 to deposit controlled waste on a site which does not benefit from an appropriate waste management license. The following must not be imported to a development site: Unprocessed / unsorted demolition wastes. Any materials originating from a site confirmed as being contaminated or potentially contaminated by chemical or radioactive substances. Japanese Knotweed stems, leaves and rhizome infested soils. In addition to section 33 above, it is also an offence under the Wildlife and Countryside Act 1981 to spread this invasive weed; and

(iii)

the safe development and secure occupancy of the site rests with the developer.

Proposals for areas of possible land instability should take due account of the physical and chemical constraints and may include action on land reclamation or other remedial action to enable beneficial use of unstable land. The Local Planning Authority has determined the application on the basis of the information available to it, but this does not mean that the land can be considered free from contamination.

15

RECOMMENDATION 4: That the applicant be advised that by law (Environmental Protection Act 1990, section 34) all commercial premises have a duty of care to ensure that their waste is transferred to and disposed of by a registered waste carrier. Owners or developers of commercial developments/properties who require Cardiff County Council to collect and dispose of their waste can contact the commercial services department on 029 20717500. RECOMMENDATION 5: Wild birds and their nests are protected by law from disturbance and destruction. The nature of this proposal requires that floating pontoons could be left unused on the water over winter. If, in the spring when the facility is re-opened any bird species have started to nest on these pontoons they must be left undisturbed until the young have fledged. In this case an alternative route should be created as set out in email East Bute Dock Ecology sent from Gareth Stevenson on 30/05/2012. These comments contribute to this Authoritys discharge of its duties under Section 40 of the Natural Environment and Rural Communities (NERC) Act 2006, wherein: 1) Every public authority must, in exercising its functions, have regard, so far as is consistent with the proper exercise of those functions, to the purpose of conserving biodiversity. 2) conserving biodiversity includes, in relation to a living organism or type of habitat, restoring or enhancing a population or habitat. RECOMMENDATION 6: The Environment Agency advise that: any incidents of blue-green algae on watercourses or private waters (such as lakes) should be reported to their incident hotline on 0800 80 70 60. This will allow them to respond appropriately by taking samples and to carry out their notification responsibilities in relation to public health. They advise that there is a useful guide called 'Blue-green algae' available from our online publications catalogue, which describes the characteristic features of blue-green algae, how algae affects the public and what the public should do if they see it. This can be downloaded here: http://publications.environment-agency.gov.uk/?lang=_e construction activities have the potential to cause serious pollution or impact on the bed and banks of a watercourse and on the quality and quantity of the water. Please refer to Pollution Prevention Guideline 5 Works or maintenance in or near water: http://publications.environment-agency.gov.uk/pdf/PMHO1107BNKG-ee.pdf?lang=_e The Environmental Protection (Duty of Care) Regulations 1991 for dealing with waste materials are applicable for any off-site movements of wastes. The developer as waste producer therefore has a duty of care to ensure all materials removed go to an appropriate permitted facility and all relevant documentation is completed and kept in line

16

with regulations. If any controlled waste is to be removed off site, then the site operator must ensure a registered waste carrier is used to convey the waste material off site to a suitably permitted facility. If any waste is to be used on site, the applicant will be required to obtain the appropriate waste exemption or permit from us. The applicant is advised to contact the Environment Management team at Cardiff Office on 029 2024 5188 or refer to guidance on our website http:// www.environment-agency.gov.uk/subjects/waste. 1. 1.1 DESCRIPTION OF PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT This is a full application, as amended, for the use of the former dock for wakeboarding and waterskiing, and the installation of a motorised cable tow system. Wakeboarding is a fast growing water sport which involves a rider on a single board, as opposed to water skiing on two. The cable tow system allows riders to be pulled along the water by a suspended cable, rather than by motor boat. The application was reported to Planning Committee on 5 December 2012 and was deferred for a site visit on 2 January 2013. The original report to December Planning Committee was amended to reflect this and to incorporate late representations received prior to 5 December Planning Committee. Amended plans were submitted 3 December 2012 and were reported to January Planning Committee as a late representation. (These proposed a change in location of one of the pylon anchors that supports pylon 5 (A5.2) from its original land based location (on the site of land that was subject to application 12/380DCI approved subject to a s106) to a water based location within the dock.) As a result of the above amendment, the owner / occupiers closest the relocated pylon anchor (nos 42-102 Schooner Way) and the owner of the land from which the pylon anchor were consulted and given 10 days to respond. The application was deferred at Planning Committee on 9th January 2013 for officers to draft potential reasons for refusal based around nuisance /disturbance and adverse visual impact. In the interim, the Agent proposed further amendments (21 January 2012) in order to try to address members concerns by withdrawing previously submitted visual illustrations, providing new visual illustrations and committing to remove plant during the off-season (see paragraphs 1.6 and 1.11). These amendments were subject to a 10 day consultation period (expires 01/02/13). The January 2013 report has been amended to include the following: the requested reasons for refusal, late representations received prior to 7th January Planning Committee, details of the proposed amendments and responses to the January consultation. Any further responses received will be reported as late

1.2

1.3

17

representations. The amendments to the January 2013 report are highlighted in bold. 1.4 The Applicant sent a letter to Planning Committee members, dated 25 January, containing information relating to noise, parking, birds, otters, water quality, visual impact, safety boat, fishing, weed and information on other sites elsewhere. This letter does not form part of the planning application. Other than clarifying that the 5 pylons are to be made of small diameter intermeshed galvanised steel rods and that weed would be harvested to a depth of 2m (as opposed to a diver being used to clear weed as part of the installation), the letter does not contain any new additional information on the proposal. The cable-tow system would consist of an elevated cable that would move through a network of five pylons to provide a returning course approx 735m long. This would run in an anti-clockwise direction, south from the boat shed. Each of the five pylons would, in turn, be supported by two pylon anchors. The course and associated cable system would be positioned in the central section of the dock, involving a section of the dock approx 480m long. The main cable forming the course would be positioned 9.6m above the water surface and approx. 30m from the waters edge to allow for the carving sweep action of skiers. The pylons the highest part of the system would rise to a maximum height of 13.4m above the water level (pylon 5). The ground based pylon anchor posts would be approx 3.3m high above ground level. The pylons and anchors would be constructed from galvanised steel with a matt silver/grey appearance. In the additional information submitted 21 January 2013, the Agent notes that the visual illustrations of the plant in situ, as originally submitted, are to be replaced with new visuals to present a more realistic impression of the visual impact, having regard to the lightweight spaceframe-type construction of the pylons and the 1cm thickness of the cables. The Agent notes that the first illustrations were prepared on the basis of an engineering model, whilst the revised impressions have been prepared from the actual appearance of the plant at other locations and scaled accurately in relation to the adjacent buildings. Photographs of similar installations at other locations are submitted to corroborate the validity of the artists impressions. The start point would be accessed off the western edge of the dock, from a gated starting platform (approx 16m x 5m) adjacent to the Boat Shed. This would be finished in hardwood boards and a temporary start hut erected over the operators console. Water exit platforms would be placed at intervals around the western (10 no) and eastern (11 no) sides of the dock. These would comprise of modular floating blocks secured together to form a 3m x 1.5m platform. A boat pick up point (approx 5.9m x 1.93m) would also be

1.5

1.6

1.7

18

positioned at the western and eastern side of the dock. The platforms would be of a grey colour HDPE plastic material and would be secured to the handrail around the edge of the dock by bespoke dock connectors. No sliders and kickers are proposed as part of the course. 1.8 No new buildings are proposed. The existing Boat Shed building, currently used as a gym, would be used to provide a reception, office, equipment storage facility, a class room/ video presentation area, changing rooms, locker area, shower and toilet facilities, and equipment washing facilities. CCTV is proposed to cover the front entrance of the Boat Shed, the reception area, the cable system control area and the start platform area. The system would be propelled by an electrically powered mechanised drive that would be manually controlled. The cable system would require a dedicated 400v electrical supply, a brake resistor and hydraulic compressor which would be housed in the technical room which would be soundproofed and positioned inside the Boat Shed. During installation, plant and tools would be kept securely in the Boat Shed, avoiding the need for any temporary cabins. To enable installation, a temporary floating work platform (6m x 4m) with scaffolding above - to allow a working height of 9-10m - would be erected. This would be dismantled after installation and only re-erected for pre-season maintenance and winterisation of the system or if the cable or pylon heads become damaged and need replacing mid season. The scaffolding would be hired on demand and, when not required, the floating platform would be removed from site. It is noted that an engineer would be able to climb up the pylons and perform routine maintenance work without the need for the floating work platform. During operation, equipment would be stored within the Boat shed. The Applicant initially proposed partial decommissioning of the system when not in use during the winter months, involving the removal of the driven cables, the trailing rider wires, all electrics and the motor unit, the start hut / canopy and all exit pontoons, but that the five pylons, all structural cables between the pylons and their respective anchors would remain. The proposal is now amended to propose the total removal of all above surface water-based plant during the nonoperational season. This would involve all five of the pylons, and their running and supporting cables being removed from the water from November through to April, in addition to the previously stated removal of the floating exit platforms, start hut and ramp, and the motor head and its connecting cables. The starting platform and ground based pylon anchors are noted to be permanent installations which would need to remain in situ.

1.9

1.10

1.11

19

1.12

In the event that the development becomes redundant, the Agent advises that none of the scheme would result in irreversible works. The five main pylons would be free-standing on the dock floor and are relatively easily removed. The start platform could also be removed, but would be mounted upon caissons in the dock and the pylon anchors would be cast into concrete pads, both of which would amount to more permanent forms of development requiring works for their removal. A maintenance and safety boat, equipped with a 15/20hp four-stroke engine would be used, together with a recue vessel to perform fast response rescues. The latter would be used for emergency use only and would not operate at any other time. Both vessels would be removed from the site for secure storage during winterisation. A public address system would be in place, but would only be used in times of emergency / system failure to assist riders to safely exit the water. The existing Wharf pub car parking would be shared to provide 18 car parking spaces and four disabled parking spaces. Six cycle parking spaces, and coach and mini bus parking would be accommodated. There would be ramped access down to the water from the dock side, and the Applicant proposes to repair the pathway between the Boat Shed and the start platform. The facility would operate from late March to the end of October. Opening hours would vary, with the longest days being 9am to 8pm Monday to Sunday, including Bank Holidays. The development is anticipated to generate up to 100 customers a day at peak times during summer months. Visitor numbers are noted to be self limiting as the apparatus is restricted to nine riders at any time, with an average stay involving a two hour session, including training and training/safety briefing. No formal events are planned through the proposals, but if these should arise it is noted that they would take place at weekends when other trip demands in the area are reduced. The application is supported by a covering letter, Design and Access Statement, Transport Statement, Installation Plan, Operational Plan, Noise Impact Assessment, a Water Quality Management Statement, Water Sampling Results for 2011 and 2012, An Analysis of Cardiff Bay Water Microbiology Results 2011-2 by Minton Treharne & Davies Limited, British Water Ski & Wakeboard Environmental Policy Note on Wash, additional information on East Bute Dock Ecology, and a Cardiff University Bute East Dock Otter and Mink Survey and other additional information. The following matters are raised: i. The cable ski concept not found anywhere else in Wales - provides for the enjoyment of surface water sports without the need for noisy and polluting towing craft, and provides for a landmark, low impact

1.13

1.14

1.15

1.16

20

ii.

iii.

iv.

v.

vi. vii.

viii.

ix.

x.

leisure facility in an underutilised water resource in the heart of Cardiff Bay that will encourage healthy lifestyles for all. The proposals will not give rise to disturbance of potential nesting bird sites, with the only disturbance to the water surface being from the riders ski or wakeboard. The British Water Ski and Wakeboarding Association policy note addresses the effect of ski wash and it is demonstrated that the wash created has an average height of only 25mm at a distance 20m from the centre line of the cable. This is noted to be almost negligible in relation to the existing surface water conditions at the dock and the variable effects of wind based currents, and that the effect of wake on any nearby nesting birds would be minimal. There are over 200 cable sites worldwide using the system proposed, with the closest being the Cotswolds Water Park, which is internationally and nationally important for wintering wildfowl, has up to 200 species of bird visit each year, has a thriving otter population and expanding water vole population and is regionally important for dragonflies. The cable systems electric motor guarantees that neither the water nor air is polluted. Studies have found that waters get oxygenated by the action of skiers and wake boarders on the waters surface which help with regeneration. If a bird were to set up a nest on the proposed exit points, the operator would cordon off the exit point and create another at a safe distance away from the nest to ensure that the nest would remain undisturbed. The Cardiff University Otter and Mink Survey confirmed no field signs of otter or mink in the dock or adjoining canal. The proposals will make use of the existing Wharf pub parking and catering facilities, with the facility providing additional footfall for the pub. Cardiff Bay Wakeboarding would be accredited by British Water Ski & Wakeboard and the site would be operated according to the British Water Ski Code of Practice for Cable Tow Waterskiing and the British Water Ski Cable Tow Operator Standards. All CBW cable operators would be qualified to British Water Ski standards and be members of British Water Ski. Staff will manually operate the mechanised drive, deal with equipment, tuition and safety, as well as the routine cleaning and care of the water body of the dock. As part of the installation process, a commercial diver would be used to clear the dock of rubbish and weed. The walkway surrounding the course would be inspected and maintenance carried out. All terrestrial litter would be removed from the dock and from around the dock to the boundary of the walkway. The assessment of noise levels generated by the equipment in use is predicted to be significantly less than the measured background noise levels in the area (measured during a typical Sunday) and concludes

21

xi.

xii.

xiii. xiv.

xv.

xvi.

that the noise from the development would not have a material impact on the nearest noise sensitive properties. The movements of water skiers will occur well below the level of windows to habitable rooms so little visual intrusion or distraction will arise. The following benefits are noted: to community safety arising from the proposed use and associated increase in the level of activity and overlooking, the benefits arising from the use of a brownfield site in a sustainable location. The proposal would require six full time employees. The proposal would not add to the existing drainage levels as there would not be any increase in the provision of sanitary facilities or nonpermeable surfaces. The Applicant has taken advice from the British Disabled Waterski and Wakeboard Association (BDWSA) and will have specifically adapted equipment such as chair wakeboards to allow use by disabled users. Full use by disabled people is entirely feasible as the start platform would be accessed via just a short ramp from the dock side allowing easy access for all users. BDWSA members currently use the cable system in Datchet with success and will visit the site before opening to the public to assess and advise on suitable use by their members. Various proposals in respect of construction, training, safety and incident management, which are not reported here as they are not a planning matter.

1.17

With respect to water quality, and its monitoring and management, a revised Water Quality Management Statement and additional information has been submitted, which note: If water quality at the site is reduced and considered a possible danger to users, the site will be closed until the quality improves. CBW has taken advice from Cardiff Councils Environmental Department, Cardiff Harbour Authority and Public Health Wales and has been testing the water quality in Bute East Dock since March 2011. They are also involved in a study with Cardiff University monitoring the nutrient levels in the dock with regard to blue / green algae growth. The water will be tested weekly for Faecal Coliforms and Streptococci, with samples being sent to the National Laboratory Service in Exeter. CBW will adopt a similar system as Cardiff Bay where the water quality will be classified daily as being excellent, good or poor, with daily classification and water quality results to be published in the CBW office. The minimum age for customers is 10, with each customer to read and sign a medical consent form and safety and risk declaration at each visit to the course. Customers will be asked to inform CBW of any illnesses contracted within 24 hrs of using the site and CBW would

22

immediately report all illnesses back to Public Health Wales via a health survey form. CBW would monitor the water for Blue / Green algae and samples would also be sent to Cardiff University. Measures would be taken during the operational season to stop algae blooms. The analysis of Cardiff Bay Water Microbiology Results 2011-12 by Minton Treharne & Davies Limited concluded that the analysis of the data covering the periods April to October 2011 and April onwards in 2012 demonstrated a high proportion of good results with the remainder being classified as satisfactory, apart from a single bad coliform result. Water quality analyses have been provided to ascertain whether these meet bathing water quality standards, which they do. There are acknowledged risks in the use of the dock for immersion activities arising from water quality incidents following periods of heavy rain fall. This is an issue which also affects Cardiff Bay and it is incumbent on the Applicant to monitor bacteriological conditions and to restrict activities where necessary in order to minimise risks to public health. This is ultimately a private matter for the Applicant to ensure that he is properly indemnified against pollution incidents arising. The greatest risk to the daily functioning of the proposals is from the occurrences of blue green algae, the presence of which may force a temporary closure and a risk assessment method statement has been submitted to illustrate how water quality monitoring and notification will manage public health risks.

1.18

In addition to the amendments noted above, new and amended plans were submitted to provide a full set of drawings of the system and to provide for overhead clearance of the path around the dock. DESCRIPTION OF SITE The application site comprises the water body of the dock, sections of the dock edge walkway to which pylons anchors would be fixed, the Boat Shed, the Wharf pub car park and a route from the car park to the dock. The dock no longer forms part of the operational docks and is subject to occasional sporting and leisure uses, including charity rowing events, and attracts a mix of users, including walkers, runners and anglers. There is a walkway surrounding the dock, not all of which is adopted and part of which forms part of the Wales Coastal Path (the footway along western edge of the dock from County Hall to the dock feeder canal south of The Wharf). A section of the footway - to the north of County Hall and adjacent to the vacant plot which forms part of the site is in a poor state of repair, with loose and missing paviours and is generally overgrown.

2. 2.1

2.2

23

2.3

The dock is characterised by a sense of openness, with view across it framed by a mix of high density development around its edges. To the west of the site lie high density housing development situated off Schooner Way (including Henke Court), The Wharf Pub, The Holiday Inn Express hotel, County Hall, a vacant plot of land (with no extant planning permission) and a private car park. Henke Court would be separated from the towing cable by a distance of approx 37-39m, the hotel by approx 35m, and County Hall by approx 120m. The ground floor apartments at Henke Court and their terraces are raised above the footway at a height of approx 2.25m, and are positioned approx 8m from the dock edge and approx 2.5m above water level. Further residential and office development are positioned to the north, approx 290m from the course. To the east of the site is the A4232 Central Link Road, a raised dual carriageway, with industrial land beyond, including the active steelworks. The residential development to the south The Waterquarter - would be positioned approx 230m from the course. A travelling crane has been relocated adjacent to the eastern edge of the dock, reflecting its industrial heritage, as does a barge, positioned adjacent to the Wharf pub. The Grade II listed Bonded Warehouse, converted to offices, is located at the northern end of the dock. The Grade II listed Spillers & Bakers building is located to the west, on the corner of Schooner Way and Llansannor Drive. In addition to the existing development around the site, planning permission has been granted for a partial change of use of The Wharf to a hotel (11/1890DCI), and the Council has resolved to grant planning permission for a crche and caf on land to the north of the Boat Shed (12/380DCI). SITE HISTORY The following applications are relevant: 89/929R Public house / restaurant, letable floor space, boat shed / changing facilities approved 26/07/1989. 97/00247c - Cable tow for watersports - refused 30/10/1997 for the following reasons: i. The proposal fails to provide for adequate car and coach parking particularly at peak times, which would result in on-street parking and congregation, to the detriment of highway safety and residential amenities. The proposal, by virtue of its scale, and nature of operation would give rise to nuisance and disturbance which would be detrimental to the residential amenities of nearby residents and or the amenities of other occupiers.

2.4

2.5

3. 3.1

3.2

ii.

24

iii.

iv.

The proposal by reason of its size, siting and design is considered a visually obtrusive form of development which is detrimental to the visual amenities of the area. Insufficient information has been submitted to allow the Local Planning Authority to properly assess the proposal in terms of water quality, health and safety issues and suitability of the proposed use for the dock.

Planning application 97/247/C for a cable tow for watersports (refused 30/10/97) proposed four pylons embedded in concrete bases submerged within the dock. These were shown to project 10.4m above water level, and tied back to dock edge by supports pictorially suggested to be around 4m in height. The current scheme proposes five pylons, the highest of which would rise to a max 13.4m above water level (pylon 5). Pylons 1, 2, 3 and 4 would rise to a height of approx 11.8m, 11.6m, 11.8m and 11.8m above water level, respectively. The ground based pylon anchor posts (supporting the pylons) would rise to approx 3.3m above ground level. 3.3 Related site history: Part of land at Schooner Way, Atlantic Wharf 12/380DCI- Proposed construction of crche and caf approved subject to s106. The Wharf, 121 Schooner Way 11/1890DCI - Partial change of use of first and second floor from A2 office to C1 hotel with the formation of new external doors from ground floor of A3 public house approved 06/01/2012. 4. 4.1 POLICY FRAMEWORK The application site is identified as unallocated white land on the City of Cardiff Local Plan proposals map, with Bute East Dock noted on the proposals map to be disused. The site lies outside, but immediately adjacent to the boundary of the Inner Harbour Principal Business Area and the land does not fall within the operational docks, as defined on the proposals map. Paragraph 7.4.6 of the Local Plan notes that Bute East Dock and the associated feeders and canals are an essential part of the operational infrastructure of the docks which need to be maintained. The dock is also identified within the boundary of the Cardiff Bay Development Corporation. The site falls within the Butetown area of the City Centre Strategy (20072010).

25

4.2

Relevant City of Cardiff Local Plan policies: 10: Contaminated or Unstable Land 11: Design and Aesthetic Quality 17: Parking and Servicing Facilities 18: Provision for Cyclists 19: Provision for Pedestrians 20: Provision for Special Needs Groups 45: Sport, Recreation and Leisure Facilities Relevant Deposit Cardiff Unitary Development Plan (2003) policies: 2.20: Good Design 2.24: Residential Amenity 2.30: Commercial Leisure Development 2.47: Sites of Local Importance for Nature Conservation 2.48: Biodiversity 2.57: Access, Circulation and Parking Requirements 2.51: Statutory Listed Buildings 2.64: Air, Noise and Light Pollution 2.74: Provision for Waste Management Facilities in Development Relevant Supplementary Planning Guidance and other guidance: City Centre Strategy (2007 2010) Safeguarding Land for Business and Industry (2006) City Centre Northern Professional Office Area Planning Brief (March 2000) Waste Collection and Storage Facilities (March 2007) Access, Circulation and Parking Standards (January 2010) Cardiff City Centre Conservation Area Appraisals (2009) Planning Policy Wales (Edition 5, November 2012) 4.2.2 The planning system provides for a presumption in favour of sustainable development to ensure that social, economic and environmental issues are balanced and integrated, at the same time, by the decision-taker when preparing a development plan and in taking decisions on individual planning applications (see Chapter 3). TAN11: Noise TAN12: Design (2009) INTERNAL CONSULTEE RESPONSES The Operational Manager (Waste Management) advises that a location for the storage and collection of waste and recycling, and presentation for collection must be included on site plans and retained thereafter, and provides advice on commercial contracts. It is advised that litter and cleansing of the wharf and canals is an on-going problem, with a lack of clarity as to who is responsible, noting that any improvement with cleansing is welcomed.

4.3

4.4

4.5

5. 5.1

26

5.2

The Operational Manager (Transportation) has no objection to the amended plans and Transport Statement, noting that the level of vehicle trips and parking likely to be generated can be comfortably accommodated on the adjacent road network and on-site car park, respectively, subject to the following conditions and advice: A condition to require details of the precise location and fixing details to be submitted for approval prior to development, to include a minimum 3m headroom under the anchor wires, given four of the land based pylons are sited within the adopted public highway and all seven represent potential obstructions to the pedestrian use of the dock edge path. The dock edge footpath facilitates lighting and other maintenance access and any submission under the above condition must allow vehicular navigation of the footpath. No development should commence until a stopping up order under s257 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 has been secured or other such licenses and/or agreements that may be required in relation to the installation of the pylons within the adopted highway. No development should commence until the Applicant has secured a licence under s178 of the Highways Act 1980 for all overhead cables and other structure, where they oversail the adopted highway. Maintenance of the license may require a structural certificate to be submitted annually to confirm that the pylons etc are fit for purpose. A S.106 contribution to encompass the clearance of undergrowth, reinstatement of the surface, repair of lighting on the footpath between the Holiday Inn and County Hall, given the additional pedestrian traffic. A s106 contribution of 3,120 towards the assessment and implementation of new and revised Traffic Orders as may be required as a consequence of the operation of the development, with the contribution to be used to assess the requirement for resident parking or extension of existing parking restrictions.

5.3

Information on the scale of the likely costs of works to the footway lighting was reported to 5 December Planning Committee as a late representation from the Operational Manager, Transportation and is set out in Section 9. It is advised that the above conditions will avoid any interference with the use of the Wales Coastal Path. It is also noted that the previous application 97/247C was based on the 1993 parking guidelines which required a minimum level of parking to be provided with most forms of development and that this application must be assessed on the 2010 guidelines, which do not require a minimum level of car parking provision within the City Centre and Bay Core Area. As such, it is advised that the proposed development would be policy compliant in terms of car, coach access and parking and any objection on this basis would be unsustainable.

5.4

27

5.5

The Public Rights of Way Team advises that the proposal will not impinge on the Wales Coastal Path. Public Protection has no objection and initially advised that: Wakeboarding will involve the user being exposed to water either through accidental immersion or through facial contact with water spray. It would appear that the degree of exposure and the frequency of body and head immersion will be dependent the ability of the user and their familiarity with the activity. Water sampling undertaken at Bute East Dock has provided some insight into the bacteriological content of the water at Bute East Dock. The results confirm the presence of faecal coliforms and faecal streptococci which indicate that the Dock water is exposed to sewage contamination. This is unsurprising given the location. Therefore if Planning Permission is given any water activities involving partial/whole body immersion and excessive water exposure to the face will involve a risk in acquiring gastrointestinal infections. All users and potential customers should therefore be adequately informed of those risks before undertaking the activity and Health and Safety Risk Assessments must include assessment of bacteriological hazards and risks associated with being a user and being a member of staff. The risk assessments should also: consider that the risk of infection maybe greater in certain population groups such as immuno-compromised individuals, children under the age of six, etc. Control and preventive measure may therefore differ within the customer population. consider that certain weather conditions may require that the activity does not take place.

5.6

The organisers need to take these issues into consideration. You maybe aware that much work has been undertaken by Cardiff Harbour Authority on managing the bacteriological risks associated with water activities in Cardiff Bay and the White Water Rafting Centre. The organisers would find value in referring to The Harbour Authority. If this application is approved, the Applicant will have responsibilities under the Health and Safety at Work etc Act 1974 to protect the health, safety and welfare of his employees and customers. This will involve undertaking risk assessments, developing safety procedures, training staff and potentially ceasing the activity under certain conditions, for example the presence of blue green algae in the Dock. As well as powers under this Act, the Council have additional powers under the Health Protection Regulations 2010 where the Council can require action or prohibit an activity to protect or prevent an infection that presents or would present significant harm to human health.

28

Following the submission of additional information, Public Protection advise that their comments remain unchanged. With regards the submission of the Operational Plan and proposed weekly monitoring to ensure compliance with bacteriological parameters in line with the Bathing Water Standards, Public Protection advise that this would form part of the health and safety risk assessment and that, from a communicable disease point of view, the more important issue is that the appropriate action is taken following receipt of these results. 5.7 Pollution Control Contaminated Land Team have no objection overall. An advisory notice relating to contamination and unstable land was initially advised, noting that they have no records indicating there to be contamination within the underlying sediments which might justify the inclusion of conditions. Pollution Control Division subsequently advised that the review of the results of chemical analysis of the water and sediment has shown no obvious risks, as the water quality meets the Environmental Quality Standards for freshwater bodies. With regards chemical concentrations in the sediment, it is advised that these are hard to compare as currently there are no set criteria for chemical quality of sediments in the UK. From a human health perspective, due to the nature of the proposed activities, they would not anticipate there to be any significant exposure of the participants to the sediment. With regards bacteriological issues, Pollution Control advise that this has been assessed by colleagues in Public Protection. Bacteriological results indicate that for the majority of the monitoring the results indicate that the water quality meets the excellent bathing water standard, with only four failures of this standard, and one incident where good quality was breached. It is noted that the Applicant has submitted an Operational Plan and that, in accordance with this, will be undertaking weekly monitoring to ensure compliance with bacteriological parameters in line with the Bathing Water Standards. Pollution Control Division Noise & Air has no objection, subject to the recommended conditions. In respect of the noise assessment and objections raised, it is noted that the noise assessment was done in accordance with British standard 4142 and a detailed technical justification provided of the parameters used. It is noted that the report takes into account the worst case scenario for the noise generated from the cable tow equipment, along with comparison against perceived lowest back ground measurement within the operating hours (it would be reasonable to assume the background noise measurements would be higher during peak hours over the weekdays). It is noted that the sound scape for the site is dominated by the road traffic produced on the duel carriage way adjacent to the dock. With regards to noise generated from people using the cable tow system, it is noted that other noise surveys undertaken representing similar sites state that noise is

5.8

5.9

5.10

29

generally centered around the launch/waiting area for the site. While some screams from failed launches are recognised, this noise is noted to be localised to the launch area, as apposed to turning locations or during the middle of run. It is documented that once away from friends at the launch area and at a constant speed of the cable tow, the only noise was from the skis in the water while being towed around. It is considered that the proposed position of the launch area would provide sufficient attenuation of this noise. 5.11 Pollution Control also advise that it is also envisaged that people will not be using the site for every run possible so the maximum number of runs where a LAmax would be achieved at 70db could be reduced. It also needs to be considered that not all participants will reach the full length of the course falling off at various stages. It would be reasonable to expect some water noise from this, however, this is unlikely to lead to significant disturbance. Regarding, the comments raised with regards to the original application, Pollution Control advise that some comparisons can clearly be made. However, the availability of data from comparison sites along with the access to site specific noise reports are now available to make a more detailed analysis of the noise predictions. The intensification of use of the link road running along side the dock would likely to have dramatically changed the noise climate since the original application. The Regeneration Team advise that policy 45 identifies that proposals for the development of sport, recreation and leisure facilities will be favoured in other locations if there is no need to preserve the site for its existing or allocated use when assessed against relevant policies of the plan. Given the sites location, the proposal is considered acceptable in land use policy terms, subject to detailed design, amenity and transport considerations. Strategic Policy (Ecology) provided initial advice on the bird species that rely on the dock for breeding and overwintering, advising that they would not encourage development that would affect their ability to overwinter here. It was noted that all breeding birds are protected from disturbance while nesting under the Wildlife and Countryside Act 1981: Part 1, 1(1)(b), and that it is an offence to intentionally take, damage or destroy the nest of any wild bird while that nest is in use or being built. As the centre will not be running regularly all year, it is considered highly likely that the situation will arise that birds have started nesting during a closed period, then, when the centre is opened the new activity will disturb the nesting. Operating the centre after birds have started nesting, knowing the potential affects on those nests could be seen as deliberate disturbance. It was noted that the proposed platforms are likely to attract nesting birds if they are not in use at the beginning of the breeding season, again, if they are used after nesting has started this will constitute disturbance. Further information was requested on how the edges of the dock would be protected from wake disturbance in order to avoid disturbing birds

5.12

5.13

5.14

30

nesting at the waters edge, and any deterrents to prevent birds using the floating platforms, or a contingency in case a platform is out of use due to bird nesting. 5.15 No objections were raised in relation to the amended plans and additional information, and an advisory notice recommended relating to the legal protection surrounding wild birds and their nests. It is advised that the Otter survey is sufficient to ensure no European Protected Species would be affected and that a full habitat is not necessary. On the basis of the information submitted, it is noted that the only habitat to be affected is the water and that the applicant has demonstrated a reasonable response to the potential impact of birds breeding on the water, and that there are no other issues to be addressed. Legal Services advise that the Council has a license from ABP which allows the Council and those authorised by the Council to use the surface of the dock for recreational and leisure activities. ABPs consent as owner of the dock would be required for the proposal. Strategic Estates advise that the Council has a 30 year lease / license that was assigned from the Land Authority for Wales and will expire 4th November 2015 and that this lease / license provides the Council with authority to issue sub-license for surface water leisure activities as was envisaged at the time of the original regeneration of the area in the early 1980s. Advice is provided on maintenance responsibilities, noting that the Council has had to deal with a large number of complaints in relation to Bute East Dock, particularly over surface water litter and monitoring and managing water quality. It is noted that negotiations with ABP would need to take place to renew the license / lease if the application is successful, to accommodate the facility and resolving the management of surface water litter and water quality. If approved, Strategic Estates believe that the proposal will, in principle, make better use of the water as was originally conceived, provide the citizens of Cardiff with a new leisure facility, create jobs, provide an additional income stream and result in better cleansing and management of the dock and its environs. Drainage Services note that there are no drainage issues to comment on as the proposal is looking to make use of existing services. The Harbour Authority advise that they have no comments to make as the area lies outside their jurisdiction. The Councils Access Officer and the Chief Officer Projects, Design and Development have not responded.

5.16

5.17

5.18

5.19

5.20

31

6. 6.1 6.2

EXTERNAL CONSULTEE RESPONSES Welsh Water has no comments. The Environment Agency provided the following initial comments: Flood Risk risk could be acceptable subject to the developer being made aware of the flood risks Drainage recommends drainage conditions to prevent pollution from the car park and given lack of details for proposed toilets Fisheries effect on fish is likely to be minor, but the scheme will almost certainly affect angling. Discussions should take place with ABP who own the fishing rights. Waste Management the site has issues with large amounts of fly tipping and the EA advise that all fly tipping be removed from site prior to development. Advice for the Applicant is provided in relation to waste materials.

6.3

The EA provided the following new comments on the amended plans: Water Quality it is useful to understand the input of contamination from the mains sources, but be aware there may be other smaller discharges into the dock via, for example, drainage from highways and residential development. It is recommended that the Authority consider designating the dock as a bathing water if it is to be regularly used for water sports this is a suggestion only not a requirement. Biodiversity the otter survey results show otter are not present and the EA have no further comments or concerns from a biodiversity perspective. Blue Green Algae Information is provided on incidences of blue green algae blooms, notably in 1999 and 2000 when the warning threshold was exceeded and was regarded as a public health risk. It is recommended that colleagues in Environmental Health are consulted to understand how to manage and mitigate the risks and that incidents of blue-green algae be reported to the EA.

6.4

Associated British Ports initially noted that they are aware of the proposal, that the Council has responsibility for the management of the water area of the dock, but that ABPs consent would be required as freeholder and no formal approach has been received from the Applicant and that they are not able to comment at this stage, other than to urge the applicant to contact ABP. It is noted that there are a number of matters which ABP would wish to discuss from a safety, environmental, engineering and legal perspective, for example. In January 2013, ABP advised that: they met with the Applicant and Cardiff Council Estates, they note that the intention for leisure uses on the dock water dates back to the development of the area in the 1980s,

32

there are a number of management issues relating to the dock and its surrounds, they understand that the proposal is likely to include improvements to the public realm in the vicinity and that they are, therefore, minded to support the application. 6.5 South Wales Police have no objection, but ask that the following points be given due consideration: the rescue vessel be adequately secured to prevent unauthorised use, the CCTV system to cover the boat docking area, and the pylon anchor points to be constructed in such a way as to eliminate the risk of unauthorised persons climbing or scaling the cable. Western Power Distribution provide a plan showing of and advice relating to existing WPD electricity / surf telecom apparatus in the vicinity of the site, a copy of which has been sent to the Agent. REPRESENTATIONS 843 neighbouring residents and occupiers were consulted, and the application advertised by means of a press and 15 site notices. 93 letters of have been received in response to the application, as originally submitted, from the owner/occupier of 39 Water Quarters, 56 Picton Rd, 57 Silver Birch Close, 77 Corvette Court, 90 Shakespeare Av, Bute Building King Edward VII Av (x2), 2 Kirby Court (x2), 21 Roxby Court, 11 Blake Court, 20, 70, 168, 174 (in capacity as a director of Waterquarter Management Company and expressing the views of the board of 7 Directors and believing they act in the interests of all 198 apartments x5), 193, 235 Galleon Way, 4 Windlass Court, 30 City Wharf, 6, 70 (x2) Schooner Way, 3 Jellicoe Court (x2), 2A Celebrity Drive, 172 Adventurers Quay, 6 Windglass Court, 2, 4 Earl Cunningham Court, 42 Spillers and Bakers, 29 City Wharf, 1 Anson Court (x2),149 Galleon Way, 2, 4 Jellicoe Court, 50 Tyndall St, 73, 117 Galleon Way, Flat 2 Keyes Court, 32 Llansannor Drive, 3, 3 & 4, 5, 8, 10, 20, 21, 25, 27, 30 (x4), 54, 79, 84, 89, 106, 108, 111 (x2), 165 Henke Court (x2), 40 Rigarossa Henke Court (x2), 42 Quayside Block - Henke Court, undisclosed no. Henke Court (x4), undisclosed no. Blake Court, undisclosed no. The Waterquarter, undisclosed address Atlantic Wharf, undisclosed no. York Court (x3), undisclosed no. Jellicoe Court (x3), a business in Beaufort Court, an occupier of County Hall (x3), 4 x address withheld, which raised the following issues and objections: i. ii. Inappropriate development in this location, better suited to Cardiff Bay and the International Sports Village Harmful environmental impact, with a full EIA and marine geophysical survey required and likely offences under the Wildlife and Countryside Act 1981 Harm to quiet enjoyment of the dock and impact on other leisure uses and users, with insufficient information to assess impact

6.6

7. 7.1

iii.

33

iv. v.

vi. vii. viii.

ix. x.

xi. xii.

xiii.

xiv. xv. xvi.

xvii.

Need for the development to be considered as part of a larger overall plan for the dock Harm to views, visual amenity and historic features of the dock, with particular concerns over the inaccurate DAS assessment, size of the course, the impact when closed up, the design of starting platform and potential clutter. Objection to the detailed positioning of the course, rather than the principle. Need for all equipment to be removed and the site restored to its previous state in the event the business fails Harm to quality of life and amenities of adjoining residents and occupiers, including visual disturbance Noise disturbance, including from equipment, PA system, motor boats, users and spectators, with various criticisms of the noise assessment, particularly in not accounting for noise from people, the PA or motor boats, and concerns that the background noise level is an unfair baseline and the assessment only based on one background noise level assessment Harm to privacy from overlooking Increased traffic and parking problems, pedestrian congestion, and risks to highway safety - from new developments, illegal parking, driver distraction, and existing poor access, with concern that the shared parking spaces may not be available Impact on Wales Coastal Path Harm to health and safety of users, from the presence of rats, needles and toxic algae, the risk of leptospirosis, aural problems and enteric diseases, with the water exit platforms likely to encourage unauthorised swimming, concern that riders would collide with the waters edge and the need for a proper risk assessment on water quality and for the Applicant to accept full responsibility in criminal and civil law Increased litter problems, noting that there are already disputes about who is responsible for clearing the dock of rubbish and that local volunteer groups are forced to organise clean ups Lack of provision for toilets Impact on property prices and saleability Inadequate consultation by the Applicant in only consulting related business partners. The application site abuts land leased to Waterquarter Management Co., which owns land right up to the edge of the Dock no conversations have taken place between the Agent and Waterquarter Management Co. The Council should have consulted the owners, as many apartments are tenanted, with landlords not having had the chance to comment. Other criticisms of the DAS, with no reference paragraph 7.4.6 of the Local Plan, in incorrectly stating that only Henke Court would be affected, that power boats use the dock, that the pub is poorly patronised, and that benefits to public safety and crime reduction are unproven

34

xviii. xix. xx. xxi. xxii. xxiii. xxiv. 7.2

The Operational Plan notes that in later years it is proposed to have a walkway across the dock, with further details requested There is no need for the facility, no suitable alternative sites have been assessed and the facility would not be unique in Wales The reasons for refusing a similar planning application (97/247c) remain relevant today Poor quality drawings and lack of illustration of the north view looking from the Waterquarter and no plans of supporting facilities Query as to how the proposal even can be entertained Increase in anti-social behaviour Concern comments have not been made available on-line.

Ten letters of support have been received from the owner/occupiers of 88 Schooner Way, FF Flat 7 Morlais St (x2), undisclosed house number Blake Court , Unit 4 Court A Atlantic Wharf (x2) and the British Water Ski and Wakeboard (BWSW - the UK governing body of water skiing and wakeboarding), the Penarth (Wales) Water Ski Club, the president of the Kitesurf and Wakeboarding Society for Cardiff University, the Waterfront Partners Cardiff Bay, which raised the following points: The proposal would meet an identified strategic need for additional cable tow ski facilities in Wales, with the nearest facility being in the Cotswolds, to be benefit of beginners and elite users, the citys leisure/sporting offer, local businesses and the economy, with potential for events and competitions and cable wakeboarding on the short list for inclusion in the 2020 Olympics and reflecting Cardiffs title of European Capital of Sport 2014 xxvi. Cable tow facilities have encouraged a fast growing youth following, providing affordable exercise, fitness and training for young people xxvii. The proposal would ensure the daily availability of facilities due to its sheltered and accessible position. It is noted that skiing in the Bay is reliant on favourable wind and surface water conditions, with sessions abandoned when wind strength provides challenging conditions, leading to disruption and loss of revenue to clubs and surrounding businesses, with users travelling to Cirencester and Dachet in England to use other cable ski systems. It is also noted that boat based wakeboarding on offer is through Penarth Ski Club, but costs are too high and only allow for one user at a time. xxviii. Cable tow facilities represent an affordable and accessible form of waterskiing and wakeboarding, and is non-polluting, quiet with minimal environmental and acceptable noise impact and is supported by the EA xxix. BWSW believe the facility will meet BWSW kite mark standards and request a planning condition to require the site to gain BWSW accreditation to ensure standards of provision xxx. Beneficial use of an under used and neglected resource, with the facility only using part of the dock xxv.

35

xxxi.

xxxii. xxxiii. xxxiv.

xxxv. xxxvi.

limited impact on anglers, who tend to fish at night, with benefits through oxygenation of the water and help eliminate algae, to the benefit of wildlife and fish reduction in anti-social behaviour upkeep of walkways, lightings and railings welcomed the area appears poorly used and maintained, with a litter problem and the proposal will result in improved maintenance of the dock, with proposals for the removal of litter and measures to make the area safer water quality appears satisfactory from submitted information no significant impact on traffic and parking, as the pub car park is underused.

7.3

Following consultation on amended plans and additional information (letters dated 21/08/2012), 19 letters of objection have been received from the owner / occupier of 2 Kirkby Court (x2), 6 Schooner Way, 49 Adventurers Quay, 70, 73, 149 Galleon Way, 2 Rigarossa Quayside, 54 (x2), 79, 108 Henke Court, 42 Quayside Court, 2 Keyes Court, 7 Blake Court and three addresses withheld. These repeat objections initially raised, and the following new objections: xxxvii. The amended plans and additional information do not address the objections and the differences have not been highlighted making assessment difficult xxxviii. Other wakeboarding sites in the UK are situated in lakes in country parks and not in residential areas xxxix. Significant weight should be given to local opposition xl. The Boat Shed gym is popular and would be a loss.

7.4

Following consultation on amended plans and additional information received, one letter of support has been received from the owner / occupier of 59 Henke Court. No new points were raised. Six objections from the owner / occupier of 49 Adventurers Quay, 79 Henke Court and an owner / occupier of an unidentified apartment in Jellicoe Court (x2) and Henke Court, and the Director of the Waterquarter Management Company on behalf of the majority of residents (198 in total) were reported to 5 December Planning Committee as written and verbal late representations. Some report objections previously raised. The following new objections were raised: xli. Shocked that Planning Committee are to consider the application and concern that additional information has been submitted without consultation Concern that application is set for green light, despite objections, that Cllr Ahmed whilst on Planning Committee and unable to contact residents - still has a responsibility towards residents and concern over

7.5

xlii.

36

lack of consideration shown. Members urged to vote with rationality and conscience xliii. Concern that residents unaware that the application is going to Planning Committee 5/12/12 website just says pending xliv. Request for advice as to what avenues are available to residents to appeal xlv. Concern that there is nothing temporary about the recommended five year temporary consent xlvi. Concern that residents could not have envisaged such a use xlvii. Flats purchased as homes and concern that area will be torn apart xlviii. One of the pylons is sited on land with permission for a caf/crche. Questions if the pylon will be repositioned and if this change will be properly and fairly scrutinised by the public. xlix. Independence of the sound report questioned given it was paid for by Applicant l. Impact on future proposals for the Bay. Can do better for Cardiff Bay. 7.6 Five letters of objection were received since 5 December Planning Committee and in response to the amended plans submitted 3 December 2012 from the owner / occupiers of 42 Rigarossa Quayside, 66 Schooner Way, 108 Henke Court, an unidentified flat in Henke Court and the owner of land relating to application 12/380DCI. Some report objections previously raised and noted above. The following new objections were raised: li. Query as to arrangements for Committee site visit, including whether residents can attend and whether the Committee will visit their apartment. Concerned not received notice of site visit and concern that residents may not be back from Xmas visits. The owner of land relating to application 12/380 (from which the pylon anchor will now be relocated to a new water based location within the dock) notes that they were not served notice on by the Applicant and questions whether the application was valid at the time of registration, and objects on grounds that the proposal would prevent implementation of application 12/380DCI. Objects on grounds of visual impact, disturbance, noise, traffic and environmental impact.

lii.

7.7

A petition in support of the proposal was submitted by the Agent 12 November 2012 with 218 entries. The Agent is not afforded a right to speak as the petition due to the lack of signatures or postal addresses. Cllr Cook objects to the application, as originally submitted, on grounds of harm to bird and aquatic life in the dock and lack of assessment of impact on wildlife, and re-states his objection to the amended plans.

7.8

37

7.9

Eluned Parrott AM objects to the application on grounds of unacceptable noise and visual impact, increase in traffic, congestion and parking problems, and harmful effect on wildlife. The Local Member was consulted and no representations were received. Six letters of objection from the owner/ occupiers of 7, 108 Henke Court, 42 Rigarossa Quayside, 3 Jellicoe Court, two no. unidentified flats in Henke Court and five letters of objection from the owner/occupiers of 12, 54, 79 and 108 Henke Court and an unidentified address were sent to Members of Planning Committee and were reported to January Planning Committee as written and verbal late representations. The following new objections are raised: liii. Concern over handling of the application - that it is being rushed through, is undemocratic, that correct legal /consultation procedures have not been followed and concern over flow of information with residents not informed of Committee meeting or site visit, concern over choice of site visit date, concern over handling of site visit. Questions appeal procedures, no of responses to consultation and whether responses would be taken into consideration. Unfairness of lack of 3rd party rights to appeal. Request for a reduction in Council Tax if granted. A similar proposal was rejected in 1997 and reasons for refusal seem as valid today More details requested on the s106 Agreement, with belief stated that there must be a reason why the Council has u-turned and question as whether the 3120 is sufficient Installations in Royal Victoria Dock are failing to make money and are left abandoned. Harm to quality of life of the retired community. A survey of nesting sites should be undertaken prior to construction and pontoon positions adjusted as necessary. All wildlife habitat removed will need to be replanted elsewhere and its use for nesting encouraged by the Applicant via new nesting sites and seasonal ecological surveys. Concerned as to how site has been assessed for hazards, engineering constraints and environmental concerns. A professional survey is needed to ensure engineering works, insurance and the health and safety of riders. Responsibility for the maintenance and insurance aspects of the docks needs to be agreed. Concerns also raised about longer term liabilities. Project has been poorly thought through.

7.10 7.11

liv. lv.

lvi. lvii. lviii.

lix.

38

lx.

lxi. lxii.

Concerns over water quality and how long the applicant can afford to run the site in the event of prohibitive water quality, leading to concerns that the ugly installations could be left unused. impact on construction of further flats between Henke Court and County Hall view that underlying reason the application is recommended for approval is due to ongoing dispute over responsibility for dock maintenance between the Council and ABP and the proposals aim to maintain a section of the dock and save the Council maintenance costs. Concern that Applicant will look to do the minimum necessary in terms of maintenance and that the proposal is not the answer to maintaining Atlantic Wharf.

7.12

Ten letters of objection were received since 9 January Planning Committee and in response to the amended plans submitted 21 January 2013 from the owner / occupiers of 6 Schooner Way, 1 Anson Court, 6 Windlass Court and 40, 79, 83, 108, 151 Henke Court, 2 Huron Crescent and unidentified number Henke Court. One letter of both support and objection from the owner/occupiers of an unidentified address were sent to Members of Planning Committee and forwarded to the case officer. Some report objections previously raised and noted above. The following new objections / matters are raised: lxiii. lxiv. lxv. lxvi. Amendments do not address concerns raised objections remain Request for clarification about the status of the application There is no view to and from Henke Court and the Holiday Inn The noise from the road and docks would not drown out noise from the wakeboarding in the evening and weekend when traffic levels drop, and screams would be more intrusive lxvii. Henke Court and other developments were not built when the previous application was refused Three letters of support were received since 9 January Planning Committee and in response to the amended plans submitted 21 January 2013 from the owner / occupiers of 174 Galleon Way (x2) and an unspecified no Amity Court. Some report matters previously raised and noted above. The following new matters are raised: lxviii. This is what living in a city centre environment is all about lxix. Minimal noise impact - site is not a quiet and tranquil environment given steel works and dual carriageway lxx. Low environmental impact wildlife more at threat from fishing and rubbish than the proposal, algal blooms can be controlled lxxi. Superb and exciting development in a sustainable location

7.13

39

8. 8.1

ANALYSIS The main issues are: (i) the principle of the development The dock is identified as being disused and does not fall within the area designated as operational docks on the Local Plan Proposals Map. Moreover, the site appears as white land on the Proposals Map, meaning that it is not allocated for any particular land use, nor is any existing use afforded policy protection. Policy 45 identifies that proposals for the development of sport, recreation and leisure facilities will be favoured in other locations if there is no need to preserve the site for its existing or allocated use, subject to detailed considerations, including whether the proposal would harm the vitality and viability of a principal business area or an approved urban regeneration scheme. The proposal would be well located in an other location, as assessed under policy 45 of the Local Plan, immediately adjacent to the Inner Harbour Principal Business Area, as defined on the Local Plan Proposals map, and between the Bay waterfront area and the core of the City Centre. It is also situated within the established City Centre Strategy (CCS) boundary, within the Butetown City Centre Strategy area. Strategic CCS objectives for the Butetown area include to provide significantly improved community facilities in the area, to improve the quality and the community use of public open spaces and the public realm in the area and to reclaim water frontages and realise their full potential for development, recreation and nature conservation. Strategic CCS Leisure and Tourism objectives include to raise Cardiffs profile at the regional, national and international level as a place to live, work, shop, visit and invest and to promote leisure uses .. whilst minimising any harmful social, economic and environmental effects. The proposal would accord with the above policy and City Centre Strategy objectives. It would help realise the potential of the dock as a leisure resource, would provide a unique cable tow wakeboarding and waterskiing facility in Wales, which would contribute to Cardiff and the Bays leisure and sporting offer, and its development as a major tourism and sporting destination. The proposal would not harm the vitality and viability of a principle business area or approved urban regeneration scheme. In considering national policy on leisure, set out in Planning Policy Wales, and the relevance of considerations of need and the sequential approach to site selection, it is noted that the guidance specifically relates to retail, leisure or other uses best located in a town centre (para 10.3.1). The proposed facility could not be located within the city centre Principal Business Area, and the proposed location is considered acceptable, in terms of the sequential approach, being well located immediately adjacent to the Inner Harbour

8.2

8.3

8.4

8.5

40

Principal Business Area and within the City Centre Strategy Area. Taking the above matters into consideration, the proposed use of the dock for wakeboarding and waterskiing would be acceptable in land use policy terms. Whilst the proposed use would rely on the availability of the Boat Shed, which would, in turn, involve the loss of the existing gym facility based in the Boat Shed, a refusal on such grounds could not be sustained. Matters of detail are considered below. (ii) impact on visual amenity, and listed buildings and their setting The proposal involves erecting a number of structures on site, including a cable tow system, five pylons, 10 supporting pylons, a start platform, 21 no water exit platforms and two boat pick up platforms. These are utilitarian and functional in nature, simple and lightweight in form, in an appropriate colour and of an appropriate material and of an acceptable height. Additional information (21 January 2013) advises that the pylons would be of a lightweight spaceframe-type construction and that the cables would be 1cm thick. No new buildings are proposed, with the existing Boat Shed building providing supporting user and equipment storage facilities. The Agent has confirmed that the cable system would be partially decommissioned during winterisation, as detailed above to include the removal of all surface-water based plant (including all five pylons), and that the structures can be removed from the site with relative ease in the event that the business closes permanently. A new condition is recommended to require the total removal of all above surface waterbased plant during the non-operational season. Whilst the structures would be visible from both long and close views and the pylons 1.2 3m higher than those of the refused application 97/247C, officers are of the view that the appearance of structures would not be out of keeping with the aesthetic of the former dock, that the height of the structures would be acceptable, taking into consideration the height and massing of the surrounding buildings and the crane positioned on the eastern edge of the dock, and that the proposal would not be visually intrusive, would not detract from the open views of the Dock or the setting of the listed buildings adjacent to the Dock, subject to the recommended conditions. Assessed in relation to Henke Court, the SW pylon (pylon 1) would emerge from the water approx 25m from Henke Court and would rise to approx 11.8m above the water level shown, at a distance of approx 30m from Henke Court. The nearest ground based pylon anchor (supporting the pylon) would be positioned approx 5m from Henke Court and would be approx 3.3m high. Henke court has a 5 / 7 storey frontage to the dock edge. Nearest to the position of the SW pylon, Henke Court has an eaves height of approx 15.2m above ground level and a ridge height of approx 18.6m. It rises to a max ridge height of 22.2m.

8.6

8.7

41

8.8

It is also noted that the agent has agreed to repair and upgrade a section of the highway north of County hall and to general maintenance of the area, which will enhance the appearance of the area. A condition is recommended to require further details of the starting platform, including any operator canopy, to be submitted to ensure its appearance is acceptable. Conditions are also recommended to control how the equipment would be managed and stored during operation and winterisation, to avoid clutter on site, and to require the land to be restored to its former condition when the operation ceases. A condition is also recommended to require the supporting facilities proposed within the Boat Shed to be provided before the use commences, to avoid any potential for partial implementation without the provision of the supporting facilities. (iii) whether the proposal would make satisfactory provision for access, parking and circulation The Operational Manager Transportation has no objection, subject to the recommended conditions, advisory notices and S106 matters. The proposal would not have an unacceptable impact on moving or parked traffic, taking into consideration the following: that the facility is located in a sustainable transport location - within walking distance of bus stops, and is accessible by foot and cycle, that users of the facility may hire all equipment and so avoid having to travel by car, the proposed use of 18 no. dedicated car parking spaces in The Wharf car park and associated condition to require their provision, numbers of staff and users, and the agreed s106 contribution towards the assessment of the requirement for residential parking and/ or the extension of existing parking restrictions, as noted in Section 9. The Applicant has also agreed to the undertake repairs to the section of the footway between the Holiday Inn and County Hall, between the Boat shed and proposed start platform, and to provide a s106 contribution towards the assessment of the requirement for residential parking and/ or the extension of existing parking restrictions, as noted in Section 9. A condition and advisory notices are also recommended to ensure that there would not be any pedestrian or vehicular conflict with the supporting pylons. Notwithstanding the recommendation of the Operational Manager, Transportation, it would be unreasonable to impose a condition to require the applicant to secure the S178 licence under the Highways Act 1980 and this is the subject of an advisory notice. Taking into consideration the recommended conditions, there would not be any unacceptable impact on the Wales Coastal Path. Whilst application 97/247C was refused on parking grounds, it is noted that this application was determined on the basis of 1993 parking guidelines, which required a minimum level of parking to be provided with most forms of development and that this application has been assessed on the basis of the 2010 guidelines, which do not require a minimum level of car parking provision within the City Centre and Bay Core Area. The Operational

8.9

8.10

42

Manager Transportation has advised that any objection on parking grounds could not be sustained. whether the proposal would harm the living conditions of neighbouring occupiers The proposal would not give rise to a loss of privacy from overlooking or visual disturbance for residents living in the immediate area, taking into consideration the height of the riders heads above the water surface, the height of the nearest terrace / opening above ground level (approx 2.25m), and the separation distances involved. Pollution Control has considered the potential for the facility to give rise to noise disturbance and has no objection. Conditions are recommended to control the opening hours, months of operation, sound proofing of the compressor and plant noise, and to prevent the playing of amplified music through the PA system. Whilst it is considered that there is insufficient grounds to support a refusal of the application on grounds of noise impact, a temporary five year consent is recommended to allow for a trial run of the development and a condition recommended to require the noise impact to be comprehensively assessed during operation, based on an appropriate noise assessment to be submitted by the Applicant at the relevant time for resubmission. It is considered that this would accord with advice in paragraph 111 of Circular 35/95, taking into consideration the unusual nature of the use. It would allow the real noise impact to be assessed, allowing the authority to be sure of its effect. A five year period is recommended having regard to the capital expenditure necessary to carry out the development. The standard statutory time limit condition is also recommended to require that the development be begun within five years of the date of the planning permission. The proposal would not unacceptably impede the activities of other dock users, subject to the recommended conditions and taking into consideration the size of the dock and area remaining beyond the course. (iv) water quality Water quality data, an analysis of the results and a Water Quality Management Statement has been submitted, and the Councils Public Protection service, Pollution Control and the Environment Agency have not raised any objections on grounds of water quality. It is noted that the Applicant will have responsibilities under the Health and Safety at Work Act 1974 to protect the health, safety and welfare of his customers and employees, and that the Council have additional powers under the Health Protection Regulations 2010. It is considered that these legislative regimes would be sufficient to manage the identified risks and that a refusal could not be justified on grounds of water quality. (iii)

8.11

8.12

8.13

8.14

43

8.15

(v) impact on biodiversity The impact of the proposal on biodiversity, including wildlife, birdlife and fish, would be acceptable. Further to the submission of the otter and mink survey and amended plans/ additional information, the Councils ecologist has raised no objections, subject to an advisory notice relating to the legal protection surrounding wild birds and their nests. The EA has confirmed they have no concerns from a biodiversity perspective. The proposal was screened with regard to the need for the preparation of an Environmental Statement to accompany the application, in accordance with the Town and Country Planning (Environmental Impact Assessment) (England and Wales) Regulations 1999 and it was concluded that the application does not give rise to such a need. Whether the proposal provides adequate facilities for the storage of waste and materials for recycling. A condition is recommended to require details of refuse management facilities. (vii) Accessibility and Equalities Impact Assessment The Applicant has taken advice from the British Disabled Waterski and Wakeboard Association (BDWSA) and confirms that they would have specifically adapted equipment, such as chair wakeboards to allow use by disabled users. It is noted that BDWSA members currently use the cable system in Datchet with success and would visit the site before opening to the public to assess and advise on suitable use by their members. A condition is recommended to require details to be submitted to demonstrate that the facility would cater for the needs of disabled users. There would be ramped access down to the water from the dock side, and the Applicant proposes to repair the pathway between the Boat Shed and the start platform, and between the Holiday Inn and County Hall. Taking the above into consideration, the proposal would have no apparent abnormal differential impact on relevant equality strands. (viii) Other Issues The proposal would make use of existing facilities in the area, including the restaurant facilities at Wharf, and contribute to the local economy and employment. Responses to consultation The responses to consultation are duly noted. Many of the objections received related to the key issues considered above, and I would comment as follows in relation to the issues not addressed above: (vi)

8.16

8.17

8.18

8.19

44

Each application should be determined on its individual merits and the Council has an obligation to determine the application before it. The reasons for refusing application 97/247C are set out in the Planning Committee report and these matters are addressed in the Analysis section of the report. The concerns over the DAS are noted. Toilets and changing facilities would be provided within the Boat Shed, and a condition is recommended to ensure the provision of various supporting facilities. The impact on the health and safety of users, impact on property prices and saleability are not material planning considerations. There is no legal requirement for the Applicant to consult third parties and the Council have met the statutory requirements in respect of publicity. The application does not include a proposal for walkway across the dock - any such proposal would need to be the subject of a new planning application. The drawings submitted are sufficient to allow the impact of the proposal to be considered. An illustration of the north view from the Waterquarter has been submitted as additional information. The proposal would not result in an increase in anti-social behaviour, taking into consideration the recommended conditions. A condition requiring that the facility meet BWSW kite mark standards would not meet the established tests for conditions set out in Circular 35/95. The drainage condition recommended by the EA is not necessary as the proposal would make use of existing services and parking. It is noted that wakeboarding facilities are not just located in country parks and that there is a cable tow wakeboarding facility on the western end of the Royal Victoria Dock, London. A mix of development surrounds the site, including a cluster of residential towers, a hotel, the Excel centre, a small restaurant, studios and a residential development. The issues of water quality, contamination and risks to health and safety are considered in the report. Responsibility for wider dock maintenance, insurance aspects and liabilities is not a planning matter. The Local Planning Authoritys role is to consider whether the application meets national and local planning policy and not to determine whether any approval can actually be implemented. A condition is recommended to deal with decommissioning. Over 800 neighbouring residents and occupiers were initially consulted (01/05/2012), and a press notice and 15 site notices displayed. Letters to over 800 neighbouring residents and occupiers and other third parties who had made representations were subsequently sent out 21/08/201 in respect of amended plans and additional information (August 2012). Further amended plans were received 3rd December 2012 in respect of a proposal to relocate one of the pylon anchors and details of the consultation are set out in para 1.2 above. The Council has fulfilled their statutory obligations in respect of publicity for planning applications as set out in Circular 15/92, and it is noted that there is no statutory requirement to consult on amended plans/ additional information. Planning Committee reports are available on the Councils

45

website three working days before Committee. There is no legal requirement to keep objectors up to date on the progress of a planning application. However, the Councils website, in noting decision pending, has a tab on the same screen view listing important dates, including the relevant Planning Committee date. All those making representations and providing an address were advised of the site visit and the associated code of practice. The purpose of the site visit is to enable Councillors to see the site to enable them to consider and determine the application, as set out in the Code of Practice for Site Visits. It is not an opportunity for consultation. The Code of Practice for Site Visits states that representations may not be made to Councillors at the meeting, but that matters of fact can be raised. The residents request that Planning Committee visit their apartment was forwarded to Democratic Services and raised with the Chair of Planning Committee. There is no third party right to appeal and decisions can be challenged in the High Court. The local media have reported on the recommendation set out in the 5 December 2012. The Council are not trying to rush the application through. There is a statutory duty for local authorities to determine planning applications within 8 weeks, although Planning Policy Wales notes that this can be extended with the agreement of the applicant and that some large or complex proposals may take longer (paras 1.3.7 8). The application was registered 23/04/2012 and has been delayed well beyond the 8 week period whilst additional information and amended plans have been requested/ received. Officers consider that sufficient information is now available to determine the application. A S106 Agreement has not been drawn up, only recommended. The key elements of the recommended agreement are set out in section 9 of the Committee report. The pylon anchor originally proposed on land relating to application 12/380 has been moved to a new location within the dock and so will not prevent the implementation of application 12/380DCI. Legal Services have been advised of the landowners question as to whether this is a valid application at the time of registration and any comments will be reported as a late representation. 9. 9.1 CONCLUSION AND S106 MATTERS The proposal is recommended for approval, subject to the recommended conditions - including a five year temporary consent - and persons having a relevant interest in the application site securing a signed Unilateral Undertaking under Section 106 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 encompassing the following matters:

46

That the Applicant would undertake the clearance of undergrowth, reinstatement of the surface, and repair and make operational the lighting on the section of footpath between the Holiday Inn and County Hall, and to repair the footway between the Boat Shed and proposed start platform. The following information has been provided by the Operational Manager, Transportation on the likely costs of works to the footway lighting: It is estimated that 3,200 should be sufficient, as a best estimate, to replace the 6 missing heads on the lighting columns and reconnect the columns, subject to the power supply being intact and the column being serviceable. It is noted that this estimate is not based on any physical inspection of the units, power supply or infrastructure and is not intended to form a quote for the Council to undertake the works. It is also noted that the Council are not proposing to adopt the lighting upon completion of the works. A s106 contribution of 3,120 towards the assessment and implementation of new and revised Traffic Orders as may be required as a consequence of the operation of the development, with the contribution to be used to assess the requirement for resident parking and/or the extension of existing parking restrictions. In view of the unusual nature of the proposal, the s106 Agreement shall be signed within 12 months of the date of Planning Committee, unless otherwise agreed in writing by the Local Planning Authority.

9.2

In addition to the need to secure planning permission, it is noted for information - that the Applicant would also need to secure a number of other consents and permissions in order to operate. This would include agreement from the various landowners to implement the planning permission and undertake associated repairs to the footway and lighting (which do not form part of the adopted public highway). A stopping-up Order under s257 of the Town and Country Planning Act would also be required in respect of any structures situated within the adopted public highway, in addition to a s178 license under the Highways Act 1980 for all overhead cables and other structures that oversail the adopted public highway, as noted above. A license to use the dock for the surface water activity would also be required. The January meeting of Planning Committee deferred the application to enable officers to draft potential reasons for refusal based on nuisance / disturbance and adverse visual impact. The following reasons for refusal are offered: The proposal, by virtue of its scale and nature of operation, would give rise to nuisance and disturbance which would be detrimental to the living conditions of nearby residents, contrary to policy 2.24 and 2.64 of the deposit draft Cardiff Unitary Development Plan and TAN 11: Noise.

9.3

47

The proposal, by reason of its size, siting and design, is considered to be a visually obtrusive form of development which is detrimental to the visual amenities of the area, contrary to policy 11 of the adopted Cardiff Local Plan and policy 2.20 of the deposit draft Cardiff Unitary Development Plan and TAN 12: Design.

48

AMENDED PLAN 12/691/DCI 29/12/2012


49

HARMERS
TOWN PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT CONSULTANTS

Site Layout Plan Cardiff Bay Wakeboarding Bute East Dock, Hemingway Rd, Atlantic Wharf, Cardiff. November 2012. Scale 1: 1250 @ A1 Drwg 5226-001-Rev.1 File ref. 5226
Crown Copyright. All rights reserved Licence No. AR100012518

AMENDED PLAN 12/691/DCI 29/12/2012

ANCHOR 4.2

BOAT PICK UP POINT 5.9 x 1.93m ANCHOR 4.1 ANCHOR 5.1

BOAT PICK UP POINT 5.9 x 1.93m ANCHOR 5.2 START RAMP

CAR PARKING AT THE WHARF PUB 18 SPACES REQUIRED

11 no. EXIT POINTS FLOATING PONTOON TETHERED TO RAILING 3 x 1.5m

10 no. EXIT POINTS FLOATING PONTOON TETHERED TO RAILING 3 x 1.5m

ANCHOR 3.2

ANCHOR 3.1

ANCHOR 1.1 EXISTING FOOTWAY / CYCLEWAY CLEARED AND REPAIRED WITH NEW LANDSCAPING BETWEEN PYLON ANCHORS ANCHOR 1.2 ANCHOR 2.1

ANCHOR 2.2

50

HARMERS
TOWN PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT CONSULTANTS

Pylon Anchor Installation Sections and Cable Clearance Cardiff Bay Wakeboarding Bute East Dock, Hemingway Road, Atlantic Wharf, Cardiff. November 2012. Scale 1: 1250 @ A1 Drwg 5226-002-Rev.1 File ref. 5226
Crown Copyright. All rights reserved Licence No. AR100012518

SCALE 1:100

AMENDED PLAN 12/691/DCI 29/12/2012

51

ADDITIONAL INFORMATION 12/691DCI 11/07/2012

52

53

54

55

56

57

58

59

COMMITTEE DATE: APPLICATION No. ED: APP: TYPE: APPLICANT: LOCATION: PROPOSAL:

13/02/2013 12/1260/DCI PLASNEWYDD APPLICATION DATE: 24/07/2012

Outline Planning Permission

Sennybridge Limited 21-27 CITY ROAD, ROATH, CARDIFF, CF24 3BJ OUTLINE PLANNING FOR THE DEMOLITION OF EXISTING SINGLE STOREY OFFICES AND WORKSHOPS AND THE PROPOSED MIXED USE DEVELOPMENT (RESIDENTIAL/RETAIL) OF THE SITE COMPRISING OF 26NO. APARTMENTS (14NO. 2 BED AND 12NO. 1 BED) GROUND FLOOR RETAIL SPACE AND ASSOCIATED AMENITY SPACE CAR PARKING CYCLE STORE AND BIN STORE ___________________________________________________________________ RECOMMENDATION 1: That, subject to relevant parties entering into a binding legal agreement with the Council under section 106 of The Town and Country Planning Act 1990 in respect of matters detailed in paragraph 8.9 of this report, Outline Planning Permission be GRANTED subject to the following conditions: 1. 2. C01 Statutory Time Limit The consent relates to the application as amended by the revised plans numbered 0400-P03 (ALT), 0400-P04 (ALT), 0400-P05 (ALT), 0400P06 (ALT), 0400-P07 (ALT), 0400-P08 (ALT) & 0400-P09 (ALT) attached to and forming part of this planning application. Reason: The plans amend and form part of the application. E1B Samples of Materials No development shall take place until full details of the site enclosures has been submitted to and approved by the Local Planning Authority. The site enclosures shall be provided in accordance with the approved scheme prior to the development being put into beneficial use. Reason: To ensure that the site is secured by an effective and visually appropriate means of enclosure. A scheme of sound insulation works to the floor/ceiling and party wall structures between the ground & first floor residential units and the ground floor commercial premises shall be submitted to and agreed in writing by the Local Planning Authority, the agreed scheme shall be implemented prior to occupation of the ground and first floor units within the block facing City Road.

3. 4.

5.

60

Reason: To ensure that the amenities of residential occupants are protected. 6. 7. D7G Road Traffic Noise Servicing of the class A1 retail unit(s) shall take place from City Road only. Reason: To ensure that the amenities of residential occupants are protected. Before the flats hereby permitted are brought into beneficial use, the cycle store shown on drawing numbered 0400-P04 (ALT) shall be complete and provided with a roof ready for use to accommodate at least 40 cycles and thereafter retained. Reason: To ensure that adequate provision is made for the secure parking of cycles. Before the flats hereby permitted are brought into beneficial use, the enclosed refuse storage facility shown on drawing numbered 0400-P04 (ALT) shall be complete, ready for use to accommodate six 1100litre bins and three 240litre bins and thereafter retained. Reason: To protect the amenities of the area. No development shall take place until details of the access to the site from Bedford Place have been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. Those details shall be implemented prior to the development being put into beneficial use. Reason: To ensure that the use of the proposed development does not interfere with the safety and free flow of traffic on Bedford Place. Prior to commencement of development a scheme of environmental highway improvements to the footway of City Road and southern end of Bedford Place adjacent to the site, and a programme for its implementation, is to have been submitted to and approved in writing by the LPA. The scheme to include, but not be limited to, the reconstruction/resurfacing of the footways and disused crossovers adjacent to the site; including surfacing, edging, drainage, lining and signing, and Traffic Order modifications required as a result of the development. The scheme to be completed to the satisfaction of the Council in accordance with the approved programme and in any event prior to beneficial occupation of the development. Reason: To ensure the comprehensive improvement of the adjacent highway/footways in the interests of highway and pedestrian safety and to facilitate access to the proposed development. Prior to commencement of development a scheme of construction management shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the LPA, to include (as required) details of construction traffic routes, site hoardings, site access, and wheel washing facilities. The development shall be carried out strictly in accordance with the approved

8.

9.

10.

11.

12.

61

construction management plan. Reason: In the interests of highway safety and public amenity. 13. The first and second floor side facing bathroom windows in the north and south side elevations of block B shall be non opening below a height of 1.8 metres above internal floor level and glazed with obscure glass and thereafter be so maintained. Reason: To ensure that the privacy of adjoining occupiers is protected. E3D Retain Parking Within Site C7Z Contaminated Land Measures D7Z Contaminated materials E7Z Imported Aggregates H7G Plant Noise No development shall take place until ground permeability tests have been undertaken to ascertain whether sustainable drainage techniques can be utilised and a drainage scheme for the disposal of both surface water and foul sewage has been submitted to and approved by the LPA. No part of the development shall be occupied until the scheme is carried out and completed as approved. Reason: To ensure an orderly form of development. The building hereby approved shall meet the BRE Code for Sustainable Homes (Version 3) Level 3, and shall obtain a minimum of 1 credit under Ene 1 (Dwelling Emissions Rate). Reason: To ensure that the development is constructed in accordance with national planning sustainable building standards. Construction for any dwelling hereby permitted shall not begin until an Interim Certificate has been submitted to the Local Planning Authority, certifying that a minimum Code for Sustainable Homes (Version 3) Level 3 and a minimum of 1 credit under Ene 1 (Dwelling Emission Rate) shall be achieved. Reason: To ensure that the development is constructed in accordance with national planning sustainable building standards. Prior to occupation of the individual dwelling(s) hereby permitted a Code for Sustainable Homes (Version 3) Level 3 Final Certificate shall be submitted to the Local Planning Authority, certifying that a minimum Code for Sustainable Homes (Version 3) Level 3 and a minimum of 1 credit under Ene 1 (Dwelling Emissions Rate) has been achieved for the dwelling(s). Reason: To ensure that the development is constructed in accordance with national planning sustainable building standards.

14. 15. 16. 17. 18. 19.

20.

21.

22.

62

RECOMMENDATION 2: The access and highway works conditions and any other works to existing or proposed adopted public highway are to be subject to an agreement under Section 38 and/or Section 278 Highways Act 1980 between the developer and Local Highway Authority. RECOMMENDATION 3: To protect the amenities of occupiers of other premises in the vicinity 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. Further to this the applicant is advised that no noise audible outside the site boundary adjacent to the curtilage of residential property shall be created by construction activities in respect of the implementation of this consent outside the hours of 0800-1800 hours Mondays to Fridays and 0800 - 1300 hours on Saturdays or at any time on Sunday or public holidays. The applicant is also advised to seek approval for any proposed piling operations. RECOMMENDATION 4: The applicant is advised that a commercial contract is required for the collection and disposal of all commercial wastes under section 34 of the Environmental Protection Act 1990, therefore is advised to contact the Commercial Services dept. (tel: 029 2071 7500). 1. 1.1 DESCRIPTION OF PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT The application seeks outline planning permission to redevelop a mainly open site with a mixed use development of residential and retail use, comprising one retail unit, fourteen 2 bedroom apartments and twelve 1 bedroom apartments. The application seeks approval of all reserved matters apart from landscaping details. A similar application for 14 apartments and 4 townhouses was recently granted consent subject to the signing of a legal agreement. The application under consideration differs by introducing apartments to the rear block at the expense of the townhouses. This results in an increase in depth of the rear block by 1m. There are also changes to the proposed elevation design and materials of both blocks. The development would comprise of a four storey block fronting City Road accommodating 14 apartments and a retail unit, and a three storey block at the rear of the site accommodating 12 apartments, both buildings would be flat roofed. The front block (Block A) would be 13.5m high and have a footprint of 21m wide by 23m deep, the first to third floors would be set back from City Road by at least 3.8m. All flats within this block would be single aspect, with an aspect either to the front or to the rear, the smallest flat would have a floor space of 72 square metres. The two flats on the ground floor and the two flats to the front on the first floor would have an external terrace, all other flats within this block would have a recessed balcony of approximately 3 square metres. The flats would be accessed via a central lobby at the rear from Bedford Place, and a lift which would serve all floors. The building would be faced in three

1.2

1.3

1.4

63

shades of buff brick, with dark grey aluminium windows and dark grey steel balcony balustrades. 1.5 The retail unit(s) would have a total floor area of 257 square metres, and would be accessed from City Road only, the front elevation would have four separate entrance doors and two glazed shop front windows. The rear block (Block B) would be 9.5m high and have a footprint of 23.5m wide by 10.7m deep, set back from the rear lane of East Grove by 6m. All flats within this block would be dual aspect, the smallest flat would have a floor space of 46 square metres. The four flats on the ground floor would each have an enclosed private rear garden of 33 square metres. The building would be faced in three shades of buff brick, with dark grey aluminium windows. An 18 space car park would be provided between the proposed buildings, with separate pedestrian and vehicular accesses from Bedford Place, the vehicular access would be secured by a sliding gate. Enclosed bin and cycle storage would be provided within a 21.5m long brick structure adjacent to the north boundary. An amenity area of approximately 100 square metres would be provided between the car park and the front block. The application is supported by a Design and Access Statement and a Sustainability Statement, the pre-assessment estimated rating/score for the proposed development is Code for Sustainable Homes Level 3. The application originally proposed a five storey block of eighteen 2 bed apartments fronting City Road and a four storey block of twelve 2 bedroom apartments at the rear projecting 1m deeper towards the rear boundary. However, the agent was advised that both blocks would be out of context with the surroundings in terms of scale, and the massing of the rear block would result in the rear elevation being unacceptably close to the boundary with rear gardens of residential properties on East Grove. The scheme was subsequently revised as recommended. DESCRIPTION OF SITE Former buildings on the site fronting onto City Road were demolished some years ago, the site is mainly hard surfaced land currently used as a private car park. Along the south side of the site area a series of single storey, flat roofed portable buildings, which are used for car valeting and car spraying. Vehicular access into the site is currently via City Road, there are additional gated accesses from Bedford Place and from the lane behind the site which do not appear to be in regular use. The site lies between two three storey buildings on City Road, occupied by a restaurant on its south side and a shop to its north. The building on the north side frontage has a ridged gable roof and the building to the south is flat roofed. There are residential properties to the north and west sides in Bedford

1.6

1.7

1.8

1.9

2. 2.1

2.2

2.3

64

Place, East Grove, and City Road (Pascall Court), and office and educational premises to the south in The Parade including the twelve storey Coleg Glan Hafren building 40m to the south, on the corner of City Road and The Parade. 3. 3.1 SITE HISTORY 11/872/DCI full planning permission granted (subject to a section 106 legal agreement) for mixed use development comprising fourteen apartments, ground floor retail, four townhouses with associated landscaping/amenity space, car parking, cycle storage and bin storage. 09/575C full planning permission granted (subject to a S106 legal agreement) for residential redevelopment comprising sixteen 2 bed apartments and four 2 bed town houses, with landscaping/amenity space/car parking/cycle shelter/bin storage. 01/157W - planning permission granted for the use of the site as a car park following the demolition of previous buildings, permission was temporary on the advice of the Operational Manager Transportation. POLICY FRAMEWORK The site lies within the City Road Centre as defined by the proposals map of the City of Cardiff Local Plan and the City Road District Centre by the Deposit Unitary Development Plan (October 2003). Relevant National Planning Guidance: Planning Policy Wales (Edition 4, Feb 2011) Planning Policy Wales TAN 12: Design Planning Policy Wales TAN 21: Waste 4.3 Relevant City of Cardiff Local Plan Policies: Policy 11: Design & Aesthetic Quality Policy 12: Energy Efficient Design Policy 17: Parking & Servicing Facilities Policy 18: Provision for cyclists Policy 19: provision for pedestrians Policy 20: Provision for special Needs Groups Policy 31: Residential Open Space Requirement Policy 40: Development in City Road 4.4 Relevant Deposit Unitary Development Plan (October 2003) policies: Policy 2.20: Good Design Policy 2.21: Change of Use or Redevelopment to Residential Use. Policy 2.24: Residential Amenity Policy 2.26: provision of open space, recreation & leisure Policy 2.36: District and Local Centres

3.2

3.3

4. 4.1

4.2

65

Policy 2.53 Conservation Areas Policy 2.55: Public Realm Improvements Policy 2.57: Access, Circulation & Parking Requirements Policy 2.74: Waste Management 4.5 Relevant Supplementary Planning Guidance: Residential Design Guide (March 2008) Energy Efficient Design for New Residential Development (1995) Open Space (March 2008) Waste Collection and Storage Facilities (March 2007) Access, Circulation & Parking Requirements (June 2006) Community Facilities and Residential Development (March 2007) 5. 5.1 INTERNAL CONSULTEE RESPONSES Strategic Planning (Land Use Policy) - the application site falls within City Road, therefore Policy 40 of the City of Cardiff Local Plan applies. Policy 40 favours the development of housing, shops (Class A1) and financial and professional services (A2) in this location, subject to considerations of scale, location, design, amenity and transportation. The application therefore raises no land use policy concerns. Transportation no objection, subject to conditions; to require the car and cycle parking spaces to be provided and retained; a scheme of construction management to be submitted; details of the vehicular access from Bedford Place to be agreed; and a scheme of environmental highway improvements to the footway of City Road and southern end of Bedford Place to be agreed. In addition a Section 106 contribution is requested to secure a financial contribution of 6,240 towards public transport infrastructure improvements within the surrounding area of City Road, namely the provision of 2 CCTV anti-crime cameras in the existing bus stops in the vicinity of the site. An additional advisory recommendation is requested to remind the developer that any works to existing or proposed adopted public highways are to be subject to an agreement under Section 38 and/or Section 278 Highways Act 1980 between the developer and Local Highway Authority. Drainage - The applicant proposes to discharge surface / roof water run off from the proposed development to a 'Main' or Public Sewer but although the site layout indicates that there will be insufficient space on the site to safely locate any soakaways consideration can still be given to the use of permeable paving for draining new non-roof areas as well as other SUDS methods that could reduce surface water run off. Records held by the authority indicate the possibility that public sewers are present within the site curtilage. Therefore the applicant is strongly advised to contact Welsh Water to confirm whether this is the case and if so what constraints, which may influence the applicants proposals, attach to the public sewers. Parks Services - The Councils Supplementary Planning Guidance - Open Space requires provision of a satisfactory level and standard of open space

5.2

5.3

5.4

66

on all new housing developments, or an off-site contribution towards existing open space for smaller scale developments where new on-site provision is not applicable. As no public open space is being provided on-site, the developers will be required to make a financial contribution towards the provision of open space off-site, or the improvement (including design and maintenance) of existing open space in the locality. Based on the information given, allowing for an increased occupancy rate of 42.9, the contribution will be 35,815. In the event that the Council is minded to approve the application, it will be necessary for the applicant and the Council to enter into a Section 106 Agreement to secure payment of the contribution. 5.5 Pollution Control request conditions to ensure: a scheme of contamination investigation is carried out; imported soils/aggregates are assessed for contaminants; a scheme of sound insulation works between the commercial units/residential units is agreed and a scheme sound insulation measures to windows facing City Road. Further conditions are requested to control any plant noise output; to control opening hours and delivery times of the commercial units; to restrict takeaway sales and to request details of any commercial kitchen extraction systems. An advisory note is also recommended relating to construction site noise. Waste Management the domestic bin storage area indicated within current site plans is acceptable, however access paths must be at least 1.5m in width and level. The bin store must be large enough to accommodate six 1100litre bins for general waste and dry recyclables and three 240litre bins for food waste. Waste must be presented to the entrance for collection. Current site plans make no reference to the storage and collection of waste and recycling for the commercial unit. A location for the storage of waste and recycling, and presentation for collection must be included on site plans, and retained for future use. Waste must not be stored on the highway and a commercial contract is required for the collection and disposal of all commercial waste. Neighbourhood Renewal (Housing Strategy) Cardiff has a high housing need for affordable housing in this area of the City. Data available from the Councils current housing waiting list (September 2012) indicates there are 1,735 households waiting for a property in Plasnewydd, with only 9 properties becoming available in the last 12 months. Due to its sustainable location, with easy access (including being within walking distance) to the city centre and to local amenities and facilities, this site is suitable for affordable housing. A 40% affordable housing contribution was originally sought, which is in-line with the interim planning policy target in the Affordable Housing Delivery Statement (AHDS), with the mix to be largely representative of the development as a whole. However, having considered fully the economic viability of this proposed scheme internally with the Councils Valuation Department, Housing Strategy accept that in the current market conditions it only viable for the scheme to provide an affordable housing contribution of 161,394. Given the size and design of the proposed scheme, the practicality of managing and maintaining a small number of affordable housing units on-site maybe

5.6

5.7

67

compromised, and could affect the overall sustainability of the scheme. Therefore, it is accepted there is justification for the affordable housing to be delivered in the form of a financial contribution. 5.8 Neighbourhood Regeneration - Supplementary Planning Guidance (SPG) on Community Facilities and Residential Development states that the Council will seek a financial contribution for improvements to existing community facilities or the provision of additional community facilities on all significant developments because the increased population will result in increased demand for local community facilities. If no on-site provision is proposed, a financial contribution is sought on residential developments containing 25 or more new dwellings including student accommodation. As there are no onsite communal facilities provided in the proposed development, an off site contribution of 15,845 is requested in line with the formula set out in the SPG (inclusive of 4% Development Management admin fee). There are several community facilities located within close proximity to the site and these are likely to experience an added pressure as a result of the new population. It is envisaged that a forthcoming community facilities contribution would be directed towards these facilities: Plasnewydd Community Hall, located within 100m of the proposed development. It has a sports hall, badminton courts and a function and committee room, and a range of sporting and social activities take place. It is likely that a financial contribution would be used to upgrade sporting and community facilities in the hall. City Road District Shopping Centre, this district centre has been identified as an area where improvements to the public realm would significantly improve the vitality and aesthetic quality of the area, i.e. improving street furniture or public open spaces, for the benefit of local residents. 6. 6.1 6.2 EXTERNAL CONSULTEE RESPONSES Welsh Water no comments received. The South Wales Police Crime Prevention Design Advisor has commented that City Road is an area with relatively high levels of crime and disorder. South Wales Police have no objection to this development but ask that the following issues be taken into consideration in relation to any development to ensure that the development addresses community safety issues: 1) 2) 3) All Flats have audio visual access control features, to prevent unauthorised access burglary and theft. All individual flat entrance doors are constructed to Pas 23/24 standards, to prevent burglary. All communal corridors are constructed and painted to ensure lighting levels are maximised and lighting switches on automatically when persons present, to enhance a sense of safety.

68

4) 5)

6) 7) 8)

9)

All ground floor windows are constructed to Secured by Design standards, to prevent burglary and theft The parking and amenity areas are secured by 2.1 metre fencing and gating with appropriate access control features, to prevent theft and provide security and enhanced safety for residents. Cycle storage and bin storage areas are secure and have suitable access control features fitted, to prevent theft and unauthorised access A scheme of lighting is submitted to demonstrate lux levels in parking and amenity areas, to enhance safety for residents. CCTV scheme is submitted to show how CCTV could enhance security of residential entrances, parking, and shop front areas, to prevent theft, burglary and damage and enhance security and safety Restriction on A3 use due to current high concentration of A3 premises in City Road and need for residential amenity.

7. 7.1 7.2

REPRESENTATIONS Local Members were consulted, no representations received. The application has been publicised by letter, site and press notice, no representations received. ANALYSIS Land Use considerations The proposal raises no land use policy concerns, policy 40 favours the development of housing, shops and financial and professional services in this location. The principle of mixed use development on this site has been established by previous draft permissions 11/872/DCI and 09/575/C.

8. 8.1

8.2

Design considerations Although block A would be 2.2m higher than the ridge line of the adjacent buildings on City Road, it would be set back and look comfortable in its setting. The scale of block B would be similar to the existing buildings to the north off Bedford Place. The use of facing brick for both blocks instead of render and timber cladding indicated on the previous scheme is considered acceptable, as neighbouring buildings are of varying materials. However, it is important that the three shades of brick suitably emphasise the vertical rhythm of the buildings, therefore condition 3 is considered necessary to ensure samples of the bricks are submitted and agreed.

8.3

A small part of the western end of the site where block B is proposed, lies within the Tredegarville Conservation Area. However, the area in question, and its immediate surroundings are not considered to be of any conservation significance. The nearest buildings which are considered to have conservation significance are those in East Grove and The Parade, and their (important) front elevations are, respectively 50m and 60m away from the proposed block.

69

8.4

Amenity Considerations The proposal would not result in any significant loss of amenity to neighbouring occupiers, both sides of block A would directly adjoin blank side elevations of adjoining buildings and the north side elevation of block B would adjoin an existing structure of similar height. Although the south side would be sited 1m from the rear curtilages of nos. 31 & 32 The Parade, these properties are in commercial use with the rear areas used for parking rather than amenity use. It is not envisaged that the rear facing upper level windows of block B would give rise to any unacceptable overlooking to the rear residential gardens of nos. 2-4 East Grove as the first floor rear window would be sited approximately 10m from the rear boundary of these properties.

8.5

The conditions requested by Pollution Control to control opening hours/delivery hours, to restrict takeaway sales and to require details of kitchen extraction are not considered reasonable given that the application proposes A1 retail use for the ground floor commercial unit(s). Such conditions would only be imposed upon permission for A3 food & drink use, and in any case condition 5 would ensure a scheme of sound insulation works between the proposed commercial and residential accommodation is agreed. The proposed external amenity area (100 square metres) to the rear of block A and the private amenity areas (33 square metres) for the ground floor flats of block B are considered acceptable, similar to the space proposed by the previously approved scheme for 14 flats and 4 townhouses. Internally, the volume of all flats comfortably exceeds the minimum floor space requirement of 30 square metres per unit and all bedrooms/living areas would have a reasonable outlook. Access Considerations The access point to the residential accommodation via an extension of the residential cul-de-sac of Bedford Place is considered acceptable, as established by the previous scheme. Transportation have confirmed that the vehicular access and off street parking layout are acceptable. The doors to the retail unit(s) would be level with the pavement of City Road and the entrances of both apartment blocks would have level access via Bedford Place, it is therefore considered that the proposal would be inclusive in terms of access equality.

8.6

8.7

8.8

Crime & Disorder Considerations Welsh Office Circular 16/94 Planning Out Crime is also relevant and, in paragraph 3 states, Crime prevention is capable of being a material consideration when planning applications are considered. The Circular advises that local planning authorities should consult police architectural liaison officers when determining planning applications. The South Wales Police Crime Prevention Design Advisor has no objection to the scheme, subject to detailed advice which has been forwarded to the developer.

70

8.9

Section 106 request considerations: The request from Parks Services for a financial contribution of 35,815 towards the provision of off-site open space, or the improvement (including design and maintenance) of existing open space in the locality is considered necessary, fairly and reasonably related to the development in accordance with Policy 31 of the Local Plan and the Open Space SPG. The request from Transportation for a financial contribution of 6,240 towards public transport infrastructure improvements within the vicinity at City Road is considered necessary, fairly and reasonably related to the development in accordance with the Access, Circulation & Parking Requirements SPG. The request from Neighbourhood Regeneration for a financial contribution of 15,845 towards improvements to existing community facilities or the provision of additional community facilities is considered is considered necessary, fairly and reasonably related to the development in accordance with the Community Facilities and Residential Development SPG. The request from Housing Strategy for a financial contribution of 161,394 for affordable housing is considered necessary, fair and in accordance with the Affordable Housing Delivery Statement. It is acknowledged that following an economic viability assessment of this scheme by the Councils Valuation Department there is no scope for provision of 40% affordable housing as originally requested, and accepted that in the current market conditions it is only viable for the scheme to provide an affordable housing contribution of 161,394.

8.10

Conclusion It is concluded that the amended application is acceptable in accordance with the relevant policies, and therefore it is recommended that outline planning permission be granted for the proposed development, subject to the legal agreement and conditions.

71

AMENDED PLAN 12/1260DCI 22/10/2012

72

AMENDED PLAN 12/1260DCI 22/10/2012

73

AMENDED PLAN 12/1260DCI 22/10/2012

74

LOCAL MEMBER INTEREST


COMMITTEE DATE: APPLICATION No. ED: APP: TYPE: APPLICANT: LOCATION: 13/02/2013 12/2170/DCI SPLOTT Full Planning Permission APPLICATION DATE: 24/12/2012

ST ALBANS CARE HOME ST SAVIOURS VICARAGE, 115 SPLOTT ROAD, SPLOTT, CARDIFF, CF24 2BY PROPOSAL: 29 BED NEUROLOGICAL CARE HOME (ALTERNATIVE INTERNAL ARRANGEMENT / ADDITIONAL PORCH CANOPY AND MINOR EXTENSIONS/MODIFICATIONS TO THAT APPROVED UNDER PLANNING PERMISSION 12/299/DCI) ___________________________________________________________________ RECOMMENDATION 1: That subject to interested parties entering into a binding legal agreement under S106 of the Town and Country Planning Act to address the issues raised in Section 9 of this report, that PLANNING PERMISSION be GRANTED subject to the following conditions: 1. 2. C01 Statutory Time Limit The external walls and roofs of the new building shall be constructed and finished in accordance with a scheme of architectural detailing/schedule of materials and finishes which shall first have been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority; the schedule shall allow for the provision of a natural slate roof, stucco render detailing, and details of window, door, and window lintels and cills and the development shall not be put to beneficial use until the approved details have been completed in full . Reason: To ensure that the finished appearance of the development is appropriately respectful of the adjacent listed building. The first floor windows on the Southeast elevation of bedrooms A18 and A19 of the new building [as indicated on approved plan reference 571/PL/05] shall be non opening below a height of 1.8 metres above internal floor level and glazed with obscure glass and thereafter be so maintained. Reason : To ensure that the privacy of adjoining occupiers is protected. This permission consents to the provision of care for a maximum of 29 residents / patients at any one time and for no greater number. Reason: For the avoidance of doubt and to ensure for the amenities of surrounding occupiers.

3.

4.

75

5.

No development shall take place until a site assessment, including ground permeability testing, has been undertaken to determine the practicality of utilizing Sustainable Urban Drainage (SUDs) techniques (such as soakaway drainage and permeable paving as a first option for the disposal of surface water run off from new hard areas and if appropriate other forms of sustainable drainage techniques) and a comprehensive drainage scheme for the disposal of both surface water and foul sewage has been submitted to and approved by the Planning Authority. The approved drainage scheme shall thereafter be implemented in full prior to the beneficial use of the care home hereby approved. Reason: To ensure for the most sustainable drainage solution. No discharge of surface water from the completed development including access ways will be permitted to drain to the public highway or any highway drain. Reason: To ensure that the development will not compromise the highway drainage system. Full details of the refuse store and refuse management arrangements shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority, and the store provided in accordance with the approved details prior to the beneficial use of the care home. Reason: To ensure for a sustainable waste management solution and an appropriate design which will not detract from the setting of the Listed Building. C4P Landscaping Design & Implementation Pro C4R Landscaping Implementation E4B Preservation of Trees G7G Plant Noise The car parking spaces, ambulance bay and cycle stands shown on the approved plans shall be provided prior to the development being brought into beneficial use and thereafter shall be maintained and shall not be used for any purpose other than the parking of vehicles. Reason: To ensure that the use of the proposed development does not interfere with the safety and free flow of traffic passing along the highway. All trees shown for retention including those the subject of the City and County of Cardiff (Farmville Road South Area, Splott) Tree Preservation Order 2009 shall be preserved and maintained and in the event of any such tree dying, being removed, becoming seriously damaged or diseased within 5 years of the completion of the development a replacement tree of a similar species shall be planted

6.

7.

8. 9. 10. 11. 12.

13.

76

and maintained unless the Local Planning Authority gives written consent to any variation. Reason: The trees are of value in the local environment and should be protected and maintained in the interests of visual amenity. 14. The rating level of the noise emitted from any fixed plant and equipment on the site shall not exceed .5dBA at any residential property when measured and corrected in accordance with BS 4142 : 1997. Reason: To ensure that the amenities of occupiers of other premises in the vicinity are protected. Prior to the commencement of development, a scheme of tree protection works relating to Highway Ash Tree (1860), shall be undertaken in accordance with a scheme of detail which shall first have been submitted to and approved by the Local Planning authority. The tree protection works shall be implemented as approved prior to the arrival of any construction materials to the site. Reason: To ensure for the longevity of the Highway tree. The building hereby permitted shall be constructed to achieve a minimum BREEAM overall standard of very good and the mandatory credits for Excellent under the energy credits Ene 1 (Reduction of CO2 Emissions). Reason: To ensure that the development is constructed in accordance with national planning sustainable building standards. [The relevant requirements are determined by the date the proposed development was registered with the BRE under BREEAM by a licensed assessor.] Construction of any building hereby permitted shall not begin until an Interim Certificate has been submitted to the Local Planning Authority, certifying that a minimum BREEAM overall standard of Very Good and the mandatory credits for Excellent under the energy credits Ene 1 (Reduction CO2 Emissions) has been achieved. Reason: To ensure that the development is constructed in accordance with national planning sustainable building standards. Prior to the occupation of the individual building(s) hereby permitted, a Final Certificate shall be submitted to the Local Planning Authority, certifying that a minimum BREEAM overall standard of Very Good and the mandatory credits for Excellent under the energy credits Ene 1 (reduction of CO2 Emissions) has been achieved. Reason: To ensure that the development is constructed in accordance with national planning sustainable building standards

15.

16.

17.

18.

RECOMMENDATION 2: That the agent/applicant be reminded that a commercial contract is required for the collection and disposal of all commercial waste.

77

RECOMMENDATION 3: To protect the amenities of occupiers of other premises in the vicinity 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. Further to this the applicant is advised that no noise audible outside the site boundary adjacent to the curtilage of residential property shall be created by construction activities in respect of the implementation of this consent outside the hours of 0800-1800 hours Mondays to Fridays and 0800 - 1300 hours on Saturdays or at any time on Sunday or public holidays. The applicant is also advised to seek approval for any proposed piling operations. RECOMMENDATION 4: The contamination assessments and the affects of unstable land are considered on the basis of the best information available to the Planning Authority and are not necessarily exhaustive. The Authority takes due diligence when assessing these impacts, however you are minded that the responsibility for (i) (ii) determining the extent and effects of such constraints and; ensuring that any imported materials (including, topsoils, subsoils, aggregates and recycled or manufactured aggregates / soils) are chemically suitable for the proposed end use. Under no circumstances should controlled waste be imported. It is an offence under section 33 of the environmental Protection Act 1990 to deposit controlled waste on a site which does not benefit from an appropriate waste management license. The following must not be imported to a development site: Unprocessed / unsorted demolition wastes. Any materials originating from a site confirmed as being contaminated or potentially contaminated by chemical or radioactive substances. Japanese Knotweed stems, leaves and rhizome infested soils. In addition to section 33 above, it is also an offence under the Wildlife and Countryside Act 1981 to spread this invasive weed; and

(iii)

the safe development and secure occupancy of the site rests with the developer.

Proposals for areas of possible land instability should take due account of the physical and chemical constraints and may include action on land reclamation or other remedial action to enable beneficial use of unstable land. The Local Planning Authority has determined the application on the basis of the information available to it, but this does not mean that the land can be considered free from contamination. RECOMMENDATION 5: That the applicant be advised to liaise with the Operational Manager, Street Operations (Tony Jones, Brindley Road) prior to undertaking any works within the adopted highway in relation to the construction of the new access.

78

1. 1.1

DESCRIPTION OF DEVELOPMENT On 13th June 2012, Planning Committee resolved to grant planning permission for a 32 bed Neurological Care Home both within and in a new build extension to the Grade II Listed former St. Saviours Vicarage to the SE end of Splott Road. Planning Permission was Granted on 9th August 2012 further to the signing of a legal agreement obligating the developer to make a contribution of 6000 toward public transport improvements in the area. This current application has been submitted as a variation to that previously approved as the design of the scheme has developed. It is now proposed that the accommodation provide for 29 bedrooms, three less than previously approved, and that the building form be modified to facilitate the new arrangements. The proposed building would be three storey comprising a subterranean basement, ground, and first floors. The external proportions of the new building are not dissimilar to the existing building having a common eaves and ridge height of 6.5 and 9m respectively. The new extension would have a similarly slow pitched roof sympathetic to the Listed building, to which it would be attached by a two storey glazed link which would provide a new and more legible entrance to the home than previously proposed. The new build wing: Would comprise a basement which would contain a sluice, kitchen, laundry, staff room, quiet room and staff changing room facilities. The ground floor would contain 11 en-suite bedrooms, two lounge/activity rooms, a nurse station and an assisted bathroom and assisted w.c. The first floor would provide a further nine ensuite bedrooms, a large lounge/dining room and assisted bath and w.c. facilities. A disabled evacuation standard lift would run through all floors.

1.2

1.3

1.4

1.5

The former Vicarage: The ground floor of the Vicarage would contain one en-suite bedroom, a general office, lounge, kitchen and two visitor toilets (one disabled) The first floor would provide a further five ensuite bedrooms; a store and separate bath room.

1.6 1.7

The cottage annexe would provide for a three bedroom self contained unit. The care home would be served by eight car parking spaces (two disabled) and a managed ambulance bay and four cycle stands (eight cycles).

79

1.8

The site would have an enclosed bin store to the Courtenay Road Boundary of the site. The principal extension being located to the eastern corner of the site to the North (rear) of the existing Vicarage. The existing non original flat roofed porch to the existing building would be removed, and its entrance retained as a piece of garden artwork between the existing building and new build building. DESCRIPTION OF SITE St. Saviours Vicarage is a vacant Grade II Statutory Listed Building located near the Southeast end of Splott Road. The existing property has been vacant for some time and has been subject to vandalism. It is a two storey Victorian villa with scribed render elevations and slow hipped slate roof with large soffit eaves and red brick chimney stacks in a Georgian Style, within its own enclosed grounds which include a number of trees with Tree Preservation Orders(TPOs). The property is set at a skewed angle to Splott Rd, within rubble walled garden bordered by Splott Road (SW), Courtenay Road (NW), and Farmville Road (NE). The site is bounded by a service lane and the side elevation of 117 Splott Rd to the SE. The principal building frontage faces Courtenay Road some distance behind the curtilage wall, with a secondary unenclosed elevation to Splott Rd. which includes a former dairy cottage attached and stepped down beyond the main building and now forming an annexe to it. (The property was formerly the farmhouse to Lower Splott Farm). Splott Rd is a busy road containing a number of different uses from residential and retail to commercial premises, but the scale of buildings is predominantly two storey with pitched roofs. College buildings, opposite the NW facing elevation of the site on Courtney Road being a notable exception as a taller building. Farmville Rd is a residential terrace. SITE HISTORY 09/02193/E: Full - Change Of Use From Vicarage To Care Home With First Floor Extension - Withdrawn : 21/01/2010 09/02210/E: LBC - Change Of Use From Vicarage To Care Home With First Floor Extension. Withdrawn: 21/01/2010 12/00299/DCI: Full - Upgrade And Extension To Existing Vicarage To Form A 32 - Bed Neurological Care Unit, Associated Car Parking, Amended Access, Landscaping And Ancillary Works Granted: 09/08/2012 (6000 To Be Paid Toward Public Transport Improvements Upon Implementation).

1.9

2. 2.1

2.2

2.3

2.4

3. 3.1

3.2

3.3

80

3.4

12/00345/DCI: LBC - Upgrade And Extension To Existing Vicarage To Form A 32-Bed Neurological Care Unit, Associated Car Parking, Amended Access, Landscaping And Ancillary Works. Granted: 04/10/2012 12/02171/DCI: LBC - Works To Facilitate 29 Bed Neurological Care Home (Alternative Internal Arrangement / Additional Porch Canopy And Minor Extensions/Modifications To That Approved Under Listed Building Consent 12/00345/DCI. Undetermined POLICY FRAMEWORK Cardiff Unitary Development Plan Deposit Written statement Oct 2003 Policy 2.20: Good Design Policy 2.24: Residential Amenity Policy 2.45: Trees, Woodlands and Hedgerows Policy 2.51: Statutory Listed Buildings Policy 2.57: Access, Circulation and Parking Requirements Policy 2.64: Air, Noise and Light Pollution Policy 2.74: Provision for Waste Management Facilities in Development

3.5

4. 4.1

5. 5.1

INTERNAL CONSULTEE RESPONSES Highways (Drainage) No development shall take place until a site assessment, including ground permeability testing, has been undertaken to determine the practicality of utilizing SUDS techniques such as soakaway drainage and permeable paving as a first option for the disposal of surface water run off from new hard areas and if appropriate other forms of sustainable drainage techniques and a drainage scheme for the disposal of both surface water and foul sewage has been submitted to and approved by the Planning Authority. No discharge of surface water from the completed development including access ways will be permitted to drain to the public highway or any highway drain.

5.2

Highways (Waste Management). Current site plans detailing refuse storage are acceptable. Further details should be provided regarding the design of the store.

5.3

Trees Officer No adverse comments subject to tree protection and landscaping conditions as per 12/00299/DCI.

5.4

Pollution Control Air/Noise Officer Requests a recommendation In respect of Construction Site Noise.

81

5.5

Transportation Officer comments that: In comparison with the extant consent the current proposal entails a reduction in the number of bedrooms from 32 to 29 together with a reduction in staff numbers from 35 to 32. Id t therefore generally re-iterate my comments made with respect to the previous application and would have no object subject to conditions relating future retention of parking for cars, cycles and ambulance. Similarly, he would again request a Section 106 contribution of 6,000 towards the enhancement of public transport facilities in the vicinity of the site, and would again suggest a second recommendation regarding the need to secure the consent of the Operational Manager, Street Operations (Tony Jones, Brindley Road) prior to undertaking any works within the adopted highway in relation to the construction of the new access.

6. 6.1

EXTERNAL CONSULTEE RESPONSES Welsh Water have provided a standard response in respect of foul, surface and land drainage run-off. REPRESENTATIONS The application has been advertised on site and in the local press. objections have been received. No

7. 7.1

7.2

The occupier of 1 Courtenay Rd confirmed that one consultation letter was sufficient to that property (multiple letters had been sent), but made no comment on the proposal itself. Cardiff and Vale NHS Trust have written in support of the proposal. Cllr Marshall wishes to reiterate her comments on the previous proposal. i.e. that: I would like to support this Planning Application as I believe that it will bring local jobs to the area, provide a much needed service to those with severe head injuries and bring a dilapidated building back into use. my only concerns would be the proximity of the development to the property next door with regard to privacy matters, the need to retain and improve the landscaped perimeter with Farmville Road, the retention of trees with TPOs or replacement trees, the potential impact on parking in the local area and the use of the Section 106 money for open space, some of which I would like to see go towards creating a wildlife garden in the local vicinity due to the loss of this through the development.

7.3 7.4

8. 8.1

ANALYSIS Land Use The application site is identified as existing residential land on the Local Plan

82

proposals map. The site has no specific allocation in the UDP but is located within an established residential area. The development of the site for residential use where care is provided therefore raises no land use policy concerns. 8.2 Good Design The existing building is Grade II Listed, and of the character of a two storey Georgian residence. The new build is a similarly scaled two storey block, extending parallel to the Vicarage but at a set back position, and returning at right angles to be slightly offset from the Farmville Road boundary, ultimately stepping down to a single storey lounge block. The new block is set back from the Vicarage to demonstrate a subordinate status but with sympathetic low slung pitch comparable with that of the listed building. The new building would be finished in a stucco render with protruding render panels reflecting the plinths of the Vicarage. This is considered appropriate and respectful of the traditional aesthetic. The proposed building, although ultimately covering a much larger footprint than the existing building is designed in such a way as to reflect traditional proportions, ridge and eaves heights and angles of roof pitch. It is therefore does not compete with the original building in scale or mass when viewed from any particular vantage point. Because of its comparable ridge height, views of the extension would likely be obscured by the Vicarage when viewed from the South East and would be partially screened by tree coverage when viewed from the Northwest. From Farmville Rd to the Northeast, the building would replace views of the Vicarage. 8.3 Residential Amenity The proposed development would maintain a detached building in its own grounds behind a tall boundary wall. The property would be built to current building regulations specifications including appropriate levels of insulation and would be double glazed. An assessment of the distance and privacy relationships of first floor windows in the property has been made and obscure glazing conditions attached where considered necessary. The proposed arrangement is not significantly different to that previously approved. 8.4 Trees, The parking arrangement does not indicate any parking spaces below the canopy/likely root protection zone of retained trees. The replacement of two C and one B class trees and replacement of two Dutch Elms is not objected

83

to /indeed considered beneficial, subject to the approval of replacement planting. 8.5 Statutory Listed Buildings The modifications to the existing listed building are more properly considered under the heads of a parallel application for Listed building Consent 12/02171 also reported to this committee and recommended for approval subject to Cadw referral. The principal additional works considered by this application however which would have an impact from the Splott Road frontage are the glazed link entrance which attaches the new build to the existing structure and the removal of the flat roof porch to the existing vicarage. The use of a transparent interface between listed buildings and extensions is a relatively common and accepted method of providing a neutral linkage between different structure and the proposal here is considered well thought through. The existing porch has been further examined and concluded not to be original to the building, however the architects proposal to keep elements of it of particular merit as a garden structure is supported, as is the revealing and refurbishment of the original access to the property (currently obscured). In summary the works are considered appropriately respectful of the special interest of the listed building and appropriate from an aesthetic / planning perspective . 8.6 Access, Circulation and Parking Requirements The applicant has confirmed that 32 staff will work in shifts of around eight persons. The proposed arrangement of eight parking spaces and managed ambulance bay is therefore considered an adequate allocation and in accord with current planning Supplementary Planning Guidance. The parking layout has minimal interference with protected trees as indicated above and the arrangement also allows for sufficient manoeuvring space for vehicles to leave the site in a forward gear in most operational scenarios (utilising the ambulance bay and bin storage access path as additional manoeuvring space when not occupied). This is considered satisfactory. 8.7 Air, Noise and Light Pollution It is not anticipated that the use of the building would generate undue amounts of noise at or above that which might be generated in a residential area. The new building will be detached and double glazed and so levels of noise transference should be minimal. Any noise from patients in the grounds are likely to be lost against traffic noise from Splott Road and Walker Rd//Courtenay Road. Similarly it is not anticipated that the facility would result

84

in any light pollution over that of a normal domestic property. Sound transference through existing single glazing arrangements within the Listed building can be improved by use of secondary glazing or bespoke DG units under the terms of the Listed Building Consent submission. 8.8 Provision for Waste Management Facilities in Development The submitted plans allow for an external bin store and the facility and grounds would appear capable of appropriately managing and storing waste outputs from the building. 9. 9.1 SECTION 106 MATTERS For clarity, the applicant is asked to pay a commuted sum of 6000 (including administrative costs but not including legal fees) toward Public Transport improvements in the area. It is not considered that any requirement for a contribution toward the formation of a wildlife garden within the area could be justified. CONCLUSION That Planning Permission be Granted subject to the signing of the S106 agreement and conditions.

9.2

10. 10.1

85

86

El Sub Sta

Ventilation well for plant and laundry

Stair

Bed A5

Bed A6

En-suite En-suite En-suite En-suite

Lounge/dining/activity
Bed A3 En-suite Bed A4 Ass. wc Bed A7

External access and escape stair from basement

Stair

Fire escape

Bed A2

En-suite

Bed A1

Disabled evacuation standard lift

En-suite

En-suite

Lounge/dining/activity

Ass. bath/wc

Bed A8

En-suite

Bed A9

Fire escape

Nurse station Stair


Entrance Canopy

Bed A11

En-suite

Bed A10

En-suite

NOTE: This planning application is for the purpose of revising the current existing approved building due to design development of the scheme only. Otherwise, all other details are as the extant planning approval dated 09/08/12

Re-use existing stone entrance screen as feature

Main Entrance

Reception Lobby

Rock garden

Entrance

Read in conjunction with the following drawings; PL/571/01 Location Plan PL/571/02 Site Plan PL/571/03 Basement Plan PL/571/04 Ground Floor Plan PL/571/05 First Floor Plan PL/571/06 Elevations
0 1m 2m 3m 4m 5m

Kitchen
10.4m

1200 x 2000

General Office
27.29m

Sitting Room
21.85m

Bed C1
13.56m

Store Visitors/dis. wc

Kitchen

Entrance

Stair Lobby

Utility Room 1200 x 2000


En-suite

Sitting Room
30.48m

17.64m plus en-suite


Staff wc

Bed B1

Staff wc

PLANNING APPLICATION ST SAVIOURS CARE HOME 115-119 SPLOTT ROAD CARDIFF CF24 2BY

DEC 2012

1:100 @A1

GROUND FLOOR PLAN

571/PL/04

87

PDF created with pdfFactory Pro trial version www.pdffactory.com

NOTE: This drawing should not be scaled, only use figured dimensions. It is the responsibility of the contractor to report any discrepencies or inconsistancies on this drawing and request clarification before proceeding. This drawing is copyright. It must not be copied or used for any other purposes than those intended when issued by ourselves unless our express permission is granted.

El Sub Sta

Stair

Bed A15
15.34m

Bed A16
16.9m

En-suite

Sluice

En-suite

En-suite

Dining

Bed A14
15.95m

En-suite

Dis wc
pitched roof
Disabled evacuation standard lift

Bed A17
16.9m

Lounge

Bed A13
15.95m

En-suite

En-suite

Cpd

Bath

Bed A18 Cpd


13.9m

flat roof

Bed A12
14.1m

Bed A20
12.7m

En-suite

Bed A19
12.7m

NOTE: This planning application is for the purpose of revising the current existing approved building due to design development of the scheme only. Otherwise, all other details are as the extant planning approval dated 09/08/12

Stair
En-suite Glazed entrance canopy

Re-use existing stone entrance screen as feature

Bridge link

Sitting area

Rock garden pitched roof

Read in conjunction with the following drawings; PL/571/01 Location Plan PL/571/02 Site Plan PL/571/03 Basement Plan PL/571/04 Ground Floor Plan PL/571/05 First Floor Plan PL/571/06 Elevations
0 1m 2m 3m 4m 5m

Bed B5 Bed B4
Cpd 14.31m plus en-suite

12.62m plus en-suite

Stair

Bed C2
13.43m

Bath wc

Bed C3
14.37m

En-suite

En-suite

Bath

Stair

Drug Store

En-suite En-suite En-suite

Bed B3

pitched roof

PLANNING APPLICATION ST SAVIOURS CARE HOME 115-119 SPLOTT ROAD CARDIFF CF24 2BY

DEC 2012

1:100 @A1

FIRST FLOOR PLAN

571/PL/05

88

PDF created with pdfFactory Pro trial version www.pdffactory.com

13.15m plus en-suite

Bed B2

12.32m plus en-suite

Bed B6

12.92m plus en-suite

NOTE: This drawing should not be scaled, only use figured dimensions. It is the responsibility of the contractor to report any discrepencies or inconsistancies on this drawing and request clarification before proceeding. This drawing is copyright. It must not be copied or used for any other purposes than those intended when issued by ourselves unless our express permission is granted.

Proposed floor level +12.235


Replicate existing window on right side of reinstated main entrance doors

Existing floor level +12.37

Proposed floor level +9.135


Proposed stair building Fire escape

Existing floor level +9.00

New building

Ventilation shaft

Basement beyond

Glazed entrance canopy and link between existing and new buildings

Reinstated entrance to existing building

North West Elevation

NOTE: This planning application is for the purpose of revising the current existing approved building due to design development of the scheme only. Otherwise, all other details are as the extant planning approval dated 09/08/12 Existing floor level +12.37
MATERIALS: (final details to be agreed) Roof Blue/grey Monier Cambrian replica interlocking slates with grey ridge and hip tiles Walls a) Proprietry water proofed through coloured render b) Through coloured 'Artstone' lintels and cills Doors and Windows a) High performance uPVC double glazed windows and doors b) Colour coated aluminium double glazed system to entrance link and canopy Rainwater Goods Brown coloured uPVC ogee guttering and matching downpipes

Existing floor level +12.235

Existing floor level +9.00

Existing floor level +9.135

Existing building and annex

New entrance porch to annex

Glazed link between existing and new buildings

Fire escape

New building
Basement beyond External access and escape stair from basement

Proposed stair building

South East Elevation

Ventilation shaft

Read in conjunction with the following drawings; PL/571/01 Location Plan PL/571/02 Site Plan PL/571/03 Basement Plan PL/571/04 Ground Floor Plan PL/571/05 First Floor Plan PL/571/06 Elevations
0 Proposed floor level +12.235 1m 2m 3m 4m 5m

Proposed floor level +9.135

Existing annex

Proposed stair building

Fire escape

New building
Ventilation shaft

North East Elevation

Basement beyond

Proposed floor level +12.235

PLANNING APPLICATION ST SAVIOURS CARE HOME 115-119 SPLOTT ROAD CARDIFF CF24 2BY

DEC 2012

1:100 @A1

PROPOSED ELEVATIONS

Proposed floor level +9.135

571/PL/06

New building

Glazed entrance canopy and link between existing and new buildings
Basement beyond

South West Elevation

89

PDF created with pdfFactory Pro trial version www.pdffactory.com

NOTE: This drawing should not be scaled, only use figured dimensions. It is the responsibility of the contractor to report any discrepencies or inconsistancies on this drawing and request clarification before proceeding. This drawing is copyright. It must not be copied or used for any other purposes than those intended when issued by ourselves unless our express permission is granted.

90

COMMITTEE DATE: APPLICATION No. ED: APP: TYPE: APPLICANT: LOCATION:

13/02/2013 12/2171/DCI SPLOTT APPLICATION DATE: 19/12/2012

Listed Building Consent

ST ALBANS CARE HOME ST SAVIOURS VICARAGE, 115 SPLOTT ROAD, SPLOTT, CARDIFF, CF24 2BY PROPOSAL: WORKS TO FACILITATE29 BED NEUROLOGICAL CARE HOME (ALTERNATIVE INTERNAL ARRANGEMENT / ADDITIONAL PORCH CANOPY AND MINOR EXTENSIONS/MODIFICATIONS TO THAT APPROVED UNDER LISTED BUILDING CONSENT 12/00345/DCI ___________________________________________________________________ RECOMMENDATION: That subject to Cadw not wishing to call in the application for determination, that LISTED BUILDING CONSENT be GRANTED subject to the following conditions: 1. 2. C02 Statutory Time Limit - Listed Building The interior and exterior of the building shall be refurbished and redecorated in accord with a schedule of repair methodologies, materials, finishes and samples which shall first have been submitted to and approved in writing by the local planning authority and the refurbishment shall be completed in accordance with the approved details prior to the beneficial use of the newbuild extension to the building approved under this consent and planning permission 12/2170/DCI. Reason: To make sure that the materials, finishes and repair technologies are appropriate to the special interest of the Listed Building and undertaken in a timely manner. This consent provides no approval for the replacement, upgrading, secondary glazing, or adaptation of any windows or external doors within the existing building without the express approval of the local planning authority. Such approval can be considered to have been granted when an itemised schedule of proposals and detailing has been submitted to and approved in writing by the local planning authority for each window and external door within the building. The approved works shall thereafter be undertaken in entirety prior to the beneficial use of the newbuild extension to the building approved under this consent and planning permission 12/2170/DCI. Reason: Such proposals are not explicit within the application and will be dependant on factors such as joinery condition and a detailed design proposal for each door and window which has yet to be provided.

3.

91

1 1.1

DESCRIPTION OF WORKS Listed Building Consent is sought for the refurbishment and extension of the Grade II Listed former St. Saviours Vicarage to the SE end of Splott Road to facilitate (along with the provision of a new build extension) the development of a 29 bed Neurological Care Home. Similar proposals were granted planning permission and listed building consent in the autumn of 2012, however as the scheme has progressed a number of modifications to the approved scheme have been sought by the client, requiring the submission of a fresh application. Proposals to the Listed building involve the removal of the existing, original porch; a replacement lean-to extension to the propertys annexe, and the provision of a two storey glazed link between the building and the proposed new building and its forward projection as story entrance canopy. but non cottage existing a single

1.2

1.3

1.4

The proposal would see the future use of the old vicarage and its annexe for the purposes of providing six bedrooms and associated lounge and bathroom space within the principal building and the use of the annexe for a self contained three bedroom unit. DESCRIPTION OF BUILDING The former St. Saviours vicarage is a vacant Grade II Statutory Listed Building located near the Southeast end of Splott Road. The existing property has been vacant for some time and has been subject to vandalism and water damage caused by removal of lead and copper pipe without disconnection of the water supply and subsequent damage to fabric. However the building is considered structurally sound and capable of renovation. The building is a two storey Victorian villa with scribed render elevations and slow hipped slate roof with large soffit eaves and red brick chimney stacks in a Georgian Style, within its own enclosed grounds. The property is set at a skewed angle to Splott Rd, and set within an enclosed garden with tall rubble walls to Courtenay Road (NW), and Farmville Road (NE). The site is bounded by a service lane and the side elevation of 117 Splott Rd to the SE. The principal building frontage faces Courtenay Road some distance behind the curtilage wall, with a secondary unenclosed elevation to Splott Rd. The buildings annexe was a cottage attached and stepped down beyond the main building and is again enclosed from Splott Rd by a tall wall. The property was formerly the farmhouse to Lower Splott Farm. As existing, the property has a flat roofed single storey porch attached to the NW elevation, and although estimated at turn of the last century would not appear to be original to the building.

2. 2.1

2.2

2.3

2.4

2.5

92

3. 3.1

SITE HISTORY Applications for Planning Permission and Listed Building consent for the change of use of the property to a care home with external lift extension were withdrawn in 2009. Applications 12/0299/DCI and 12/00345/DCI for Planning Permission and Listed Building Consent for a 32 bed neurological care home were approved in autumn 2012. A parallel planning application for the development with which these works are associated (12/2170) is also reported to planning committee today. POLICY FRAMEWORK PPG Wales Chapter 6 Welsh Office Circular 61:96 Planning and the Historic Environment. ANALYSIS The removal of the existing flat roofed porch to the building

3.2

3.3

4. 4.1 4.2 5.

5.1

The architect cites one of the weaknesses of the former scheme as the lack of prominence and capacity of the proposed entrance which is neither large enough or sufficiently legible as the main entrance to the facility. Examination of the existing porch structure suggests it is a later addition to the building, as there are no physical ties between the main structure and the porch and because its flat roofed design and window apertures are not common to the main building. Interestingly however the porch does have a two centred arched doorway which may have been acquired from another location and built into the structure. It is proposed to remove the porch and to retain the arched detail as a garden feature within a new quiet garden proposed between the new and old buildings. This is considered appropriate. The porch once removed would reveal the original entrance to the building which would be refurbished and is welcomed as this would improve the presentation of the building. The glazed link / new entrance.

5.2

5.3

5.4

5.5

It is proposed to link the new building to the old with a two storey glazed link which would also extend forward as a single storey canopy entrance. The external proportions of the new building are not dissimilar to the existing listed building and the finish and roof inclines are aesthetically sympathetic to it. In this respect the design works well as a neutral interface between the two building periods and is supported by the planning officer.

93

5.6

The new linkage also has the benefit of requiring minimal fixing to the existing structure and would be relatively easily reversible should this be desired in the future. This said, the proposed glazed link is considered appropriately respectful of the special interest of the listed building and to be far more preferable than a directly annexed extension in respect of the preservation of the character of the building. Overall, accepting the loss of the porch feature is concluded to result in a far better overall adaptation of the building. Lean-to covered entrance to the rear of the cottage annexe,

5.7

5.8

At present a lean to canopy exists to the Splott Rd side of the annexed cottage accommodation, and a back door exists to the rear of the building. The proposal is to reverse the arrangement so that entry to the building is from the opposite side. This would have minimal impact in terms of the public view of the building as the existing lean-to is set behind a tall stone boundary wall and is not appreciable from the Splott Rd footway. The current rear of the annexe appears the more heavily modified in that it has landscape proportion window openings and more convoluted arrangement of rainwater goods. The single storey lean-to entrance would involve the widening of the existing doorway opening to around 2m and its extension some 1.75m out from the principle elevation to realise an internal lobby. As these works are out of the public eye and interfere with fabric which has been previously modified there is no objection to these works in principle which are advised to afford a more practical arrangement for the facility as a living unit offering greater independent living unit, a more accessible internal stair and bathroom/kitchen arrangement within the annexe. Internal works.

5.9

5.10

The internal works require very few internal modifications to structural fabric, and only minor modifications to the principal layout of the main building with changes being limited to the insertion of a number of stud partitions; The removal of a first floor WC and bathroom are not objected to in that these are relatively modern insertions / fittings. The loss of the staircase and WC within the annexed cottage accommodation is accepted as a loss of secondary fabric. The original arrangement of the cottage / cottages(?) is not known and would appear to have been adapted on a number of occasions previously. Given the overall refurbishment of the building these are considered acceptable losses within the overall scheme and will facilitate the renovation of the building for its new intended use.

5.11

5.12

94

6. 6.1

CONCLUSION Proposals to refurbish the building and bring it back into viable use are wholly welcomed. The control of appropriate materials and repair technologies can be secured by condition and the planning officer is happy to foster an ongoing dialogue with contractors on site as works progress. It is concluded that listed Building Consent be Granted further to referral to Cadw for the elements of external works.

6.2

6.3

95

COMMITTEE DATE: APPLICATION No. ED: APP: TYPE: APPLICANT: LOCATION:

13/02/2013 12/2205/DCI CATHAYS APPLICATION DATE: 24/12/2012

Full Planning Permission

Primark Stores Ltd BRITISH HOME STORES, 50-54 QUEEN STREET, CITY CENTRE, CARDIFF, CF10 2AF PROPOSAL: DEMOLITION OF NORTH AND WEST FACADES REPLACEMENT OF NORTH AND WEST FACADES EXTENSIONS TO FLOORS 1, 2, 3 & 4 ___________________________________________________________________ RECOMMENDATION 1: That planning permission be GRANTED subject to the following condition(s): 1. 2. C01 Statutory Time Limit This consent relates to the application as supplemented by the following additional information: Queen Street cgi looking west dated 30.1.13 and Queen Street cgi looking east dated 30.1.13. Reason: The information provided forms part of the application. Samples of Materials: No development shall take place until samples of the external finishing materials have been submitted to and approved by the Local Planning Authority. The development shall be carried out in accordance with the approved details. Reason: To ensure a satisfactory finished appearance to the building. No development shall take place until a scheme showing the architectural detailing of the Queen Street elevation of the building has been submitted to and approved in writing by the LPA and the development shall not be brought into beneficial use until the approved scheme is implemented. Reason: To ensure a satisfactory finished appearance to the building. Notwithstanding the provisions of the Town and Country Planning General Development Order 1995 (or any Order amending, revoking or re-enacting that Order) and the Town and Country Planning (Control of Advertisements) Regulations 1992, the ground floor windows of the premises shall allow an open and unrestricted view of the trading areas within the premises and the first and second floor windows shall allow an unrestricted view of the window displays within the premises, and the windows shall not be painted, covered over or otherwise obscured without the prior written consent of the Local Planning Authority. Reason: In the interests of visual amenity.

3.

4.

5.

96

6. 7.

C8G No shutter in front of window No part of the development hereby permitted shall be commenced until a scheme of construction management has been submitted to and approved by the Local Planning Authority, to include as required details of site hoardings, site access and wheel washing facilities. Construction of the development shall be managed strictly in accordance with the scheme so approved. Reason: In the interests of highway safety and public amenity. C7S Details of Refuse Storage

8.

RECOMMENDATION 2: To protect the amenities of occupiers of other premises in the vicinity 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. Further to this the applicant is advised that no noise audible outside the site boundary adjacent to the curtilage of residential property shall be created by construction activities in respect of the implementation of this consent outside the hours of 0800-1800 hours Mondays to Fridays and 0800 - 1300 hours on Saturdays or at any time on Sunday or public holidays. The applicant is also advised to seek approval for any proposed piling operations. 1. 1.1 DESCRIPTION OF PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT The detailed application is for the remodelling, refurbishment and extension of the BHS building on the south side of Queen Street to create a Primark Stores. There is no change of use involved. The proposals are for the demolition of the Queen Street faade and Frederick Street faade, the construction of a new three storey stone-clad principal faade to Queen Street and a two storey glazed faade to Frederick Street, and extensions to third and fourth floors. The interior is replanned and new lifts and escalators are to be installed. An application for Conservation Area Consent (12/2206/DCI) for the demolition of the facades is under consideration. The footprint of the building extends through to a rear entrance on the St. Davids Mall and to a secondary side entrance on Frederick Street (no longer used as an entrance). There are currently four sales floors including the basement and this will be increased to five sales floors an increase in total floor area of 1,618 sqm. The current faade was remodelled in the 1960s and again in the 1980s and comprises a conventional ground floor glazed retail frontage with a blank metal-clad slightly projecting first floor above. Unlike the neighbouring 3 storey buildings the second and third floors are set back about 5.5m from the principal Queen Street building line.

1.2

1.3

1.4

1.5

97

1.6

The proposals for the Queen Street elevation are a modern interpretation of the former 1913 Woolworths three storey stone faade. The faade relates to the eaves and storey heights of the neighbouring buildings and is symmetrical about the central entrance doors and vertical windows are grouped in threes to each side. The faade is faced in limestone to the upper storeys and black granite to the ground floor and the upper storeys of the principal faade are modelled to create a rhythm of recessed openings. The degree of modelling of the faade is similar to that of the neighbouring listed bank building. The Frederick Street entrance has not been used for many years and the display windows are not dressed. It is single storey with a false slate roof similar to the older two storey building to the north. The proposed three storey replacement faade will have large display windows to first and second floors with reconstituted stone flanking elements. A black granite shopfront is proposed at ground floor. The fire exits are retained. It will not function as an entrance but as a display The existing third floor is a stock room with faade to Queen Street set back 5.5m from the building line. The extended third floor creates another trading floor and restores the three storey principal facade to Queen Street. The existing fourth floor is a plant area occupying part of the rear half of the building and this is extended to form a stock room and staff accommodation and is setback 4.5m from the principal frontage. The fifth floor footprint remains the same and will house plant (as existing). The overall height of the building remains the same. The principal difference in terms of massing is the extended third and fourth floors. Sustainability

1.7

1.8

1.9

1.10

1.11

The development is not required to meet national sustainability standards since it is a conversion/ extension. Additional Information

1.12

The following additional information is submitted: Visuals looking east and west along Queen Street

2. 2.1

DESCRIPTION OF SITE The application site is a prominent city centre location on the south side of Queen Street, the capitals principal shopping street. It is located in the City Centre Principal shopping Area and Queen Street Conservation Area. Immediately to the east is an impressive three storey Grade II listed bank building. The neighbour to the west is a non-descript 1980s three storey reconstituted stone building on the corner of Queen Street and Frederick Street. To the north (rear elevation) the ground floor forms part of the St.

2.2

98

Davids Mall, the upper floors look over the first floor service road. The rear elevation is not visible. 2.3 The building has a disused entrance on to Frederick Street - a cul-de-sac about 60m long which terminates against the rear of shops in the St. Davids Centre. It is not a thoroughfare and provides fire exits for the shops that back on to it. PLANNING HISTORY 12/2206/DCI Concurrent application for conservation area consent for demolition of north and west facades. POLICY FRAMEWORK Planning Policy Wales Edition 5 Nov 2012. Relevant National Policy Guidance: TAN 12: Design. The following adopted Cardiff City Local Plan 1996 policies are relevant: Policy 3 Development in Conservation Areas; Policy 11 Design and Aesthetic Quality. The following deposit Cardiff Unitary Development Plan 2003 policies are relevant: Policy 2.20 Good Design; Policy 2.51 Statutory Listed Buildings; Policy 2.53 Conservation Areas. Supplementary Planning Guidance: City Centre Conservation Area Appraisal 2009 INTERNAL CONSULTEE RESPONSES Land Use Policy: 5.1 The alterations will increase the existing floorspace from 5122sqm (4,759sqm A1 / 363sqm A3) to 7,973sqm (all A1). The premises are located within the City Centre Principal Shopping Area (PSA) of the adopted City of Cardiff Local Plan, within the Queen Street Conservation Area and within the Central Core Area of the approved City Centre Strategy 2007 - 2010. Policy 47 of the Local Plan favours new and improved shopping facilities within the Principal Shopping Area. The proposed retail (Class A1) development will, by nature of its location, scale (increase of 2851sqm) and form, maintain a compact shopping area and help to enhance the vitality and viability of the City Centres existing retail offer. Planning Guidance (Wales) Technical Advice Note 4 Retailing and Town Centres, paragraph 6 states that All applications for retail developments over 2500sqm gross floorspace should be supported by an impact assessment. Whilst the proposed development increases the retail floorspace by 2851sqm,

3. 3.1

4. 4.1 4.2 4.3

4.4

4.5

5.

5.2

5.3

99

it is acknowledged that the premises are located within the Principal Shopping Area and involve an extension to an existing retail premises, as such it is not considered necessary to provide a Retail Impact Assessment in this instance. 5.4 For the above reasons, the proposal is considered acceptable in land use policy terms, subject to detailed design and amenity considerations. Public Realm: 5.5 This is a large scale proposal (55% floorspace increase / additional 2851sqm) in a strategically important location and the intensification of use will place increased pressure on the surrounding pedestrian environment. Policy 2.55 of the deposit Unitary Development Plan identifies the need for new developments to make appropriate provision for public realm improvements. In addition, Policy B2 of the adopted South Glamorgan (Cardiff Area) Replacement Structure Plan favours measures to improve the environmental quality of the urban fabric. Over the past five years a series of S106 funded public realm improvement schemes have been carried out along the streets adjoining Queen Street. The Queen Street Gateways Project has seen the upgrading of the pedestrian environment at eight locations and has included the extension of pedestrianised areas, upgrading of paving materials, the removal of street furniture clutter and the redesign of these public spaces in order to create a safer and more accessible pedestrian environment. Nos. 50-54 Queen Street is bordered to the west by Frederick Street and the application proposes to install an active window display and fire exit along this frontage. Fredrick Street is currently separated from the surrounding area by a concentration of large items of street furniture, including an electronic information panel, toilet block, poster drum and air quality monitoring station which are located around the junction with Queen Street. The layout of street furniture impacts on views into / out of the area, which affects how people currently use Frederick Street. As part of the Gateways project it is proposed to remove / rationalise this street furniture and redesign the space in order to open-up the street and create an improved pedestrian environment. Developer contributions are an important factor in delivering environmental enhancements and the precedent of securing public realm contributions in the city centre is well established. Comparable examples of retail developments include 07/02791/C at Marks and Spencer on Queen Street and 03/02584/C Queens Arcade which secured a contribution of 65,000 and 89,000 respectively. Both of these developments involved increased retail floorspace within existing premises and are located along Queen Street. Subject to the application being acceptable in all other respects, the applicant is requested to provide a financial contribution of 78,948 towards a scheme of public realm enhancements along Fredrick Street.

5.6

5.7

5.8

5.9

5.10

100

5.11

Transportation: The Councils Transportation Officer has no objection subject to a standard construction management condition. Pollution Control recommendation. (Noise): PC Noise request a construction noise

5.12

5.13 5.14

Pollution Control (Contaminated Land): PC (CL) have no comments. Waste Management: The Sustainable Planning Officer notes that plans make no reference to the storage and collection of waste and recycling and requests details. The comments have been forwarded to the agent. Highways and Waste Management: The Drainage Engineer has no comments. EXTERNAL CONSULTEE RESPONSES Welsh Water: No comments. City Centre Conservation Area Group: The Group welcomed the proposals which are a significant improvement. They recommended that signage be discrete and that the design be amended to better relate to the horizontal banding of the adjacent building. Glamorgan Gwent Archaeological Trust : No objection. REPRESENTATIONS The proposals were advertised in the press and on site as a major application and as affecting the setting of a conservation area and listed building, and Local Members and neighbours were consulted. No representations have been received. ANALYSIS The main issue relates to the proposed design and the effect on the character and appearance of the City Centre Conservation Area, and on the setting of the neighbouring Grade II listed building. The proposed Queen Street faade replaces an inappropriate 1980s faade with a three storey stone clad faade that respects the building line and scale of Queen Street and the neighbouring listed building and is a significant enhancement of the building. The extended 4th floor is set back 4.5m from the remodelled three storey faade and will not be visible from Queen Street. Proposed scale and elevational treatment to Queen Street and Frederick Street is acceptable.

5.15

6. 6.1 6.2

6.3 7. 7.1

8. 8.1

8.2

101

8.3

The proposals enhance the Queen Street frontage by restoring the three storey faade and respecting the proportions and articulation of the neighbouring listed building faade. It enhances both the conservation area and the setting of the listed building. Materials are traditional (granite shopfront and limestone faade over to Queen Street and granite shopfront with render/ reconstituted stone over) and are acceptable. The proposed use is acceptable and raises no amenity-related issues. Public Realm

8.4

8.5

8.6

The public realm improvements to Frederick Street requested by the Regeneration Group are not considered justifiable having regard to the legal test and given that the proposed works (removal of Council street clutter) on Frederick Street, a cul-de-sac that does not give access to the store, does not have any direct relationship to the application site. It should also be noted that the quality of the proposals (particularly the new faade to Queen Street) make a significant contribution to enhancing the conservation area and the setting of the neighbouring listed bank building. Waste Management

8.7

The Waste Management Officer has no objection subject to a standard waste storage details condition. CONCLUSION The proposals provide additional retail space on the principal shopping street and significantly enhance the character and appearance of the conservation area and the setting of the neighbouring listed building. The granting of planning permission is recommended subject to conditions.

9. 9.1

102

DO NOT SCALE FROM THIS DRAWING - Figured dimensions only to be used for setting out. Any dimensional discrepancies found on site are to be brought to the attention of the architect or contract adminstrator immediately. IF IN DOUBT ASK!

318400m

318500m
318300m 318400m 318500m 318600m 176600m 176600m

176600m

5 4 3 o 4 t

TCBs

Bank
7

2 1

PC

0 1

St Davids /Dewi Sant


4

176500m

6 8 1 1

4 1

TCBs
o t 6 6

22

5 4 3 o 4 t

5 2

t S

s d i v a D

2 1

PC

H T N R I O TO N A V E L E

0 1

176400m

318300m

318400m

St Davids /Dewi Sant


4

6 8 1 1

4 1

176500m

Location Plan 1:1250

20

22

R A E R

ON I T A V E L E

9 3
5 3 7 3
3 3

o t

7 4

ON I T A V E L E L L A M

5 2

t S

s d i v a D

318400m

4 4

o t

y a W

o t

1 3

318500m
drawing title

o t

0 5

a 1 3
6 3

176400m
project job number

Whitsundoles Broughton Milton Road

Salford Keynes 8 BU scale MK17

t. 01908 325 230 f. 01908 325 231 mail@3darchitects.co.uk

103

4 4

Bank

o t

y a W

o t

1 3

318500m

0 10m

Scale Bar

client

DAD Ref: Dra 3D Cardiff Relocation AR 08

o t

0 5

a 1 3
6 3

20m 30m

6 4

6 4

4 6

0 6

8 o 5 6 t 5

V E A T L E E T E SR E E N U Q

2 6

11.0m

re te t e S N en u Q I TO

0 7

9 4 7 o 4 t

20

1 5

9 3
5 3 7 3
3 3

o t

7 4

4 6 to

2 6

60

11.0m

6 6

re te t n S ue Q e
8 o 5 6 t 5
4 o 5 0 t 5

0 7

9 4 7 o 4 t

1 5

6 8 4 4
4 42 4

W al dr he t Ca

t ee r St c ik er c i ed er Fr ed r lF eo /H

St Davids/Dewi Sant

k al
5 1

176500m

5
6 o t 8

21

23

25

4 o 5 0 t 5

6 8 4 4
2 4 4 4

k l ON 7 W a VATI al ELE dr EAST he t Ca

t ee r St c ik er c i ed er Fr ed r lF eo

/H

9
176400m 318600m

5 1

5
ET RE ST C IK ER ED ON I FR VAT E EL

6 o t 8

21

23 25
40m 60m 50m 80m 70m 90m 100m Primark Cardiff Relocation

15115
drawing no. rev.

Location & Site Plan

08
date

Nov 2012
drawn checked

KD

SD

1:1250 & 1:500@A1

104

COMMITTEE DATE: APPLICATION No. ED: APP: TYPE: APPLICANT: LOCATION:

13/02/2013 12/2206/DCI CATHAYS APPLICATION DATE: 21/12/2012

Conservation Area Consent

Primark Stores Ltd BRITISH HOME STORES, 50-54 QUEEN STREET, CITY CENTRE, CARDIFF, CF10 2AF PROPOSAL: DEMOLITION OF NORTH AND WEST FACADES REPLACEMENT OF NORTH AND WEST FACADES. EXTENSIONS TO FLOORS 1, 2, 3 & 4 ___________________________________________________________________ RECOMMENDATION: That conservation area consent be GRANTED subject to the following conditions: 1. 2. C05 Statutory Time Limit - Con Area Consent No demolition shall take place until a copy of the signed contract for the development of the application site in accordance with planning permission no. 12/2205/DCI has been submitted to the Local Planning Authority. Reason: To ensure the satisfactory development of the site following demolition. No demolition shall take place until a demolition method statement has been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority and the demolition works shall be implemented in accordance with the approved method statement. Reason: To safeguard public safety and amenity.

3.

1. 1.1

DESCRIPTION OF PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT A planning application is before this committee (12/2205/DCI) for the replacement of the Queen Street and Frederick Street facades and the extension of the 3rd and 4th floors. The application is for conservation area consent for the demolition of the Queen Street faade and Frederick Street faades to allow replacement with new facades. DESCRIPTION OF SITE The application site is a prominent city centre location on the south side of Queen Street, the capitals principal shopping street. It is located in the City Centre Principal shopping Area and Queen Street Conservation Area.

1.2

2. 2.1

105

2.2

Immediately to the east is an impressive three storey Grade II listed bank building. The neighbour to the west is a non-descript 1980s three storey reconstituted stone building on the corner of Queen Street and Frederick Street. To the north (rear elevation) the ground floor forms part of the St. Davids Mall, the upper floors look over the first floor service road. The rear elevation is not visible. The building has a disused entrance on to Frederick Street - a cul-de-sac about 60m long which terminates against the rear of shops in the St. Davids Centre. It is not a thoroughfare and provides fire exits for the shops that back on to it. PLANNING HISTORY 12/2205/DCI Concurrent application for planning permission for replacement of north and west facades and extension of third and fourth floors. POLICY FRAMEWORK Planning Policy Wales Edition 5 Nov 2012. The following adopted Cardiff City Local Plan 1996 policies are relevant: Policy 3 Development in Conservation Areas. The following deposit Cardiff Unitary Development Plan 2003 policies are relevant: Policy 2.53 Conservation Areas. Supplementary Planning Guidance: City Centre Conservation Area Appraisal 2009. INTERNAL CONSULTEE RESPONSES None requested. EXTERNAL CONSULTEE RESPONSES City Centre Conservation Area Group: No objection. REPRESENTATIONS The demolition proposals were advertised in the press and on site in accordance with statutory requirements and neighbours were consulted. No representations have been received. ANALYSIS Neither of the facades proposed for demolition is listed or locally listed. The faade to Queen Street is from the 1980s and is of no architectural merit and as such makes no contribution to the character or appearance of the City

2.3

3. 3.1

4. 4.1 4.2

4.3

4.4

5. 5.1 6. 6.1 7. 7.1

8. 8.1

106

Centre Conservation Area. The faade to Frederick Street is also of relatively recent construction and poor quality and similarly offers no contribution to the appearance of the conservation area. 8.2 The Councils policies and guidance do not preclude the demolition of buildings which make little or no contribution to the character or appearance of the conservation area, subject to detailed and acceptable plans for redevelopment. The replacement facades are considered to enhance the character and appearance of the conservation area and are acceptable and detailed (see accompanying planning application 12/2205/DCI). The granting of conservation area consent subject to conditions is recommended.

8.3

8.4

107

DO NOT SCALE FROM THIS DRAWING - Figured dimensions only to be used for setting out. Any dimensional discrepancies found on site are to be brought to the attention of the architect or contract adminstrator immediately. IF IN DOUBT ASK!

318400m

318500m
318300m 318400m 318500m 318600m 176600m 176600m

176600m

5 4 3 o 4 t

TCBs

Bank
7

2 1

PC

0 1

St Davids /Dewi Sant


4

176500m

6 8 1 1

4 1

TCBs
o t 6 6

22

5 4 3 o 4 t

5 2

t S

s d i v a D

2 1

PC

H T N R I O TO N A V E L E

0 1

176400m

318300m

318400m

St Davids /Dewi Sant


4

6 8 1 1

4 1

176500m

Location Plan 1:1250

20

22

R A E R

ON I T A V E L E

9 3
5 3 7 3
3 3

o t

7 4

ON I T A V E L E L L A M

5 2

t S

s d i v a D

318400m

4 4

o t

y a W

o t

1 3

318500m
drawing title

o t

0 5

a 1 3
6 3

176400m
project job number

Whitsundoles Broughton Milton Road

Salford Keynes 8 BU scale MK17

t. 01908 325 230 f. 01908 325 231 mail@3darchitects.co.uk

108

4 4

Bank

o t

y a W

o t

1 3

318500m

0 10m

Scale Bar

client

DAD Ref: Dra 3D Cardiff Relocation AR 08

o t

0 5

a 1 3
6 3

20m 30m

6 4

6 4

4 6

0 6

8 o 5 6 t 5

V E A T L E E T E SR E E N U Q

2 6

11.0m

re te t e S N en u Q I TO

0 7

9 4 7 o 4 t

20

1 5

9 3
5 3 7 3
3 3

o t

7 4

4 6 to

2 6

60

11.0m

6 6

re te t n S ue Q e
8 o 5 6 t 5
4 o 5 0 t 5

0 7

9 4 7 o 4 t

1 5

6 8 4 4
4 42 4

W al dr he t Ca

t ee r St c ik er c i ed er Fr ed r lF eo /H

St Davids/Dewi Sant

k al
5 1

176500m

5
6 o t 8

21

23

25

4 o 5 0 t 5

6 8 4 4
2 4 4 4

k l ON 7 W a VATI al ELE dr EAST he t Ca

t ee r St c ik er c i ed er Fr ed r lF eo

/H

9
176400m 318600m

5 1

5
ET RE ST C IK ER ED ON I FR VAT E EL

6 o t 8

21

23 25
40m 60m 50m 80m 70m 90m 100m Primark Cardiff Relocation

15115
drawing no. rev.

Location & Site Plan

08
date

Nov 2012
drawn checked

KD

SD

1:1250 & 1:500@A1

DO NOT SCALE FROM THIS DRAWING - Figured dimensions only to be used for setting out. Any dimensional discrepancies found on site are to be brought to the attention of the architect or contract adminstrator immediately. IF IN DOUBT ASK!

Q P N A B C D E F G H J K L M

CUSTOMER LIFTS

MH

1
MALL ENTRANCE CUSTOMER STAIR

r t ance l M al En

FIRE EXIT

3
LIFT

ESCALATORS

3
ST E R ET .

UP FROM BASEMENT

DOWN FROM FIRST

VOID
UP TO FIRST DOWN TO BASEMENT

6
FIRE EXIT STREET ENTRANCE

5 6 7

Q U EE N

SALES FLOOR

9 10

FIRE EXIT

11 12

ENTRANCE CLOSED

13

FIRE EXIT

FIRE EXIT ROUTE

FREDERICK STREET

EXISTING
project job number

Primark Cardiff Relocation

5115
drawing no. rev.

drawing title

Existing Ground Floor

02
date

4.0

Sept 2012
client Whitsundoles Broughton Milton Road drawn checked

SD
scale

DA

Salford Keynes 8 BU MK17

t. 01908 325 230 f. 01908 325 231 mail@3darchitects.co.uk

1:100@A0

DAD Ref: Dra 3D Cardiff Relocation AR 02

109

COMMITTEE DATE: APPLICATION No. ED: APP: TYPE: APPLICANT: LOCATION: PROPOSAL:

13/02/2013 12/1961/DCI APPLICATION DATE: 28/12/2012

GRANGETOWN Full Planning Permission Mr Neil Patel 115-117 PENARTH ROAD, GRANGETOWN, CARDIFF, CF11 6JU RETENTION OF SINGLE STOREY REAR EXTENSION & PROPOSED AMENDMENTS TO EXISTING SHOPFRONT

___________________________________________________________________ RECOMMENDATION: That planning permission be GRANTED. 1. 1.1 DESCRIPTION OF PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT A full application for the retention of a replacement single storey extension as built, and alterations to create a new shopfront. This application has been submitted as a result of an Enforcement Investigation, which found that the single storey extension as built was not in accordance with the plans approved under application 11/379DCI, in that it was built with an increased height. The single storey extension as built covers the whole of the rear yard area and measures approx. 10m x 8m x 3.2m (to flat roof approx. 3.5m to top of parapet walls) and is constructed from red facing brick to match the original building and has access doors off Blaenclydach Street and the gated rear access lane. The proposed shopfront seeks to close an existing display window to the Blaenclydach Street elevation with facing brick to match the existing faade, retain a single display window to the corner section, replace central double glass doors and display windows with an offset single glass door and windows to the no. 115 frontage and insert a new single glass door to the existing display windows to the no. 117 frontage. The new shopfront would be aluminium powder coated frames and glazing. Level access off the street is maintained. DESCRIPTION OF SITE This full application relates to a three storey, red brick property, no 115, with a three storey rear annexe, at the junction of Penarth Road and Blaenclydach St, and the adjoining two storey property, no 117, with a two storey rear annexe. There is an existing shopfront to the front of both properties. The application notes that a single storey extension, with roller shutter doors to the rear and side, and which completely filled the rear of the site, was demolished

1.2

1.3

2. 2.1

110

for structural reasons in January 2011. A photo is shown in the DAS which shows the original extension prior to demolition. 3. 3.1 SITE HISTORY 94/389R Convert storerooms to maisonette, garage and enclosing rear ground floor toilet Approved 10/1772DCI Change of use of ground floor to A3 food & drink, alterations to frontage and erect dwarf wall on boundary to front Refused Appeal dismissed. 11/379DCI Replacement single storey rear extension and replacement shopfront Approved 11/2079DCI Change of use of ground floor to A3 vegetarian restaurant Approved Appeal against hours of operation and non takeaway sales conditions lodged. 13/21DCI Retention of three bed flat to second floor and change of use of part of first floor from office to three bed flat Under consideration. 4. 4.1 POLICY FRAMEWORK PPW Edition 5 (Nov. 2012): paragraph 9.3.3 states- Insensitive infilling or the cumulative effects of development or redevelopment, including conversion and adaptation, should not be allowed to damage an areas character and amenity. This includes any such impact on neighbouring dwellings, such as serious loss of privacy or overshadowing. Cardiff Local Plan (adopted 1996) 11 (Design and Aesthetic Quality) 4.3 Cardiff Unitary Development Plan Deposit Written Statement (October 2003) 2.20 (Good Design) 2.24 (Residential Amenity) 5. 5.1 5.2 6. 6.1 INTERNAL CONSULTEE RESPONSES Operational Manager Transportation No comments received. The Pollution Control (Contaminated Land) manager has no objection. EXTERNAL CONSULTEE RESPONSES Nil.

4.2

111

7. 7.1

REPRESENTATIONS Adjacent occupiers have been consulted. A letter of objection has been received from the occupier of 72 Penarth Road on grounds that the extension as constructed is complete and therefore the applicant has sought to circumvent the planning process and has built a wall higher than is legal. Objections have been received via email from Mr C Jones, Mr A Hovord and Ms. T Pika on grounds that should the Council allow this application it will: open the floodgates to allow anybody who doesnt adhere to set planning rules to go ahead and do anything they want. Mr Hovord further states: The size/height of the rear extension was clearly set down by a previous Council planning Committee, 11/0379/DCI and he has clearly chosen to breach the planning laws. Mr Jones further states: The size/height of the rear extension was clearly set down by a previous Council planning Committee, 11/0379/DCI and he has clearly chosen to breach the planning laws. I have lived here for over 20 years and since Mr Patel has moved his business into the area along with the Chinese wholesale shop, it has become impossible to access the street from Penarth Road without having to avoid cars parked on double yellow lines. What use is any Planning law when it can be breached so easily? The Planning Officer should be empowered to enforce planning decisions, the applicant shouldn't be allowed to go back to the Council every time he/she/they decide they don't want to comply with planning laws. Mr Patel has also submitted another application, another breach of 11/379/DCI and he will continue as he wants unless the Council stand by their previous decisions. Ms Pika also makes the same comments as Mr Jones above, however there is referral to application 11/2079DCI (for the change of use of the application premises) rather than the (correct) application number 11/379DCI.

7.2

7.3

In addition to the emails mentioned above, a further three emails have been received from Mr C Jones, each email is a copy of the above comments, with the same application referral (11/2079DCI) as contained in the email from Ms Pika.

112

7.4

On the 28th January 2013 Mr C Jones submitted a petition comprising several emails with letters from 26 properties attached. This submission amounted to 56 signatories (there were a number of duplicate letters in the batches submitted). The nature of the petition was a number of individual letters, dated January 2012. The content of the letters offered comments in objection to planning application 11/2079DCI, for the change of use of the ground floor of 115-117 Penarth Road to a restaurant. ANALYSIS A full application for the retention of a replacement single storey extension as built, and alterations to create a new shopfront. With regard to the single storey rear extension, consent was granted to replace the original extension under application 11/379DCI. This application was determined under delegated powers, with consent being granted on the 14th April 2011. The extension as approved replaced an existing extension that had a partial sloping roof (sloping inwards towards no. 117 from the Blaenclydach Street elevation) with a maximum height of approx. 3.0m, reducing to a flat roof area (on the plot of no. 117), of approx. 2.4m height, with a flat roof extension of maximum height approx. 3.0m stepped down on the plot of no. 117 to approx. 2.4m.

8. 8.1

8.2

8.3

The extension as built has a continuous flat roof across both no. 115 and 117, with the main roof structure being approx. 3.2m in height. The total height of the structure is increased by parapet walls to the Blaenclydach Street elevation and the elevation to no. 119 Penarth Road to a height of approx. 3.5m. The extension as built is of a red facing brick construction, with concrete coping and black metal access doors. The finish of the extension is of a reasonable standard and is keeping with the character of the original building. The premises to the opposite corner of Blaenclydach Street and Penarth Road benefits from a substantial two storey annexe that extends completely to the rear access lane. Having regard for the character and context of the application site and the premises to the opposite corner, which form a frame to the street when approaching from the south, moving towards Penarth Road, it is considered that the single storey extension as built causes no harm to the street scene that would warrant refusal of consent. With regard to the impact on the occupiers of no. 119 Penarth Road, it is noted that adjacent to the shared boundary there is a partially demolished garage type structure in the garden of no. 119. It is understood that this structure has been in this condition for a considerable period of time. The structure, even in its current dilapidated form significantly reduces the impact of the increase in enclosure height (approx. 1.1m from original). Having regard for the original situation and the presence of this structure adjacent to

113

the boundary, it is considered that there would be insufficient grounds to refuse consent in terms of impact on residential amenity. 8.4 With regard to the proposed shopfront alterations, these differ slightly from those previously approved under application 11/379DCI in that the side window is to be closed off, the approved door to the corner section will now be a window and the slight re-alignment and insertion of new doors to the aluminium framed main frontage. The currently proposed shopfront maintains the commercial character of the ground floor frontage and would no have any adverse impact on the street scene. 8.5 With regard to the issue raised in representations, the following comments are made: There is no legal height that boundary walls can be in this area. Any application for the construction of a means of enclosure would be considered on it merits; Whilst it is acknowledged that the applicant has undertaken development that is currently unauthorised, this does not preclude the submission of an application (as in this case) which seeks to retain that which has been built. In addition, although the applicant has undertaken works that are currently unauthorised, this would not be relevant or sustainable grounds to withhold planning permission if, on full consideration, the development is otherwise acceptable; Planning application 11/2079DCI has no relevance to the proposed retention of the extension as built. The relevant application is 11/379DCI; The current proposals, to retain a single storey extension and replace a shopfront have no impact on parking levels in the vicinity of the site that would warrant or sustain refusal of consent; A further application (13/21DCI) has been submitted by the same applicant to retain a 3 bed flat to the second floor of the premises and to convert part of the existing first floor office space to a second 3 bed flat. These proposals have no connection to planning permission 11/379DCI.

8.6

With regard to the submitted petition, Mr Jones has been advised (by email dated 29th January 2013) that this is invalid as a petition against this application as: The only reference to this application in any of the correspondence is the quoting of the application number (12/1961DCI) in the email subject header; The attached letters were copies of letters dated January 2012 that raised objection to the application for the change of use of 115-117 Penarth Road to a vegetarian restaurant. The content of the letters relate solely to that proposal and there was no indication that the signatories of those letters object to the proposals under consideration here.

114

Mr Jones has been advised that should he wish to submit a valid petition, he should do so by 17:00hrs on Tuesday 5th February, in accordance with the Councils procedures relating to the submission of petitions and rights to address Committee. 8.7 In light of the above, and having regard for adopted planning policy guidance, it is recommended that planning permission be granted.

115

116

117

118

COMMITTEE DATE:

13/02/2013 APPLICATION DATE: 07/01/2013

APPLICATION No. 13/00021/DCI ED: APP: TYPE: APPLICANT: LOCATION: GRANTGETOWN

Full Planning Permission

Vegetarian Food Studio VEGETARIAN FOOD STUDIO, 115-117 PENARTH ROAD, GRANGETOWN, CARDIFF PROPOSAL: RETENTION OF ONE NO THREE BED FLAT ON SECOND FLOOR AND CHANGE OF USE OF PART OF FIRST FLOOR TO CREATE A SECOND THREE BED FLAT ___________________________________________________________________ RECOMMENDATION 1 : That planning permission be GRANTED subject to the following conditions: 1. Within three months of the date of this consent, details of refuse storage facilities for the flats hereby approved shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The approved details shall be implemented immediately upon receipt of written approval and shall thereafter be retained and maintained. The details submitted shall provide for separate commercial and domestic refuse storage facilities. Reason. To ensure an orderly form of development and to protect the amenities of the area. Within three months of the date of this consent, details of soundproofing to the floor/ceiling between the first floor flat and the ground floor commercial premises shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The approved scheme shall be implemented within three months of receipt of written approval. Reason. To protect the amenities of future residential occupiers.

2.

RECOMMENDATION 2 : That the applicant be advised to ensure that any fume extraction system approved in discharge of condition 8 attached to planning permission 11/2079DCI is implemented prior to the beneficial use of the ground floor restaurant. 1. 1.1 DESCRIPTION OF PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT A full application for the retention of a 3 bedroom flat to the second floor and partial change of use of vacant office space to a further 3 bedroom flat to the first floor of a three storey property, with commercial floorspace to the ground floor that has consent for Class A3 (Food & Drink) use. No external alterations are proposed.

1.2

119

1.3

Upon inspection it has been found that the works to partially convert the first floor area to a 3 bed flat have been completed and both flats are occupied. DESCRIPTION OF SITE This full application relates to a three storey, red brick property, no 115, with a three storey rear annexe, at the junction of Penarth Road and Blaenclydach St, and the adjoining two storey property, no 117, with a two storey rear annexe. SITE HISTORY 94/389R Convert storerooms to maisonette, garage and enclosing rear ground floor toilet Approved 10/1772DCI Change of use of ground floor to A3 food & drink, alterations to frontage and erect dwarf wall on boundary to front Refused Appeal dismissed. 11/379DCI Replacement single storey rear extension and replacement shopfront Approved 11/2079DCI Change of use of ground floor to A3 vegetarian restaurant Approved Appeal against hours of operation and non takeaway sales conditions lodged. 12/1961DCI Retain rear ground floor extension & amendments to shopfront Under consideration.

2. 2.1

3. 3.1

4. 4.1

POLICY FRAMEWORK Cardiff Local Plan (adopted 1996) 11 (Design and Aesthetic Quality)

4.3

Cardiff Unitary Development Plan Deposit Written Statement (October 2003) 2.20 (Good Design) 2.21 (Change of Use or Redevelopment to Residential Use) 2.24 (Residential Amenity)

5. 5.1

INTERNAL CONSULTEE RESPONSES The Operational Manager Transportation has no objection to the proposals, making the following comments: I refer to the above and would confirm that the submission has been assessed and is considered to be acceptable in principle. To which end, it is noted that there is no additional floorspace proposed and that the new flat is to be created by converting existing office/storage space, the parking

120

requirements for which are considered to be consistent. I therefore have no objection to the application as submitted. 5.2 The Pollution Control (Noise and Air) Manager objects to the proposals on grounds that the setting of the first floor flat directly over a Class A3 (Food & Drink) premises would likely have an unacceptable impact on the residential amenity of occupiers due to noise and smell nuisance. The Waste Manager comments that the application makes no reference to facilities for the storage of waste and that waste must not be stored on the highway. EXTERNAL CONSULTEE RESPONSES Welsh Water have no objection. REPRESENTATIONS Adjacent occupiers have been consulted. A letter of concern has been received from the occupier of 72 Penarth Road on grounds that there is no fire escape from the second floor flat and that the remaining part of the first floor is not to be utilised as an overflow area for the ground floor restaurant use. Emails have been received from Mr A Hovord and Mr C Jones objecting to the application on the following grounds: If the Council allows this breach of planning law then floodgates will open with other developments taking place without consent; What use is planning law if it can be breached so easily? The Council objected to residential use (there is a referral to condition 11 of planning permission 11/2079DCI (NOTE This is an assumption as there is no reference to the relevant application number in the representation)); A previously dismissed appeal (NOTE it is assumed that this is a reference to application 10/1772DCI. No application number is given) identified harm and conflict with the development plan in the development proposed under that application; There is no facility for parking; The Council determined that the premises should be used for offices (upper floors); The applicant has ignored this decision and allowed people to live in the property; The existing planning permission for residential use is over 10 years old and therefore not valid; The applicant should not be allowed to apply for consent whenever they carry out un-authorised developments; The flats are already occupied in breach of HMO rules;

5.3

6. 6.1 7. 7.1

7.2

121

The determination of the application should be delayed until such time as a complaint relating to the publicity of this application (non-display of site notice) has been resolved;

In addition to the above, Mr Jones states, I also look forward to speaking at the hearing as we petitioned against this proposal.. 8. 8.1 ANALYSIS A full application for the retention of a three bed, second floor flat and the conversion of part of the existing first floor office space to a second three bed flat (the conversion has already taken place). The Land Use Policy Manager has considered the application and has no objection to the change of use, making the following comments: The application site falls within an existing residential area, as defined by the Local Plan Proposals Map. The existing office use on the upper floors of the building would be offered no specific protection in land use policy terms in this location, as it falls outside of any area designated for business and industrial use. The proposed change of use to residential, therefore, raises no land use policy concerns. The application should be determined based upon the likely impact upon residential amenity, given the restaurant use on the ground floor. 8.3 Policy 2.21 of the Deposit UDP advises that conversion of redundant commercial floorspace to residential use is acceptable, subject to certain criteria including: There is no over-riding need to retain the existing use; The residential accommodation and amenity are acceptable; There is no unacceptable impact on the operation of existing business; Community facilities are accessible.

8.2

The accommodation provided by the two flats is of an acceptable standard, with reasonable floorspace and aspect. Whilst it is noted that the building occupies the entire curtilage and therefore has no amenity space, this is no an unusual situation facing residents occupying flats above commercial premises. The Land Use Policy Manager has advised that there is no policy protection for the use of the upper floors and it is unlikely that the proposals will adversely impact on existing business operation. Ample community facilities (public transport links, shops, open space etc.) are available in the vicinity of the application site. In this case, it is considered that the proposals accord with the requirements of policy 2.21. 8.4 With regard to the objections raised by the Councils Pollution Control (Noise

122

& Air) Manager, it has been found at previous appeals relating to the impact of food & drink premises on adjacent residential occupiers, that with the appropriate use of approved fume extraction systems the issue of smell nuisance can be overcome. It is confirmed that the consent for a food & drink use to the ground floor (11/2079DCI) includes a condition requiring the submission and approval of a fume extraction system. In this case, it is unlikely that the Council could sustain refusal of consent here on these grounds. It should be noted that although some internal works are taking place at ground floor level, there is no evidence that this consent has been implemented. With regard to noise disturbance, a condition is recommended above which seeks to secure appropriate levels of soundproofing between the ground floor and first floor (this is reflective of planning permission 11/2079DCI where a similar condition applies to the party wall between the ground floor food & drink premises and the adjacent dwelling at no. 119 Penarth Road). Given the similarities between the existing dwelling at no. 119, the proposed first floor flat and their relationship with the ground floor use, it is considered unlikely that the Council could sustain refusal of consent on these grounds. It is also noted that the hours of operation of the ground floor food & drink use are restricted to 10:00 22:00hrs. 8.5 with regard to the concerns raised by the occupier of no. 72 Penarth Road, the issue of fire protection, means of escape etc. are matters dealt with and enforced by other legislation. The remainder of the floorspace to the first floor it to be retained as office accommodation. Any use of this floorspace as additional restaurant space would require further planning permission. With regard to the issues raised by Mr Hovord and Mr Jones: The Council as Local Planning Authority is obliged to consider planning applications on their merits. This includes applications submitted retrospectively; The Council did not object to residential use as part of (assumed) planning application 11/2079DCI. That application was for the ground floor of the premises and related to a change of use to Class A3 (food & Drink) use. There were no proposals for residential use as part of that application. Condition 11 restricts the food & drink use to the ground floor; The previously dismissed appeal (assumed referral to 10/1772DCI) related to the change of use of the ground floor to food & drink use with minor alterations. No residential development was proposed; This application has been assessed by the Operational Manager Transportation, who has no objection (para. 5.1 above); The Council has not decided that the upper floors should be used for offices. In para. 1.4 of the report to Planning Committee dated 18th April 2012 relating to application 11/2079DCI for the change of use of the ground floor, Members were advised that the applicant had confirmed that that application related to the ground floor only and that

8.6

123

the upper floors would remain in office use. This statement does not constitute a decision. The applicant has the right to submit the current application and the Council is obliged to consider it on its merits; It is acknowledged that, insofar as planning permission 94/389R was not implemented, it has lapsed; Whilst it is accepted that to undertake unauthorised development is unacceptable, this does not relieve applicants of the right to submit applications retrospectively; The premature occupancy of the first floor flat is noted in para. 1.3 above. The comments relating to HMO legislation have been passed to the Councils Housing Enforcement Manager; The application has been publicised in accordance with procedures laid down in paragraph 5 of Schedule 12 of Part 2 to the Town & Country Planning (Development Management Procedure) (Wales) Order 2012. Mr Jones has been advised of the Councils position in this regard and any complaint received cannot reasonably delay the Councils decision making process. For the information of Committee, the procedure for publicising planning applications of this nature is: (5) In a case to which neither paragraph (2) nor paragraph (4) applies, the application must be publicised by giving requisite notice (a) by site display in at least one place on or near the land to which the application relates for not less than 21 days; or (b) by serving the notice on any adjoining owner or occupier. In this case, letters of notification were sent to properties directly adjacent to and behind the application site and to properties on the opposite side of Blaenclydach Street and Penarth Road. A further notification letter was sent to 9 Blaenclydach Street.

With regard to the comment relating to speaking at Committee, no petition has been received in respect of this application. 8.7 In light of the above, and having regard for adopted planning policy guidance, it is recommended that planning permission be granted.

124

125

126

LOCAL MEMBER OBJECTIONS AND PETITION


COMMITTEE DATE: 13/02/2013 APPLICATION No. ED: APP: TYPE: APPLICANT: LOCATION: PROPOSAL: 12/1454/DCO LLANDAFF Outline Planning Permission APPLICATION DATE: 21/08/2012

Nabatean Limited LAND AT RADYR COURT ROAD, DANESCOURT, CARDIFF OUTLINE APPLICATION FOR THE DEVELOPMENT OF 48 DWELLINGS ___________________________________________________________________ RECOMMENDATION 1: That subject to persons having relevant interest in the application site entering into a binding planning obligation in agreement with the Council under SECTION 106 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 encompassing the matters referred to in paragraph 8.32 of the Chief Strategic Planning and Environment Officer's report planning permission be GRANTED subject to the following conditions: 1. E00 Standard outline 2. This consent relates to the application as supplemented by the information contained in the letter from the agent dated 23rd October, 2012. Reason: The information provided forms part of the application. 3. C1J CFSH - Stan Overarch Con Post 11/12/10 4. C1K CFSH - Pre-ComCon Post 11/12/10 5. C1L CFSH - Post Construc Con Post 11/12/10 6. Details submitted in pursuance of Condition 1 shall include proposed floor levels of any building in relation to the existing ground level and the finished levels of the site. The development shall be constructed and completed in accordance with the approved details . Reason: These details are not included with the application and are required to ensure an orderly form of development. 7. Prior to their installation on site details of the means of site enclosure shall be submitted to and approved by the Local Planning Authority. The means of site enclosure shall be constructed in accordance with the approved details prior to the development being put into beneficial use. Reason: To ensure that the amenities of the area are protected. 8. Prior to their installation on site details of facilities for the storage of refuse

127

containers shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The facilities approved shall be provided before the development is brought into beneficial use and shall be thereafter retained for future use. Reason: To secure an orderly form of development and to protect the amenities of the area. 9. D7G Road Traffic Noise 10. E7G Railway Noise 11. F7G Railway Vibration 12. D3C Parking Within Curtilage 13. Prior to their installation on site, details showing the provision of cycle parking spaces shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the local planning authority. The approved details shall be implemented prior to the development being put into beneficial use. Thereafter the cycle parking spaces shall be maintained and shall not be used for any other purpose. Reason: To ensure that adequate provision is made for the secure parking of cycles. 14. No development shall take place until construction details of the junction between the proposed access road and the highway have been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. Those details shall be implemented prior to the development being put into beneficial use. Reason: To ensure that the use of the proposed development does not interfere with the safety and free flow of traffic passing along the highway abutting the site 15. No development shall take place until detailed plans showing the position and form of construction of all roads and footpaths within the site (including a turning area) and the method of disposal of all surface water drainage there from have been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The development shall not be brought into beneficial use until the roads, paths and all surface water drainage works have been constructed and completed (except for the final surfacing) in accordance with the approved plans and details. Reason: To ensure an orderly form of development and to make provision for the satisfactory access to the development by future occupants 16. Prior to commencement of development a scheme of construction management shall be submitted to and approved by the Local Planning Authority to include details of construction traffic routes, site hoardings, site access, and wheel washing facilities. The development shall be managed strictly in accordance with the scheme so approved. Reason: In the interests of highway safety and public amenity

128

17. C2G Provision of Open Space 18. C4P Landscaping Design & Implementation Pro 19. C4R Landscaping Implementation 20. No development shall take place until a reptile survey has been submitted and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The development shall be implemented in accordance with the findings of the approved survey. Reason: To ensure for the protection of any reptiles which may be present on site. 21. Prior to their installation on site details of the street lighting shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the local planning authority. The development shall be implemented in accordance with the approved details and retained thereafter. Reason: To minimise disturbance to nocturnal species. 22. No site clearance/demolition shall take place between 1st February and 15th August unless otherwise agreed in writing by the Local Planning Authority. Reason: To avoid disturbance to nesting birds which are protected under the Wildlife and Countryside Act 1981: Part 1, 1(1)(b), it is an offence to intentionally take, damage or destroy the nest of any wild bird while that nest is in use or being built. 23. No development shall take place until ground permeability tests have been undertaken to ascertain whether sustainable drainage techniques can be utilised and a comprehensive drainage scheme for the disposal of both surface water and foul sewage has been submitted to and approved by the Local Planning Authority. No part of the development shall be occupied until the scheme is carried out and completed as approved. Reason: To ensure an orderly form of development. 24. No development shall take place until a detailed method statement for the removal or long-term management/eradication of Japanese Knotweed and Himalayan Balsam on the site shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the local planning authority. The method statement shall include proposed measures to prevent the spread of Japanese Knotweed and Himalayan Balsam during any operations such as mowing, strimming or soil movement. It shall also contain measures to ensure that any soils brought to the site are free of the seeds / root / stem of any invasive plant covered under the Wildlife and Countryside Act 1981. Development shall proceed in accordance with the approved method statement. Reason: Japanese Knotweed is an invasive plant, the spread of which is prohibited under the Wildlife and Countryside Act 1981. Without measures to prevent its spread as a result of the development there would be the risk of an offence being committed and avoidable harm to the environment being caused.

129

25. F7Y Ground Gas Protection 26. C7Z Contaminated Land Measures 27. If, during development, contamination not previously identified is found to be present at the site then no further development (unless otherwise agreed in writing with the Local Planning Authority) shall be carried out until the developer has submitted, and obtained written approval from the Local Planning Authority for, an amendment to the remediation strategy detailing how this unsuspected contamination shall be dealt with. Reason: To prevent pollution of the environment, particularly as the site is in close proximity to several historic landfills. 28. D7Z Contaminated materials 29. E7Z Imported Aggregates 30. Any facilities for the storage of oils, fuels or chemicals shall be sited on impervious bases and surrounded by impervious bund walls. The volume of the bunded compound shall be at least equivalent to the capacity of the tank plus 10%. If there is multiple tankage, the compound shall be at least equivalent to the capacity of the largest tank, or the combined capacity of interconnected tanks, plus 10%. All filling points, vents, gauges and sight glasses must be located within the bund. The drainage system of the bund shall be sealed with no discharge to any watercourse, land or underground strata. Associated pipework shall be located above ground and protected from accidental damage. All filling points and tank overflow pipe outlets shall be detailed to discharge downwards into the bund. Reason: To prevent pollution of the water environment. 31. The outline permission hereby approved shall not extend to the housing layout shown on drawing no. IL30748-006 labelled Illustrative Layout. Reason: This plan is indicative only. RECOMMENDATION 2: To protect the amenities of occupiers of other premises in the vicinity 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. Further to this the applicant is advised that no noise audible outside the site boundary adjacent to the curtilage of residential property shall be created by construction activities in respect of the implementation of this consent outside the hours of 0800-1800 hours Mondays to Fridays and 0800 - 1300 hours on Saturdays or at any time on Sunday or public holidays. The applicant is also advised to seek approval for any proposed piling operations. RECOMMENDATION 3: This development falls within an area which has a geological predisposition to radon and will require basic radon protective measures, as recommended for the purposes of the Building Regulations 2000. Should you have any queries in this matter I would suggest you consult

130

with my Building Control Division RECOMMENDATION 4: The contamination assessments and the affects of unstable land are considered on the basis of the best information available to the Planning Authority and are not necessarily exhaustive. The Authority takes due diligence when assessing these impacts, however you are minded that the responsibility for (i) determining the extent and effects of such constraints and; (ii) ensuring that any imported materials (including, topsoils, subsoils, aggregates and recycled or manufactured aggregates / soils) are chemically suitable for the proposed end use. Under no circumstances should controlled waste be imported. It is an offence under section 33 of the environmental Protection Act 1990 to deposit controlled waste on a site which does not benefit from an appropriate waste management license. The following must not be imported to a development site: Unprocessed / unsorted demolition wastes. Any materials originating from a site confirmed as being contaminated or potentially contaminated by chemical or radioactive substances. Japanese Knotweed stems, leaves and rhizome infested soils. In addition to section 33 above, it is also an offence under the Wildlife and Countryside Act 1981 to spread this invasive weed; and (iii) the safe development and secure occupancy of the site rests with the developer. Proposals for areas of possible land instability should take due account of the physical and chemical constraints and may include action on land reclamation or other remedial action to enable beneficial use of unstable land. The Local Planning Authority has determined the application on the basis of the information available to it, but this does not mean that the land can be considered free from contamination. RECOMMENDATION 5: That the developer be advised that where any species listed under Schedules 2 or 4 of The Conservation (Natural Habitats etc.) Regulations 1994 is present on the site in respect of which this permission is hereby granted, no works of site clearance, demolition or construction shall take place in pursuance of this permission unless a licence to disturb any such species has been granted in accordance with the aforementioned Regulations and a copy thereof has been produced to the local planning authority. RECOMMENDATION 6: That future residents be informed of their future travel options as a welcome pack on occupancy to encourage sustainable travel behaviour. The developer is advised to contact the Operational Manager, Transport Policy, for leaflets and further information.

131

1. 1.1

DESCRIPTION OF PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT Outline permission is sought for the development of 48 dwellings on land at Radyr Court, Danescourt. Access is submitted for consideration under this application. Matters of appearance, landscaping, layout and scale are reserved. The proposed vehicle access to the site would be via Radyr Court Road from the south east. No vehicles would access the site from Danescourt Way to the south west. 4 no. existing footpath access points into the site would be retained. An illustrative site layout plan has been submitted with the application showing a possible dwelling arrangement, public open space, shared surface arrangements and a potential attenuation area. The application was subject to a screening under The Town and Country Planning (Environmental Impact Assessment) (England and Wales) Regulations 1999. The proposals are classified as Schedule 2 development as the site size exceeds the threshold of 0.5 hectares. However, the site is less than 5 hectares and significantly less than 1,000 dwellings. It was concluded that the proposals would not have a significant urbanising effect and therefore did not constitute EIA development. The following documents have been submitted in support of the application: (i) Planning Statement; (ii) Bat Survey Report; (iii) Tree Survey; (iv) Flood Consequences Assessment; (v) Extended Phase 1 Habitat Survey and Reptile Survey Report; (vi) Code for Sustainable Homes Pre-Assessment Report; (vii) Transport Statement; (viii)Design and Access Statement.

1.2

1.3 1.4

1.5

1.6

2. 2.1

DESCRIPTION OF SITE The site comprises approximately 2.14 hectares of rough grazing on two fields, dense scrubland, woodland and scattered trees. A network of informal footpaths and one public right of way cross the site. The site lies at the northern end of Radyr Court Road. The Radyr/Danescourt railway abuts the northeast site boundary. The Danescourt housing estate adjoins the site to the southwest. A single dwelling adjoins the site to the east and a terrace of 3 no. former railway cottages sits opposite the southern boundary of the site on Radyr Court Road. The site is undulating with a steep rise to the Danescourt estate to the southwest.

2.2

2.3

132

2.4

A wooded belt of mixed species abuts the northwest boundary of the site. It is subject to a tree preservation order. The site is adjacent to the River Taff flood plain, which abuts the east side the Radyr-Danescourt railway line. The River Taff is also a designated Site of Importance for Nature Conservation (SINC). SITE HISTORY 04/02044/W: Permission refused in December 2004 for proposed residential development of five dwellings for the following reason: A subsequent appeal was dismissed in January 2006. In dismissing the appeal the Inspector drew the following conclusions: (i) (ii) In terms of its width, the road falls below national standards I consider that further improvements would be necessary to avoid potential conflict between users of the highway, including pedestrians. (iii) A Grampian style condition to secure such improvements prior to the scheme being implemented would be reasonable and would, together with the agreed improvements, overcome the highway safety deficiencies that I have identified. (iv) The Council did not dispute the appellants findings that the quality of the landscape of the site and the vicinity is not of particular merit given the visual and noise impact of the nearby built-up areas and the railway line. (v) Despite the proximity of the row of properties at Blethin Close, its elevated position and intervening vegetation means that it is visually distinct from the appeal site and the other lower-lying land within the river valley. (vi) It is evident that the area of open space, within which the site lies, is valued by local residents because it is an easily accessible area that has retained, to a significant extent, a rural character, and which also contributes to the enjoyment of recreational users who appreciate its role as a part of a larger area of open space. (vii) The area would be particularly susceptible to harm from further development that would erode the present balance between the natural environment and the built form. (viii) The extent of improvements to the highway that I consider to be necessary would markedly alter its appearance, which currently resembles a quiet country lane, particularly along the section closest to the appeal site. This urbanising effect reinforces my findings that the project would harm the areas character. (ix) I consider that the proposed development would harm the character and appearance of the surrounding area.

2.5

3. 3.1

3.2

4. 4.1

POLICY FRAMEWORK Planning Policy Wales, 5th Edition (October 2012).

133

4.2

Technical Advice Notes (TANs): 1 2 5 10 11 12 15 16 18 21 22 Joint Housing Land Availability Studies (2006) Planning and Affordable Housing (2006) Nature Conservation and Planning (2009) Tree Preservation Orders (1997) Noise (1997) Design (2009) Development and Flood Risk (2004) Sport, Recreation and Open Space (2009) Transport (2008) Waste (2001) Planning for Sustainable Buildings (2010)

4.3

South Glamorgan (Cardiff Area) Replacement Structure Plan 1991-2011 (April 1997): EV1 MV1 MV2 MV11 MV12 H4 H5 H6 B4 C4 C7 C8 Towards Sustainable Development Location of New Developments Commuted Payments Parking Public Access Special Housing Provision Affordable Housing Community Facilities Greening of Urban Areas Local Sites of Nature Conservation Value Woodland and Hedgerows Protection of Water Resources

4.4

City of Cardiff Local Plan (January 1996): 7 9 10 11 12 16 17 18 19 20 24 25 31 Protection of Open Space Development in Areas at Risk of Flooding Contaminated or Unstable Land Design and Aesthetic Quality Energy Efficient Design Traffic Calming Parking and Servicing Facilities Provision for Cyclists Provision for Pedestrians Provision for Special Needs Groups Affordable and Special Needs Housing Affordable Housing Within the Built-Up Area Residential Open Space Requirement

4.5

Deposit Unitary Development Plan (October 2003) 1.A General Principles for the Location of Development

134

1.B 1.C 1.J 1.K 1.N 2.20 2.23 2.24 2.26 2.27 2.45 2.47 2.48 2.49 2.57 2.61 2.62 2.74 4.6

Achieving Good Design Planning Obligations Open Space Movement and Transport Priorities Car Parking Good Design Affordable Housing Residential Amenity Provision for Open Space, Recreation and Leisure Provision for Schools Trees, Woodland and Hedgerows Sites of Local Importance for Nature Conservation Biodiversity Protection of Open Space Access, Circulation and Parking Requirements Protection of Water Resources Flood Risk Provision for Waste Management Facilities in Development

Relevant Supplementary Planning Guidance: Access, Circulation and Parking Standards (January 2010) Developer Contributions for Transport (January 2010) Trees and Development (March 2007) Waste Collection and Storage Facilities (March 2007) Residential Design Guide (March 2008) Biodiversity (June 2011) Developer Contributions for School Facilities (March 2007) Open Space (March 2008) Community Facilities and Residential Development (March 2007)

4.7

The Interim Planning Policy Affordable Housing Delivery Statement (October 2010) is also relevant. INTERNAL CONSULTEES RESPONSES The Operational Manager, Transport Policy, notes that Planning Policy Wales (PPW) and Technical Advice Note (TAN) 18 emphasis the importance of locating new development in locations which enable good access by walking, cycling and public transport in order to reduce the need to travel by private car. Paragraph 8.7.1 of PPW states that local planning authorities should consider the impacts of the proposed development on travel demand, the level and nature of public transport provision and the accessibility by a range of different transport modes when determining a planning application for development that has transport implications. In addition, paragraph 5.9.1 of TAN 12 states that Good site location, building and street design can play an important role in achieving a reduction in car traffic and speed and short distance motorised journeys, as well as encouraging a wider choice of more sustainable modes of travel.

5. 5.1

135

5.2

He refers to Structure Plan Policy MV1 which states To minimise traffic movements, developments will be favoured at locations which are well served by public transport and are easily accessible for those wishing to travel other than by car and Local Plan Policy 13 which states: Proposals for new development at locations other than those identified on the Proposals Map, will only be permitted where resultant traffic flows, travel patterns, energy use and other emissions would be minimised; and they would be well located by reference to public transport and for those wishing to travel other than by car. He considers that the key issue raised by this proposal is whether the proposed development is sited in a location where it could reduce the need to travel, minimise trips by car, and provide accessibility by a range of transport modes including walking, cycling and public transport. He notes that the site is approximately 500 metres from local shops and facilities, approximately 700 metres from the nearest GP surgery, approximately 500 metres Danescourt Primary and approximately 1200 metres from Radyr Comprehensive. The nearest bus stops on Danescourt Way (approximately 450 metres) are served by 3 Cardiff Bus services an hour and 3 Stagecoach buses an hour to the city centre. There is also an hourly Cardiff Bus service which provides a direct link to Whitchurch Village, Heath Hospital, Colchester Avenue and St Mellons. Danescourt Railway station is located within 1 kilometre. Regarding cycle links, Cart Road 52 on the west edge of the River links Radyr Court Road and the Radyr Sidings development to the north. The Cart Road can be accessed from the application site via a subway beneath the railway which has restricted headroom. Measures to improve the subway including increasing the headroom to 2.4 metres and provision of lighting are desirable although it is acknowledged that this would be very costly. The Council is currently refurbishing the disused railway bridge to provide a cycle link from the Cart Road to Hailey Park and the Taff Trail on the east side of the river. The bridge connection would also make Llandaff Station accessible by bicycle. However, the Cart Road would benefit from a new surface to make it more attractive to pedestrians and cyclists. At the southern end of the Cart Road, the Taff Trail can be reached via Radyr Court Road, although, given that this would provide the primary road access to the site, measures to control traffic speeds may be required to make cycling attractive The Operational Manager, Transportation, acknowledges the Transport Statement (TS) that was submitted in support of the application. The transport impact analysis and found that the traffic increase during the AM and PM peak hour periods would be 2.17% and 2.54% respectively. Whilst in percentage terms this is considered to be minor on the current situation, he considers that there will be a direct impact on the use of Radyr Court Road itself by vehicles over the course of a typical day. The following mitigation works are proposed:

5.3

5.4

5.5

5.6

5.7

136

(i) Upgrade the section of Radyr Court Road leading to Danescourt Way by providing lighting to improve security and encourage shared access to shops, facilities and schools for cycling and walking; (ii) Provide a tarmacadam surface to Cart Road 52 which would compliment the improvement works to the old railway bridge which will connect the development site to Hailey Park for cyclists and walkers; A sum of 62,400 has been agreed to achieve this; (iii) The introduction of speed control measures to Radyr Court Road to make this principle vehicle access suitable for cycling and to improve safety for pedestrians. Additional lighting maybe required at the northern end of the road; (iv) The threshold for residential travel plans set in the Access Circulation and Parking SPG is 80 dwellings and above. Although this proposal sits below that threshold, he requests that a residential travel plan is put in place for the development to ensure that all new residents are aware of all their travel options, particularly for access to the local facilities in Danescourt. This is due to the significant difference in access to the site for pedestrians and for the private car 5.8 He acknowledges that the site is located close to local facilities and public transport. Planned improvements to local cycling routes will further extend the range of travel options by facilitating access to the Taff Trail and rail stations at Radyr and Llandaff North. Provided mitigation is in place (as detailed above) there would be no reason to object to this proposal on transport policy grounds. The mitigation described above would require a financial contribution which would be secured via a Section 106 Agreement. Relevant conditions are also attached. The Councils Ecologist makes the following comments: (i) having considered the bat survey, he notes that there are no structures or trees on site that are likely to support roosting bats. However, it is evident that the site is used by several species of bat for foraging and commuting and therefore the final layout of the site should seek to retain this capacity as far as possible. For example, trees on the site should be retained as far as possible as part of a landscape/movement corridor, allowing movement of bats through the site and preserving the linear habitat corridor between the Radyr Court Road estate and the River Taff; (ii) He considers that street lighting may cause disturbance to nocturnal species such as bats, especially if it is directed towards trees and other dark corridors that they may use for roosting, foraging and commuting. He supports the advice given in Appendix III of the Report and recommends that a pre-commencement condition be attached to any consent which requires the applicant to submit and adhere to a lighting scheme, which should be approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. (iii) He notes that there are no records of Dormice or Great Crested Newts on this site nor of sites connected to it. Therefore they support the decision not to undertake surveys for this species. He states that there are records of otters on the River Taff which lies about 30 metres to the east of the site. However, given the high public usage of the pathways through the

5.9

137

site and between the site and the river, he agrees that it is unlikely that otters use the site for lying-up. (iv) Whilst the reptile survey methodology claims to be based upon Froglife Advice Sheet 10 (FAS 10), the survey deviates from the recommendations in this document and other widely-used sources of guidance. In most, if not all, aspects of the reptile survey, the surveyors have either used inappropriate methodology or sought to use the bare minimum acceptable standards. Therefore he has no confidence that the negative result was due to absence/low density of reptiles rather than due to inadequate survey methodology. Having visited the site, he holds the view that the site is highly likely to support Slow Worms and Grass Snakes, though much less likely to support Adders and Common Lizards. This being the case, the applicant should be aware that reptiles may be present on the site, and that site clearance may result in harm to reptiles. The adopted view of the Countryside Council for Wales is that where it is predictable that reptiles are likely to be killed or injured by activities such as site clearance, this could legally constitute intentional killing or injuring, which are offences under the Wildlife and Countryside Act. Furthermore, if reptiles are discovered during site clearance or construction, in order to avoid the risk of prosecute work would have to cease and a trapping and translocation exercise undertaken. This would lead to substantial and costly delays. Therefore, he advises that the reptile survey should be repeated in April/May, using best-practice methodology, and a report submitted with the reserved matters application; (v) Although not a protected species, Radyr Hawkweed was first described in Cardiff and its entire distribution consists of only 3 sites, 2 of which are in Cardiff and very close to the application site. However, he has been advised by colleagues from the National Museum that it is unlikely that this species occurs on the application site, so he does not consider that further surveys are necessary; (vi) It is likely that birds are nesting on the site, so site clearance should avoid the bird nesting season. To this end we recommend attaching the standard condition from the Biodiversity Supplementary Planning Guidance; (vii) The Report refers to Japanese Knotweed and Cotoneaster species occurring on the site. Japanese Knotweed and some invasive Cotoneaster species are listed on Schedule 9 of the Wildlife and Countryside Act. Therefore he recommends a standard condition be attached to any permission that is granted. 5.10 He also makes the following responses to the representations of local residents on ecology matters: (i) Regarding the relationship with Radyr Woodland Site of Importance for Nature Conservation (SINC), although the area of woodland and scrub between the site and the SINC may provide a buffer, there is no evidence that the habitats on site are of sufficient quality to be designated as such themselves. A 15 metre buffer around woodlands is normally applied, and the proposed development site significantly exceeds this;

138

(ii) The area of woodland to be lost on the site is small (less than 0.5 Hectares), and is not listed as Ancient Semi Natural Woodland according to the Forestry Commission. He therefore does not consider its loss to be unacceptable; (iii) He accepts that the Phase 1 Habitat Survey was conducted at a less than optimal time of year, but from knowledge of the site and data on previous surveys of the site, he does not believe that surveys conducted in the optimal season would have revealed substantial protected or priority habitats on the site. Surveys undertaken at any time of year are always likely to miss some species which are not flowering or in leaf at that particular time. (iv) Bluebells are listed on Schedule 8 of the Wildlife and Countryside Act 1981, but only in respect of Section 13(2), which prevents sale of these plants. Apart from this, all wild plants have a general protection under Section 13(1)(b) of the same Act, which prevents plants from being intentionally uprooted by non-authorised persons. Authorised persons are defined in Section 27(1), and basically means the landowner and people authorised by the landowner. It is safe to assume that if a landowner instructed someone to clear the site for development, including the bluebells and other plants, then they would give them authorisation to uproot these plants under Section 13(1)(b). (v) In theory, all sites, including previously developed sites, could develop habitats worthy of SINC designation, given enough time and the correct management. However it is clearly unreasonable to designate all of these areas in the expectation that they may be worthy of SINC designation at some point in the future. (vi) He accepts that toads and probably other amphibian species will use the site, but apart from Great Crested Newts, these species receive no protection in wildlife law, beyond preventing their sale. There are no records of Great Crested Newts (GCNs) on this site, and in fact the nearest historical records are from the Waterhall Plantation Pond, some 1.2 km to the west. There are unconfirmed reports of this species at Forest Farm, about 1.3 km north. In both these cases, the GCN record is separated from the current site by significant barriers to dispersal, including numerous roads, housing, and the River Taff. Therefore, whilst it is remotely possible that GCNs (and any other species for that matter) could occur on this site, this likelihood has to be weighed against the costs and time delays of undertaking surveys for them. As set out in Section 6.2.2 of Planning Policy Wales Technical Advice Note 5: Nature Conservation and Planning:- bearing in mind the delay and cost that may be involved, developers should not be required to undertake surveys for protected species unless there is a reasonable likelihood of them being present. However, the level of likelihood that should trigger a requirement for developers to undertake surveys should be low where there is a possibility that European Protected Species might be present. It is considered best practice that such screening should be carried out by a competent Ecologist on the basis of data provided by the relevant Local Record Centre(s) (vii) The Local Planning Authority does not have any responsibilities under the Badger Act so any offences under this Act are a matter between those

139

committing the offence and the Police. However, they do have a general duty under the NERC Act to consider biodiversity in the exercise of their functions. Therefore any specific records of badger setts in this area should be reported to the Local Planning Authority who will in turn submit them to the Local Records Centre (SEWBReC). (viii)There are no records of Dormice on this site, and the nearest records we are aware of are at Greenmeadow Wood, 3 Km to the north. Whilst it is remotely possible that this species occurs on this site, they have to weigh this likelihood against the cost and delays associated with a survey. On this occasion, he considers that the low likelihood of this species occurring on this site does not justify the requirement for a survey to be undertaken. 5.10 The Operational Manager, Environment (Noise & Air) has no objection subject to conditions to address railway noise and vibration and road traffic noise plus they recommend an advisory note regarding construction site noise. The Operational Manager, Neighbourhood Regeneration, advises that the Supplementary Planning Guidance (SPG) on Community Facilities and Residential Development states that the Council will seek a financial contribution for improvements to existing community facilities or the provision of additional community facilities on all significant developments because the increased population will result in increased demand for local community facilities. If no on-site provision is proposed, a financial contribution is sought on residential developments containing 25 or more new dwellings where it has been identified that investment in community facilities will be required to meet the needs of the new population. This is an outline application for 48 dwellings with all matters except access reserved for future consideration. The housing mix is currently unknown. The formula in the community facilities SPG is based on the number of habitable rooms per dwellings. In this instance the plan for the site proposes 48 no. dwellings but does not include exact details of the number of habitable rooms. It is recommended that the development should make provision for payment of a financial contribution for community facilities to be calculated in accordance with the formula in the Community Facilities and Residential Development SPG. An exact request for a community facilities contribution will be made once details of dwelling numbers and/or habitable rooms have been provided. A contribution towards community facilities would be used to improve the quality and availability of Danescourt local centre and adjoining community facilities. The contribution may be used by the Council towards the design, improvement and/or maintenance of community facilities. Given the potentially significant increase in population and lack of community facility provision outlined within the proposed plans, it is reasonable to assume that added pressure will be put on the community facilities identified above. Maintenance and repair costs will become increasingly more frequent due to an increase in use and it is therefore reasonable to request a contribution from the applicant to off set the negative impact the development would have on the community facilities.

5.11

5.12

140

5.13

The Chief Culture, Leisure and Parks Officer advises that the Open Space Supplementary Planning Guidance (SPG) requires provision of a satisfactory level and standard of open space on all new housing developments, or an offsite contribution towards existing open space for smaller scale developments where new onsite provision is not applicable. The illustrative layout plan shows a number of small areas of grassland, but in their current form these are too small to form a good quality of open space which would be adopted by the Council. The use of the open space within the development does however help to provide some degree of green corridor through the site. In the absence of suitable or sufficient onsite public open space in the new development, the developers will be required to make a financial contribution towards the provision of open space offsite, or the improvement (including design and maintenance) of existing open space in the locality. In preapplication discussions with the agent they confirmed that an offsite contribution would be of more value as there is informal and formal green space within a reasonable distance from the site. An existing underused open space is located south of the site and this is likely to form the main focus for use of any offsite contribution, in preference to adoption of new open space on the development site. The amount of offsite contribution would be based on the number of habitable rooms and proposed increase in population as set out in the SPG. Further details of proposed housing would be required to calculate a figure. In the event that the Council is minded to approve an application, it will be necessary for the applicant and the Council to enter into a Section 106 Agreement to secure payment of the contribution. The Operational Manager, Environment (Contaminated Land) notes that the site may have been associated with localised quarrying and unauthorised waste disposal. This may have caused the land to become contaminated. The proposed development is also within close proximity of former landfill sites. Such sites are associated with the generation of landfill gases, within subsurface materials, which have the potential to migrate to other sites. These factors may give rise to potential risks to human health and the environment for the proposed end use. He recommends that conditions relating to ground gas protection, contaminated land measures, and imported soils and aggregates be attached to any permission, plus advisory notes relating to radon gas and contamination and unstable land. The Chief Schools Officer accepts a contribution of 41,488 towards the 4 no. additional Welsh Medium places that would be created by the development. The Operational Manager, Waste Management, notes that current plans make no reference to the storage and collection of waste and recycling. Plan must be provided together with vehicle tracking to show that a refuse vehicle can safely manoeuvre in and around the site. The Access Officer has been consulted. Any comments received will be reported to Committee.

5.15

5.16

5.17

5.18

141

5.19

The Chief Housing Strategy Officer considers that the site is suitable for affordable housing and seeks a 40% on-site contribution, which is in-line with the interim planning policy target in the Affordable Housing Delivery Statement (AHDS). A tenure split of 50% Intermediate Rented and 50% Low Cost Home-Ownership has been agreed with the agent. The latter would be provided between 60-65% Open Market Value, with the exact percentage being agreed prior to the completion of the units. The Public Rights of Way Officer has no objection to the proposals. He notes that public footpath No. 48 Radyr transverses the site and will require a diversion pursuant to S.278 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990. Since it is reasonable to assume that future residents are likely to utilise the footpaths, he considers that the developer should give consideration to their improvement. EXTERNAL CONSULTEES RESPONSES The Environment Agency notes that the development in question is not within a fluvial floodplain and they have no record or awareness of any flooding having occurred to the site. The site lies entirely within zone B, as defined by the development advice map (dam) referred to under TAN 15 Development and Flood Risk. Based on this information, they have no adverse comments to provide from a flood risk perspective. The watercourse known as the River Taff at this location is scheduled as a statutory main river, pursuant to the Water Resources Act 1991 and the Agency's Land Drainage Byelaws. The prior formal Flood Defence Consent (formerly a land drainage consent) of the Environment Agency must be obtained for any works in, under or over the watercourse, or within 7 metres of the base of any floodbank or wall, or where there is no bank or wall, within 7 metres of the top of the riverbank. The responsibility for the maintenance and good order of all watercourses and structures thereon rests, in the first instance, with the riparian owner. Land Drainage legislation does not seek to remove this responsibility. They advise that surface water run-off should be controlled as near to its source as possible through a sustainable drainage approach to surface water management (SUDS). SUDS are an approach to managing surface water runoff which seeks to mimic natural drainage systems and retain water on or near the site as opposed to traditional drainage approaches which involve piping water off site as quickly as possible. SUDS involve a range of techniques including soakaways, infiltration trenches, permeable pavements, grassed swales, ponds and wetlands. SUDS offer significant advantages over conventional piped drainage systems in reducing flood risk by attenuating the rate and quantity of surface water run-off from a site, promoting groundwater recharge, and improving water quality and amenity. The variety of SUDS techniques available means that virtually any development should be able to include a scheme based around these principles.

5.20

6. 6.1

6.2

6.3

142

6.4

They note that an overarching Construction Environmental Management Plan (CEMP) and Site Waste Management Plan (SWS) will be prepared for the proposed development. They request a suitably worded condition requiring the submission, agreement and implementation of the CEMP and Site Waste Management Plan. They would also request that the developer submit a timetable/programme of works. Network Rail has no objection in principle although they do make various detailed comments for the safe operation of the railway and the protection of Network Rail's adjoining land regarding security fencing, drainage, railway safety, ground levels, piling, noise, landscaping, and site layout. Welsh Water recommend drainage conditions be attached to any consent that is granted. The Countryside Council for Wales does not object to the application, provided appropriately worded conditions are attached to any planning permission that is granted. They advise that a licence must be obtained before construction commences to ensure for the protection of bats on the site, which are a European Protected Species. They welcome the Phase 1 Habitat and Bat surveys that have been undertaken and support the range of mitigation measures proposed including the retention of trees within the foraging and commuting habitat for bats and other species on site. Subject to the implementation of appropriate mitigation identified in the Bat Survey Report, they do not consider that the proposed development will result in a detriment to the favourable conservation status of European protected species. Should planning permission be granted they advise that suitable conditions are attached to the permission to agree a habitat management plan and any proposed external lighting scheme. The South Wales Police Crime Prevention Design Advisor has been consulted and any comments will be reported to Committee. REPRESENTATIONS Councillor K Davies supports the objections of local residents, particularly in relation to the following: (i) The proposed vehicle access via Radyr Court Road from its junction with Gerddi Taf cannot be improved to full two-way carriageway with pavements, which would be the minimum required standard for a development of this size. A shared space solution for would be completely inadequate for pedestrian and cyclist safety; Development of the site would therefore be contrary to Policy 19 of the Local Plan and to acceptable technical standards for highways; (ii) Vertical clearance for a standard fire tender is 3.7 metres and the vertical clearance under the railway bridge is 3.73 metres. The difference between these two figures is only 30mm (about one and a quarter inches) which is not a sufficient margin for error. The safety margin required for a newly built bridge would be 150mm, a much larger figure. The problem

6.5

6.6

6.7

6.8

7. 7.1

143

(iii)

(iv)

(v)

(vi)

with this affects not only emergency vehicles, but since passing under the bridge would be the only vehicular means of access, it would affect all furniture delivery vehicles as well as most retail delivery vehicles that are taller than 3.7 metres; The nearest property would be located approximately 100 metres beyond the bridge. This would mean that any delivery driver would have to carry the goods to be delivered for at least this distance. I cannot see too many delivery drivers or furniture removal staff being prepared to carry items this far, it is just not practical. There is also the problem of the narrow road; where would these vehicles park whilst a delivery is being made and how would they turn around to depart? Radyr Court Road is only 4.3 metres wide, again as stated by the Transport Statement. Manual for Streets recommends that two vehicles travelling in opposite directions to pass each other have the following widths: 5.5 metres for delivery vehicles, 4.8 metres for car and delivery vehicle, 4.1 metres for two cars, and 3 metres for cycle and car. Radyr Court Road is only capable of allowing two cars to pass; The junction of Radyr Court Road and Bridge Road is already constrained by the daily presence of stationary traffic to the Bridge Road/Cardiff Road junction. The junction itself and Bridge Road are incapable of accommodating additional traffic from Radyr Court Road; Two rights-of-way cross the site and significant wooded and grassed areas provide valuable amenity open space for the local community as evidenced by the many comments made by local residents. Development of the site would therefore be contrary to Policy 7 and, as an urban fringe site, Policy 5 of the Local Plan. The proposed development site is designated as amenity open space in Cardiff's Deposit Unitary Development Plan (October 2003). Although not adopted, this is a material consideration in the absence of an existing Local Development Plan.

7.2

Councillor R Cook (Canton) objects to the proposals. He states that he is a regular user of the path to the edge of the proposed development, which is a busy route from the Taff Trail along the west side of the Taff river. The area has abundant wildlife, trees and shrubs and is an important part of the river corridor for wildlife moving along the corridor. Development would encroach on the wild green space and would be contrary to Policy 5 of the Local Plan, causing harm to the leisure amenity and nature conservation of the area. He notes that a previous application for part of the site was refused on appeal in 2004 and nothing has changed since. The application should be refused. Kevin Brennan MP and Mark Drakeford AM have submitted a joint letter of objection to the proposals, raising the following issues: (i) the proposals fail to adequately consider the nature of local geography and layout of existing housing; (ii) the road is narrow, unlit and without a pavement for much of its length and is therefore unsuitable for the amount of traffic proposed; (iii) substantial congestion at the junction with Bridge Road makes access to Radyr Court Road problematic at present;

7.3

144

(iv) site is important for environmental and amenity purposes; (v) the application is speculative regarding the nature of housing. 7.4 Elaine Parrot AM objects to the above application, noting that a previous application in 2004 for five dwellings was recommended for refusal on the basis that the proposal would result in the loss of an area of open space which has visual amenity value in forming part of a corridor of open space which separates Danescourt from the River Taff. Furthermore, this refusal was upheld at appeal in 2006. The current application far exceeds the number and impact of the previous application and is contrary to the Councils planning policies and designations. She also adds that access to the site is extremely limited and presents serious highway safety issues. She therefore trusts that the application will be recommended for refusal. The proposals were advertised in the press and by site notice on 13 September 2012. Neighbouring occupiers have been re-consulted on the additional information. Approximately 90 individual objections have been received from residents of Pencisely Road (Canton), Sumner Close, Ty Parc Close, Timothy Rees Close, Pace Close, Heol Aradur, De Braose Close, Peckham Close, Beale Close, Radyr Court Rise, Buckley Close, Riversdale, Heol Seddon, Gerddi Taf, Blethin Close, Radyr Court Road and Nicholson Webb Close, plus a resident of Ascot, Berkshire. Their objections can be summarised as follows: (i) loss of semi-rural green open space, causing harm to bio-diversity, trees and wildlife habitat which is enjoyed by walkers, joggers, and cyclists; it is important for its visual amenity and its leisure amenity and has linkages to wider networks of open space; Japanese knotweed and Himalayan Balsam are present on site; The Councils Preferred Strategy Consultation Plan (October 2012) is a material consideration. The site falls within a designation on the key diagram to protect and enhance the river corridor. Policy 22 specifically states protection of the river valleys. The proposals neither preserve or enhance; The Background Technical Paper No. 1 Initial Sustainability Appraisal Report (October 2012) Appendix G sets out the sustainability criteria used for candidate site appraisals. The proposals would negatively impact many of these objectives; Radyr Court Road is narrow and unsuitable to accommodate the increase in traffic arising from the development. It has a high bank, is overhung by trees, and floods in extreme weather conditions. It currently serves 6 no. dwellings; Questions whether 48 no. dwellings is a significant contribution to meeting housing need and whether the houses would be affordable; Proposals conflict with Governments aims to promote walking and cycling as proposals will result in increased traffic and pollution; Congestion at along Radyr Court Road to Bridge Road. The local transport network is already overloaded; Devaluation in property values;

7.5

7.6

(ii) (iii)

(iv)

(v)

(vi) (vii) (viii) (ix)

145

(x) (xi) (xii)

(xiii) (xiv) (xv) (xvi) (xvii) (xviii) (xix) (xx) (xxi) (xxii) (xxiii) (xxiv) (xxv)

(xxvi)

(xxvii) (xxviii) (xxix)

(xxx)

Increase in noise pollution and traffic pollution; Increased risk to children and cyclists; An appeal for 5 no. dwellings on part of the site was dismissed in January 2006. Nothing has changed since this decision. The Inspectors conclusions found: The effect on the character and appearance of the area was the main issue; Most of the site is identified as open space. Local Plan Policy 7 is relevant; Blethin Close is elevated and visually distinct from the appeal site. The modest, long-established dwellings do not justify consolidating development; Open space is valued and retains, to a significant extent, a rural character; The area would be susceptible to harm from further development which would be difficult to resist; Highway improvements would markedly alter its appearance, which currently resembles a quiet country lane. Urbanising effects would harm character; Insufficient mitigation; Harm to character and appearance of surrounding area; Inefficient use of Greenfield site; Unsustainable location; No compensatory open space is provided; Flood risk; Contrary to Structure Plan Policies MV12, B4, and C1; Contrary to Planning Policy Wales and Technical Advice Note 16; Contrary to Local Plan Policies 7, 18 and 19 and deposit Unitary Development Plan Policies 1.J, 2.45, 2.47, 2.49, 2.57; Contrary to the Open Space, Biodiversity Supplementary Planning Guidance; Loss of linkages to footpath networks; Permission would open the door to further erosion of public space; The small size of the development does very little to fulfil the Citys requirement for new housing. Cardiffs land bank is currently estimated to be in excess of 8 years; Phase I Habitat Survey is dated October 2011, outside of the recommended March-Sept guidelines, meaning results are questionable; Great Crested Newts are recorded in the area although survey does not state where. Slow worms and badgers are also present; Bluebells, protected by the Wildlife and Countryside Act 1981, are on the site; The Biodiversity Supplementary Planning Guidance requires schemes to be designed to avoid harm to protected species and biodiversity priority species during construction and operation. Corridors and links to adjacent/neighbouring habitats should be maintained and enhanced; Habitat and Reptile Survey accompanying the application has a number of omissions;

146

(xxxi) (xxxii)

(xxxiii) (xxxiv) (xxxv)

(xxxvi) (xxxvii) (xxxviii) (xxxix)

Railway bridge on Radyr Court Road prevents emergency and large vehicle access and is on a blind bend, causing safety concerns; A review of the Habitat and Reptile survey leads to the following comments: Site contains 3 different habitats (pasture land, scrub land, and woodland which is likely to include a wide diversity of flora and fauna; Should be viewed in the context of the wider River Taff corridor, not in isolation; Amenity planting areas will be grass and ornamental. Loss of mosaic of habitats resulting in loss of biodiversity; Substantial loss of woodland; Surveys took place at the end of the season so some species may have been missed e.g. bluebells, which only appear in spring, and Radyr Hawkweed, which flowers May to July; Reptile survey in October is outside the recommended survey season of March Sept; Great Crested Newts may forage on the site. Ponds are located within 500m at Radyr Community Woodlands; Bats are likely to be present on site; Badgers have been reported foraging in nearby gardens and therefore are highly likely to be present on site; The site is suitable for Dormice habitat; Preliminary assessment for the Code for Sustainable Homes states the site has low ecological value. This is incorrect. Local schools and nursery are nearing capacity; Inaccuracies in the planning application and supporting documents; Contrary to Cardiffs Countryside Strategy, which vows to protect the green corridors, particularly the river valleys, and green spaces of Cardiff; Development would not encourage fitness and alternative transport modes to the car; Increase in crime; Site drains naturally at present; There are other vacant sites in the City which should be developed instead e.g. Ely Paper Mill.

7.7

A petition of 250 signatures has been submitted via www.saveradyrcourtroad.org.uk in opposition to the application due to inadequate and unsafe access, loss of well-used public amenity space and loss of visual amenity and privacy. A petition of 8 signatures has been submitted by Age Concern objecting to the proposals stating: It would have a major effect on the character and appearance of the area; It is un-developed open space enjoyed by local residents and used by walkers and cyclists; Established trees, shrubs and wildlife provides a peaceful rural setting;

7.8

147

Radyr Court Road is partly unlit and would require significant upgrading harming the areas character and creating an urbanising effect.

7.9

A petition of 33 signatures has been submitted by residents of Gerddi Taf objecting to the proposals stating: It would have a major effect on the character and appearance of the area; It is un-developed open space enjoyed by local residents and used by walkers and cyclists; Established trees, shrubs and wildlife provides a peaceful rural setting; Radyr Court Road is partly unlit and would require significant upgrading harming the areas character and creating an urbanising effect.

7.10

A petition of 19 signatures from residents of Blethin Close has been submitted objecting to the proposals on the following grounds: misleading or lack of technical information submitted with the application; a full topographical survey is required; loss of open space of important leisure/recreational and nature conservation value; loss of space of important visual amenity; unsustainable location for development; adverse impact of vehicular traffic along Radyr Court Road; permission was recently refused, and dismissed at appeal, for a smaller residential development on part of the site.

7.11

The Llandaff Society objects to the development on the following grounds: (i) the land is an important part of the strategic open space for the community, being a continuation of Radyr Woods and the Taff Corridor; (ii) the proposed access is totally unacceptable being subject to flood risk with a sub-standard junction with the heavily-trafficked Bridge Road; (iii) an appeal for 5 dwellings on part of the site was dismissed; (iv) proposals represent an over-development of the site leaving very little green space and compromising footpaths. The Danescourt Community Association objects to the proposals for the following reasons: (i) Emergency vehicles and delivery vehicles will struggle to gain access to the site under the existing railway bridge; a clearance of only 30mm exists at present; (ii) Parking concerns leading to congestion; (iii) Radyr Court Road is only 4.3 metres wide, again as stated by the Transport Statement. Manual for Streets recommendations that two vehicles travelling in opposite directions to pass each other have the following widths: 5.5 metres for delivery vehicles, 4.8 metres for car and delivery vehicle, 4.1 metres for two cars, and 3 metres for cycle and car. Radyr Court Road is only capable of allowing two cars to pass; (iv) Lack of lighting raises safety concerns;

7.12

148

(v) Concern that the section of Radyr Court Road where it joins Danescourt Way, would be re-opened to vehicles. 7.13 The Friends of Hailey Park object to the proposals for the following reasons: (i) a smaller scale application was previously refused permission due to local objections; (ii) loss of wildlife habitat, hedgerows, trees and grassland; (iii) historical importance with the old Radyr ford; (iv) impact upon popular cycling routes; (v) increased traffic; (vi) detrimental to the areas character. 7.14 Cardiff Ramblers would object to the extinguishment of any public rights of way, footpaths or Cart Road 52 within the site and would also object to any diversion of these routes should the diverted route fail to be as convenient. They confirm that they are willing to meet with the applicant and Council officers to discuss any proposed changes. The Headteacher of Danescourt Primary School expresses concern regarding risks to pupil safety due to an increase in traffic close to the school, damage to ecosystems and wildlife and impact upon the schools learning in Science, Geography and ESDGC. The Woodland Trust notes that the woodland adjacent to the development is acting as a natural buffer to an area of woodland which appears on the Countryside Council for Wales woodland inventory as ancient semi natural woodland. The Assembly has recognised that areas of ancient woodland are declining and becoming increasingly fragmented, emphasising the importance of conserving ancient woodland and its value as a biodiversity resource (see Planning Policy Wales). The woodland to be cleared for the development is acting as a natural buffer to the ancient woodland and protecting the site from detrimental edge-effects, changes in microclimate which would be as a result of development, penetrate woodland and it is known that these changes can extend up to three times the canopy height from the forest edges. The development would effectively create a new woodland edge, which is highly sensitive to edge effects. Therefore they object to the application due to the loss of woodland, which is acting as a buffer to the ancient woodland. ANALYSIS The key issues for the consideration of this application are land use policy, urban design issues, ecology matters, traffic, access and parking considerations, housing need and the previous appeal decision, together with the issues raised during public consultation. Each of these issues will be considered in turn.

7.15

7.16

8. 8.1

149

Open Space Issues 8.2 This site is defined as an area of amenity open space in the adopted City of Cardiff Local Plan. It is located within the existing urban area and therefore planning policies seeking to protect the countryside are not considered to be relevant. Local Plan Policy 7 seeks to protect areas of existing open space through only allowing proposals involving the loss of recreational or amenity open space where: 1. they would not cause or exacerbate a local or city-wide deficiency of recreational open space and the open space has no amenity or nature conservation importance; or 2. the developers provide satisfactory compensatory open space. 8.3 The last survey of open space in 2009 classified this site as amenity open space. The Supplementary Planning Guidance (SPG) states that there should be an objection to proposals which would adversely affect the appearance of open spaces which significantly contribute to the visual appearance of an area. The SPG also highlights the important role amenity areas can play in providing an informal open space resource for local people through accommodating activities such as walking, dog exercise and nature studies, especially where there are limited alternative areas of recreational and amenity open space in the locality and seeks to resist proposals that would cause unacceptable harm to such areas. It is noted that the applicant in the supporting statement has assessed the amenity value of the site and concludes that it is limited and also concludes that the quality of the site is of moderate and limited value and that the grass areas see little use. It is also noted that the site is held in high regard by local residents, demonstrated by the high level of local opposition to the proposals. Whilst the quality of the open space may be of limited value, it is clearly wellused and valued by the local community. This must be weighed against the other material considerations in this analysis. It is also noted that the indicative layout plan suggests that open space and footpath enhancements will be provided. These enhancements would include retention of an enhanced corridor of informal open space through the site together with improved access to the Taff Trail recreational route. The developer has confirmed their agreement to provide open space on either site, off-site or a combination of the two depending on the detailed design of the development.

8.4

8.5

8.6

The River Corridor 8.7 The site falls within the boundaries of the Taff Corridor Landscape Character Area, as identified within the Landscape Study of Cardiff 2008. This Character Area covers the River Taff and adjoining land from the County Boundary to Cardiff Castle and is identified as an important green corridor through the

150

city, penetrating the urban core and providing a link between urban Cardiff and the countryside to the north. 8.8 Structure Plan Policy B4 seeks to protect, conserve, and enhance open spaces which are important for amenity, recreation and/or nature conservation and the development of such areas will not be permitted, except on the sites identified for development by other development plan policies. The Policy favours the creation of a coherent network of green spaces and corridors with particular attention to river corridors. The site lies in close proximity to the Taff Trail Corridor, yet it is distinct from it and is separated from the river by the Radyr-Danescourt railway line. It is noted that the proposals seek to retain footpath and cycle linkages through the site to the existing River Taff Corridor. The proposals are not considered to undermine the coherence of the existing river corridor. It should also be noted that Cart Road 52 runs adjacent to the site between the river and the railway. On-site improvement works funded by a Section 106 Agreement attached to the Radyr Sidings development are under way and include access improvements over the former railway bridge into Hailey Park. Whilst the site falls within a designation on the key diagram of the Councils Preferred Strategy Consultation Plan (October 2012) to protect and enhance the river corridor, this document carries no weight as the Local Development Plan is yet to be formally adopted.

8.9

8.10

8.11

Urban Design Considerations 8.12 The issue of connectivity is an important consideration. Access to the site is via Radyr Court Road. From the junction with Gerddi Taf this section is a narrow single road, which is well used by pedestrians as an access route to the Danescourt estate and local schools and facilities. It is considered important that the integrity of this section of Radyr Court Road is maintained. In dismissing the appeal decision on the 2004 application site for 5 dwellings (see paragraph 3.2), the Inspector considered that The extent of improvements to the highway that I consider necessary would markedly alter its appearance, which currently resembles a quiet country lane, particularly along the section closet to the appeal site. Since this appeal the Manual for Streets outlines guidance on the specific subject of shared surface streets as follows: In traditional street layouts, footways and carriageways are separated by a kerb. In a street with a shared surface, this demarcation is absent and pedestrians and vehicles share the same surface. The key aims are to encourage low vehicle speeds; create an environment in which pedestrians can walk, or stop and chat, without feeling intimidated by motor traffic; make it easier for people to move around; and promote social interaction. These principles are considered to be appropriate should Members be minded to approve the development of this site. The quality of this location, with Radyr Court Road meandering alongside the River Taff

8.13

151

should be embraced. However it must also be balanced with the need to provide safe access for 48 new dwellings. 8.14 The indicative site layout shows an intention to retain and enhance footpath linkages through the site, maintaining the good levels of permeability with the Danescourt estate, the Taff River Corridor, and green spaces. These linkages offer safe and convenient pedestrian and cycling routes to shops, schools and open space. Whilst it is acknowledged that the detailed layout is reserved for subsequent consideration, the indicative layout shows dwellings fronting onto the movement corridor. This arrangement is supported and will introduce good levels of natural surveillance which would help to design out crime. The density is considered acceptable in relation to the efficient use of land as recommended by TAN 12 Design.

8.15

Nature Conservation Issues 8.16 It is noted that the Councils Ecologist does not dispute the findings of the requested bat survey, subject to relevant conditions (see paragraph 5.9). It is also noted that the Countryside Council for Wales (see paragraph 6.7) is also content with the findings of the bat survey. Relevant conditions are attached to ensure for the protection of this protected species. The proposed conditions in Recommendation 1 are considered to be sufficient to adequately safeguard nature conservation interests. Following public consultation on the proposals, several responses have been received raising concerns regarding the impact of development upon nature conservation. The Councils Ecologist has responded in depth to the specific issues raised and these are summarised in paragraph 5.10 The Councils Tree Officer expresses concerns that two large sewer easements run through the site which the indicative site layout shows as a landscape/movement corridor with tree planting. He advises that Welsh Water are unlikely to accept large tree planting this area, which would limit the potential for replacement planting to mitigate against tree removal. Members should note that matters relating to detailed site layout are not for consideration at this stage and the precise amount and location of replacement tree planting will be assessed during the consideration of reserved matters. Members are also advised to note that the River Taff corridor is located immediately east of the application site, which will remain intact and provides a more substantial movement corridor for wildlife. The Councils Tree Officer is also concerned with potential conflict between residential properties and a group of B category oaks and sycamore trees bordering the site on the northeast boundary, which he considers may be a constraint to development. Whilst his concerns are acknowledged, Members are reminded that detailed matters relating to site layout will be assessed following the submission of reserved matters and these concerns are not considered to be sufficient in themselves to prevent development.

8.17

8.18

8.19

152

Transport & Access 8.20 It is noted that, subject to conditions and the completion of a Section 106 Agreement to secure the mitigation measures identified in paragraph 5.7, the Operational Manager, Transportation, has no objections to the proposals. In making his comments, he has accepted the findings of the Transport Statement accompanying the application that that the existing road network would be able to accommodate the increase in traffic movements. The proposals to create a shared surface to Radyr Court Road between the application site and the junction with Gerddi Taf is welcomed and is considered to be a satisfactory solution to promoting walking and cycling. This complies with the Governments to promote walking and cycling as an alternative to the private car. The strong feelings of local residents regarding the adequacy of Radyr Court Road to provide satisfactory access are noted. However, officers are satisfied that the improvement works will not compromise the safety of pedestrians, cyclists or other road users. The previous Inspector, in dismissing the appeal for 5 no. dwellings on the site in 2006 described Radyr Court Road as resembling a quiet country lane and that any highway improvements would markedly alter its appearance which would have an urbanising effect. The proposed improvement works consist of provision of street lighting, 4 no. painted strips on the road, and 4 no. highway signs. Vegetation would also be cut back where necessary. No footways are proposed (they were required previously). Whilst the findings of the previous Inspector in 2006 must be given due consideration, it is submitted to Members that the proposed highway improvements to this Section of Radyr Court Road are not, in themselves, unacceptable. The creation of a shared surface along this section of highway reduces the urbanising effect of the development to such a degree that it is submitted to Members that this section of Radyr Court Road would retain its appearance resembling a quiet country lane. It is not considered that the increase in traffic would be so great as to result in an unacceptable level of traffic pollution for neighbouring occupiers.

8.21

8.22

8.23

8.24

Housing Land Supply 8.25 Planning Policy Wales (Edition 5, October 2012) and Technical Advice Note 1: Joint Housing Land Availability Studies (June 2006) make it clear that Local planning authorities must ensure that sufficient land is genuinely available or will become available to provide a 5 year supply of land for housing. Study groups have been established across Wales to undertake housing land availability studies and are co-ordinated by the department for Economy and Transport of the Welsh Assembly Government. The latest housing land availability figures for Cardiff were issued in August 2012 based on figures as

153

at 1st April 2011. These indicate that Cardiff has a 2.3 year residential land supply based the past 5 year build rates. 8.26 In situations where housing land supply is less than 5 years, TAN 1 states: The results of the Joint Housing Land Availability Studies should be treated as a material consideration in determining planning applications for housing. Where the current study shows a land supply below the 5 year requirement, the need to increase supply should be given considerable weight when dealing with planning applications, provided that development would otherwise comply with national planning policies. Members should also be aware of the recent appeal decision in May 2012 for residential development and strategic open space at Michaelston Road. This site is located in the open countryside and is also within the St. Fagans Conservation Area. In allowing the appeal, the Inspector considered that the significant shortage of land supply, the acknowledged need for family housing, and the likely timescale for production of the Local Development Plan provide compelling grounds to allow the appeal and he afforded them considerable weight. He also considered that the site would provide approximately 79 dwellings comprising a mix of dwelling types, including family and affordable housing, which would make a notable contribution to the Citys identified housing need.

8.27

Flooding and Drainage Issues 8.28 It is noted that the Environment Agency and Welsh Water have no objection, subject to relevant conditions. A relevant condition is attached to ensure that the method of the disposal of foul and surface water is agreed with the local planning authority in advance of development commencing on site. It is noted that the site is not located within an area requiring flood risk mitigation measures. The occasional temporary flooding of part of Radyr Court Road during extreme weather conditions is not considered to be a significant constraint that should prevent development. The Environment Agency has requested conditions requiring a Construction Environmental Management Plan and a Site Waste Management Plan (paragraph 6.4). However, these matters are considered to be adequately controlled under separate legislation and therefore such conditions are not necessary.

8.29

8.30

Response to Local Representations 8.31 In respect of the outstanding neighbour objections not already discussed in this analysis: (i) A relevant condition is attached to satisfactorily address any Japanese Knotweed and/or Himalayan Balsam that maybe present on site; (ii) Any depreciation in property value is not a material planning

154

consideration; (iii) It is considered that any potential source of noise pollution could be adequately mitigated through relevant conditions; (iv) The development of 48 no. dwellings on this site, with provision of a green corridor, replacement tree planting and retention of footpath linkages represent an efficient use of this greenfield site; (v) No objection to the proposals has been received from the Chief Schools Officer. He has no objection subject to a financial contribution to education provision (see paragraph 5.16); (vi) The planning application and supporting documents are considered to be sufficiently accurate to enable a full and proper assessment of the proposals to be carried out; (vii) There is no evidence that the development would result in an increase in crime levels in the area. It is noted that the South Wales Police Crime Prevention Design Advisor has not objected to the proposals; (viii)Other potential development sites may exist in the City however this application must be determined on its own merits. The Council has a duty to determine this application. (ix) The Background Technical Paper No. 1 Initial Sustainability Appraisal Report (October 2012) Appendix G has no status as it has not been formally adopted. (x) The proposals would encourage alternative transport modes to the car. Section 106 Agreement Heads of Terms 8.32 The agent has confirmed that their client is willing to enter into a Section 106 Agreement to secure the following: 40% Affordable Housing provision on-site with a tenure split of 50% Intermediate Rented and 50% Low Cost Home Ownership; A financial contribution towards the improvement of Community Facilities at Danescourt Local Centre. The precise sum will be calculated using the formula in Community Facilities and Residential Development Supplementary Planning Guidance, (March, 2007); 41,488 towards education provision; The provision of Public Open Space on site, off-site or a combination of the two, to be agreed following the submission of reserved matters; 62,400 towards upgrading Court Road 52 which would then be conveyed to the Council (see paragraph 5.7); A Travel Plan to make future residents aware of their travel options; If required following survey work, speed reducing measures to Radyr Court Road from the entrance to the application site to its junction with Bridge Road; and Install street lighting from the site entrance on Radyr Court Road to the junction with Danescourt Way.

Conclusions 8.33 In concluding, it is recognised that the site is valued by the local community as an area of amenity open space for informal leisure activities. However, the

155

local planning authority recognises that the site has little intrinsic value. It is also noted that the developer is willing to enter into a Section 106 Agreement to secure satisfactory compensatory open space provision, either on site or in the vicinity of the site. 8.34 The protection of this site from development through a reliance on open space policies must be weighed against the current housing need that Cardiff faces. The recent appeal decision at Michelston Road in July 2012, which allowed the development of 79 dwellings on land that is subject to stringent countryside policies and conservation area protection, demonstrates that the urgent housing need faced by the city can not be ignored. It is the view of officers that this urgent housing need outweighs existing policies which have served to provide sufficient protection in previous cases. It is also considered that the improvement works to Radyr Court Road would not cause unacceptable harm to the character or appearance of this road. Subject to the completion of a legal agreement to secure the provision of the comprehensive package of terms listed in paragraph 8.32, and relevant conditions, it is recommended that outline permission be granted.

8.35

156

157

158

LOCAL MEMBER OBJECTIONS, PETITIONS


COMMITTEE DATE: 13/02/2013 APPLICATION DATE: 03/09/2012

APPLICATION No. 12/1520/DCO ED: APP: TYPE: APPLICANT: LOCATION: PROPOSAL: FAIRWATER

Full Planning Permission

Mr Deniz Dogan 56A PLAS MAWR ROAD, FAIRWATER, CARDIFF, CF5 3JX REFURBISHMENT OF EXISTING A1 RETAIL UNIT AND CHANGE OF USE TO A3 HOT FOOD TAKEAWAY INCLUDING NEW EXTERNAL FASCIA SIGN NEW GATED ACCESS TO REAR SERVICE YARD REINSTATING EXISTING REAR ACCESS DOOR AND WINDOWS TO REAR SIDE & FRONT ELEVATIONS ___________________________________________________________________ RECOMMENDATION: That planning permission be GRANTED subject to the following conditions: 1. C01 Statutory Time Limit 2. No member of the public shall be admitted to or allowed to remain on the premises between the hours of 23.00 and 10.00 hrs on Monday to Saturday and between the hours of 21.00 and 10.00 on Sunday. Reason: To ensure the amenity of occupiers of other premises in the vicinity are protected, in accordance with policy 2.24 of the deposit Cardiff Unitary Development Plan. 3. The rating level of the noise emitted from fixed plant and equipment on the site shall not exceed the existing background noise level at any time by more than 5dB(A) at any residential property when measured and corrected in accordance with BS 4142: 1997(or any British Standard amending or superseding that standard). Reason: To ensure that the amenities of occupiers of other premises in the vicinity are protected, in accordance with policy 2.24 of the deposit Unitary Development Plan and guidance contained within the adopted supplementary planning guidance, Restaurants, Takeaways and other Food and Drink Uses (1996). 4. The extraction of all fumes from the food preparation areas shall be mechanically extracted to a point to be agreed in writing by the Local Planning Authority, and the extraction system shall be provided with a de-

159

odorising filter. All equipment shall be so mounted and installed so as not to give rise to any noise nuisance. Details of the above equipment including the chimney shall be submitted to, and approved by, the Local Planning Authority in writing and the equipment installed prior to the commencement of use for the cooking of food. The equipment shall thereafter be maintained in accordance with the manufacturers' guidelines, such guidelines having previously been agreed by the Local Planning Authority in writing. Reason: To ensure that the amenities of occupiers of other premises in the vicinity are protected, in accordance with policy 2.24 of the deposit Cardiff Unitary Development Plan. 5. Access to the premises for customers shall be from the front of the site only and not via the rear lane. Reason: In the interests of highway and pedestrian safety, in accordance with policy 17 of the Cardiff Local Plan and policy 2.57 of the deposit Cardiff Unitary Development Plan. 6. Before the development hereby approved is brought into beneficial use, a plan showing details of facilities for the storage of refuse and recycling containers within the site, and details of where they will be presented for collection, shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority and thereafter refuse and recycling containers shall only be stored in accordance with the approved details. Reason: To secure an orderly form of development and protect the amenities of the area, in accordance with policy 2.74 of the deposit Cardiff Unitary Development Plan. 8. Details of scheme for the installation of a CCTV monitoring system at the premises shall be submitted to and approved by the local planning authority prior to its installation on site. Thereafter the system shall be installed before any customers are served. Reason: To deter the occurrence or antisocial behaviour in the vicinity to protect residential amenity of neighbours residents in accordance with policy 2.24 of the deposit Cardiff District Development Plan and Planning Policy Wales 3rd paragraph 4.10.12. 1. 1.1 DESCRIPTION OF PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT Planning permission is sought for the change of use of a vacant A1 unit (previously in use as a greengrocers) to a Class A3 takeaway use and alterations to the existing building and rear yard. It is proposed that the opening hours of the business will be from 10.00 am to 10.30 pm Monday to Saturday and 10.00 am to 9.00 pm on Sundays (the

1.2

160

agent has requested that this be for a trail period of 12 months only, whereby they would seek to increase afterwards). 1.3 The alterations to the building entail a new shopfront and fascia board (sign would require separate advertisement consent), internal alterations, new door and window to the rear to be reinstated, new ramp to rear of unit, new gate entrance inserted into boundary wall and a fume extraction system. DESCRIPTION OF SITE The application premises is sited adjacent to a small parade of approximately 11 commercial units to the north, with residential properties to the south and west, with garage to the east. The property is a single storey building attached to another unit, currently in use as a hairdressers. SITE HISTORY 02/1075/W Change of use from shop repair to taxi control office and erect aerial. Approved, note that taxis and taxi drivers restricted from premises between 23.00 18.00 hours each day. 10/1665/DCO Extensions to create three storey building comprising 2 no. retail units retained at ground floor, 3 no. self-contained 2 bedroom flats at upper floors, 2 no. dormers to front elevation, plus external alterations. Refused. POLICY FRAMEWORK The application site is shown as part of an existing housing area indicated on the Proposals Map of the City of Cardiff Local Plan, although the premises is located within a private of retail units, is currently in retail use, and was previously a taxi control office. The Council has resolved that in addition to extant development plans, the Deposit Cardiff Unitary Development Plan (October 2003) should be taken into account in development control decisions. The following policies of the Deposit Cardiff Unitary Development Plan (October 2003) are considered to be relevant to the proposal: Policy 2.24 (Residential Amenity) Policy 2.57 (Access, Circulation and Parking Requirements) Policy 2.64 (Air, Noise and Light Pollution)

2. 2.1

2.2

3. 3.1

3.2

4. 4.1

4.2

4.3

161

4.4

The Local Plan Supplementary Planning Guidance Restaurants, Takeaways and other Food and Drink Uses (June 1996) is also relevant to the determination of this application. Technical Advice Note 11 : Noise. Planning Policy Wales 2011. INTERNAL CONSULTEE RESPONSES The Operational Manager, Environment (Pollution Control) states that: (i) There would be an objection, from a noise pollution view point on the grounds of their being residential accommodation to the side of the proposed development. It is likely that the amenities of the residents in the accommodation would be affected by noise nuisance being generated by the activities of the proposed development and from patrons frequenting the proposed development and from patrons frequenting the proposed development. This would be in line with the Supplementary Planning Guidance on Restaurants, Takeaways and Other Food and Drink Uses. (ii) There would also be an objection from an air pollution view point on the grounds of their being residential accommodation to the side of the proposed development. It is likely that the amenities of the residents in the accommodation would be affected by smell nuisance being generated by the activities at the proposed development. This would be in line with the Supplementary Planning Guidance on Restaurants, Takeaways and Other Food and Drink Uses.

4.5 4.6 5. 5.1

5.2 5.3

Operational Manager, Transportation has no objections. The Strategic Planning Manager (Land Use Policy) state that the site falls within an existing residential area, as defined by the Local Plan. The proposals should be assessed against the Supplementary Planning Guidance on Restaurants, Takeaways and Other Food and Drink Uses (1996). Paragraph 3.1 states that food and drink uses are unlikely to be acceptable within or adjacent to residential areas, if they would cause nuisance and loss of amenity to residents, or result in the loss of residential property. The proposal involves the change of use of one vacant A1 unit into an A3 unit. The building falls outside any area designated for shopping uses within the Local Plan, so the existing retail element is not afforded any specific protection in land use policy terms in this location. Cardiff Council 2011 monitoring data indicated8 x A1s, x Suit Generis, 1 x A2 + 1 x A3 in the Plas Mawr Road shopping frontage.

162

The proposal raises no significant land use policy concerns, but the application should be determined based on the likely impact upon residential amenity and having regard to the planning history of the site. 5.4 The Operational Manager Waste Management advises that the submitted plans make no reference to the storage of waste and recycling. EXTERNAL CONSULTEE RESPONSES Welsh Water advise that a condition requiring a grease trap should be imposed. South Wales Architectural Liaison Officer no comments received, however, it is noted that the comments received for a recent application nearby (58 Plas Mawr Road application 10/2218/DCO) were: Analysis has shown that overall crime and anti-social behaviour is high in the Fairwater area of Cardiff with a total of 176 incidents being recorded in December 2010. The proposed hot food takeaway will adjoin an existing fish and chip shop which is located on a parade of shops at the above location and which has provided to be a hone pot to youths in the area who regularly congregate to the annoyance of others. The area is a hotspot for anti-social behaviour and with the added attraction of a later opening premise, this would cause a longer spell of ASB. There are elderly, disabled and vulnerable people living very close to the current shop who regularly call about groups who gather by the shops when they are open. 7. 7.1 REPRESENTATIONS The proposal was advertised by the site notice and press notice; the consultation period on 11th October, 2012. Neighbouring occupiers have been consulted. Letters and emails have been received from the occupiers of 40 Hirst Crescent, 56 Plas Mawr Road and 46 Frewer Avenue, objecting for the following reasons: (i) (ii) (iii) (iv) (v) (vi) over-saturation of existing takeaways in surrounding area; anti-social behaviour/youth annoyance; noise from patrons frequenting the premises; litter; smells from cooking of food; congestion/highway safety.

6. 6.1

6.2

7.2

163

7.3

A 62 name petition has been submitted, objecting to the proposal for the following reasons: (i) (ii) (iii) (iv) (v) noise; pollution; litter; gathering of youths; blocking of access to council owned garages to rear.

7.4

A petition has also been received with 100 signatures supporting the proposed application. Local Members have been consulted and Councillors Neil McEvoy and Lisa Ford object to the proposal for the following reasons: (i) (ii) (iii) (iv) Location map and Design and Access Statement are incorrect. Traffic issues 3 schools in close proximity and lorries. Access to lane is narrow. Fume extraction flue would be in close proximity to No. 56 Plas Mawr Road. (v) Not enough space for refuse storage in rear yard. (vi) Problems with anti-social behaviour in area. (v) Request a site visit.

7.5

8. 8.1

ANALYSIS The main planning issues relate to: (i) The impact of the amenities of neighbouring occupiers. (ii) Highway safety/parking issues.

8.2

Amended plans have been submitted, which shows the fume extraction unit moved onto the side elevation of the adjoining commercial property (56b Plas Mawr Road). The agent has also stated that he wishes for the opening hours to be altered to 10.00 am 10.30 pm Monday to Saturdays and 10.00 am to 10.00 pm on Sundays for a trail period of 12 months. He also states that his client will install CCTV in the premises and has experience managing other late night outlets. It is noted that the Operational Manager, Environment (Pollution Control) maintains his objection in light of the above amendments. The application comprises a ground floor shop unit, with residential properties to the south only and, separated by an existing access lane to rear garage area. It is noted that the site is not within a designated local centre. In respect of the potential impact upon the amenities of neighbouring residents, it will be noted that the Operational Manager, Environment (Pollution Control)

8.3

164

has objected to the proposal on the grounds that the proposal would be likely to adversely affect the amenities of the local residents, creating noise and smell nuisance. This is referred to within the advice contained within the Supplementary Planning Guidance on Restaurants, Takeaways and Other Food and Drink Uses (see paragraph 4.4 above), which states that food and drink uses are unlikely to be acceptable within or adjacent to residential area, if they would cause nuisance and loss of amenity to residents. 8.4 The Operational Manager, Transportation raises no objections to the proposal in terms of parking and highway safety. In regard to the objections received from neighbouring occupiers: (i) There are approximately 11 shops in the neighbourhood parade, one of which is an A3 use and a second unit has been approved. The remainder are A1 of other uses. This is not considered to be an overconcentration of A3 uses. (ii) Comment is noted. (iii) See paragraph 8.3 above. (iv) Police Architectural Liaison Officer has been consulted but no comment received, however, note comments of paragraph 6.2. (v) See paragraph 8.2 above. (vi) See paragraph 8.3 above. 8.6 In regard to the objections received from Councillors McEvoy and Ford. (i) The location plans and Design and Access Statement have been amended to remove any reference to Ferrier Avenue. (ii) & (iii) See paragraph 8.4 above. (iv) See paragraph 8.3. (v) Submitted plans show the provisions of a refuse storage within the existing rear year. (v) Police Architectural Liaison Officer has been consulted but no comment received, note comments of paragraph 6.2. 8.7 Notwithstanding the comments made by the Operational Manager, Environment (Pollution Control), the proposal has to be considered in the light of recent planning decisions within the vicinity of the site, the previous site history, and the separation of the site from residential property by a lane serving a block of garages. The key issues in this context are: (a) The parade of 11 shops includes a recent planning consent for a second A3 Unit, where residential accommodation is located above.

8.5

8.8

165

(b) The premises has a previous planning consent for a taxi control office between the hours of 18.00 and 23.00 each day. (c) There is no restriction of vehicular access between the site and the nearest residential property ay No. 56 Plasmawr Road. 8.9 In light of the above, it is considered that these key issues override the strict interpretation of the Councils Supplementary Planning Guidance on Restaurants, Takeaways, and other Food and Drink Uses (1996). Accordingly, it is recommended to grant planning consent subject to conditions that control hours of use, and impact of noise and smells to nearby residential properties.

166

167

168

169

170

COMMITTEE DATE: 13/02/2013 APPLICATION No. ED: APP: TYPE: APPLICANT: LOCATION: 12/1850/DCO LLANRUMNEY Variation of conditions APPLICATION DATE: 29/11/2012

Cardiff University. CARDIFF UNIVERSITY SPORTS FIELDS, MENDIP ROAD, LLANRUMNEY, CARDIFF, CF3 4JN PROPOSAL: VARIATION OF CONDITIONS 3 AND 4 OF PLANNING PERMISSION 96/00964/N TO INCREASE FLOOD LIGHT USE ___________________________________________________________________ RECOMMENDATION: That planning permission be GRANTED subject to the following conditions: 1. C01 Statutory Time Limit 2. The floodlights shall be used for training and competitive sports matches only. Reason: In the interests of residential amenity. 3. The floodlights shall not be used after 21:00 hours on any night and their use shall be limited to the evenings specified in the application viz: Monday, Tuesday, Wednesday and Thursday evenings. Reason: In order to safeguard the amenities of the occupiers of nearby residential properties. 4. The floodlights shall be so directed and (if deemed necessary by the Local Planning Authority) shielded to ensure that no nuisance is caused to the occupiers of nearby residential properties by reason of glare. Reason: In the interests of residential amenity.

1.

DESCRIPTION OF PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT The proposal is for the variation of Conditions 3 and 4 of planning permission 96/000964/N to increase flood light use. Condition 3 restricts the use of the floodlights for rugby training purposes only and not for competitive matches Condition 4 restricts the use of the floodlights to Tuesday, Wednesday and Thursday evenings. The proposal is to extend the use to include Monday evenings.

2. 2.1

DESCRIPTION OF SITE The site is located to the south of Mendip Road. There are residential properties on the northern side of Mendip Road which face toward the pitch.

171

The pitch forms part of Cardiff University playing fields which are located on land to the east of the river Rhymney. To the east of the playing fields is an area of woodland, and Ridgeway Road beyond (a residential street), at a significantly higher ground level. 3. SITE HISTORY 96/00964/DCO Planning permission granted for training floodlights for rugby training (two evenings a week) Tuesday, Wednesday, Thursday evenings, maximum 6pm 9pm. 4. 4.1 POLICY FRAMEWORK The site is within existing area of Open Space as defined in the City of Cardiff Local Plan. Planning Policy Wales, 5th Edition (November 2012) Relevant Technical Advice Notes (TANs): 11 Noise (1997) 12 Design (2009) 18 Transport (2007) 4.4 The application should be considered against the following policies of the adopted City of Cardiff Local Plan: (i) (ii) 4.5 11 Design and Aesthetic Quality 17 Parking and servicing requirements

4.2 4.3

The following policies of the Deposit Cardiff Unitary Development Plan (October 2003) are relevant: (i) (ii) (iii) (iv) 2.20 Good Design 2.24 Residential Amenity 2.57 Parking and Servicing 2.64 Air, Noise and Light Pollution

4.6

The following Supplementary Planning Guidance: (i) Access, Circulation and Parking Requirements, Standards, January 2010; (ii) Open Space (2008)

5. 5.1

INTERNAL CONSULTEE RESPONSES The Operational Manager, Environment (Pollution Control) (Noise and Air) notes that the application is to both extend the number of evenings whereby the floodlights may be used from Tuesday to Thursday inclusive to Monday to Thursday inclusive and also be to extend the permitted use from training only to training and competitive matches. It is not proposed to extend the existing

172

permitted times of use i.e. 6.00 p.m. to 9.00 p.m. I note, also, your advice that the floodlit pitch has been used for competitive matches contrary to the existing planning consent. I have checked our records and can find no recent complaints relating to this activity. I do not wish to object to the proposed extension of training uses to Monday to Thursday 6.00 to 9.00 pm. He remains concerned that an extension of use to include competitive matches within the above hours will increase the potential for justified complaint from occupiers of nearby residential accommodation. However, given the lack of recent complaint with regard to this activity he considers that it will not be possible to sustain an objection to this proposed development on noise grounds. 5.2 The Operational Manager, Transportation advises that he notes, and greatly sympathises with the concerns raised by the objector together with accompanying petition. Nevertheless, he is mindful that this is an existing, and long-established, community sporting facility and that the problems regarding noise and parking are on-going throughout the year i.e. even without the floodlights the facility the proposed activities could take place at other times of the year without the need for planning consent. On this basis, he considers that an objection of highway grounds to the current application would be difficult to sustain at appeal and he therefore has no objection. With regards to the parking problems which the objector describes, he would comment that while the introduction of restrictions could be considered, this may not be entirely effective. Restrictions would not be considered to address what would be occasional problems except to address safety issues i.e. such restrictions would be limited to junctions and would not therefore address the wider problem and in any case, the introduction of wider restrictions would equally disadvantage residents throughout the rest of the day, whilst parking on footways is illegal and is therefore a matter for the police.

6. 6.1 7. 7.1

EXTERNAL CONSULTEE RESPONSES None. REPRESENTATIONS Local Members were consulted, a site notice was displayed and neighbouring occupiers were notified. Two letters of representation have been received from the occupiers of 23 Northam Avenue, one of which has been signed by the occupiers of 14 neighbouring dwellings on Mendip Road and Northam Avenue. The letters raise the following objections:

7.2

173

(i) Breaches of the conditions of planning permission 96/964/N, with regard to the days of use of the floodlights, and the use by players for competitive matches rather than the approved training purposes. (ii) Extensive light pollution. (iii) Parking congestion, exacerbated by spectators arriving to support teams. (iv) Noise pollution from people using the pitches, along with supports when breaches of condition have occurred. (v) Planning permission was refused in 2001 (01/290/N) for use of the floodlights seven days per week until 10.00. p.m. 8. 8.1 ANALYSIS The proposed use of the pitch for an additional day per week, and the use of the floodlights for competitive fixtures are considered acceptable. In reaching this opinion account has been taken of the fact that there is no restriction at competitive fixtures in daylight. Planning permission was refused in 2001 (01/290/N) for an extension of the use of the floodlights to seven days per week and for an extension of use until 10.00 p.m. The application was refused due to concerns regarding the impact upon the amenities of neighbouring occupiers, more specially an increase in noise and light pollution at unsocial times. The current proposal does not include an extension to the hours of use, but to the days of use by an additional day. There would likely be an objection to an increase in the hours of use, as 9.00 p.m. is considered to be a time beyond which disturbance would be more likely. The submitted letter of objection has been signed by 14 occupiers of neighbouring dwellings listing objections such as noise, parking problems and light pollution (as detailed in paragraph 7.2 above). The representations have been taken into consideration. However, the Operational Manager, Environment (Pollution Control) advises (see paragraph 5.1) that he has no objections with regard to noise or light pollution from the use of the floodlights on an additional day per week, and although he has some reservations regarding the use of the floodlights for competitive matches, this does not sustain an objection. The Operational Manager, Transportation (see paragraph 5.2) has no objection on parking grounds. It is acknowledged that planning enforcement has previously investigated complaints regarding breaches of conditions of planning permission 96/964/W. Investigations related to the use of the floodlights for competitive matches and use of the floodlights outside of the approved days (Tuesdays Thursdays). The complainant was advised that complaints relating to noise matters should be directed to the Operational Manager, Environment (Pollution Control) for investigation. Pollution Control has no record of recent complaints. Planning Enforcement advise that they have not received any complaints from other occupiers within the vicinity. On balance, given the location of the floodlights, on long established sports

8.2

8.3

8.4

8.5

8.6

174

playing fields, on land designed as Open Space as defined in the City of Cardiff Local Plan, it is considered that the local planning authority should support the use of the land for recreational purposes considering the associated health and social benefits to the community. The local planning authority should only seek to prevent increased activity if it is considered that the activity would significantly prejudice the amenities of neighbouring occupiers. It is not considered in this circumstance that the proposed development would prejudice the amenities of neighbouring occupiers sufficiently to warrant a recommendation of refusal.

175

176

LOCAL MEMBER OBJECTION, PETITION


COMMITTEE DATE: 13/02/2013 APPLICATION No. ED: APP: TYPE: APPLICANT: LOCATION: 12/1904/DCO RHIWBINA Full Planning Permission APPLICATION DATE: 09/11/2012

PMG Ltd THORNHILL GARAGE, HEOL LLANISHEN FACH, RHIWBINA, CARDIFF, CF14 6ZA PROPOSAL: PART CHANGE OF USE FROM A CAR SHOWROOM, ANCILLARY VALETING BAYS AND WORKSHOPS INTO THREE RETAIL UNITS (A1/A2 USE) AT GROUND FLOOR LEVEL AND OFFICES (B1) USE AT FIRST FLOOR LEVEL; PROPOSED EXTERNAL ALTERATIONS; PROPOSED PLANT AND EQUIPMENT AND ASSOCIATED LANDSCAPING ___________________________________________________________________ RECOMMENDATION 1: That, subject to persons having relevant interest in the application site entering into a binding planning obligation in agreement with the Council under SECTION 106 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 encompassing the matters referred to in paragraph 5,3 the Chief City Development Officer's report planning permission be GRANTED subject to the following conditions: 1. C01 Statutory Time Limit 2. The retail floorspace shall not exceed 400 sq. m. net, either by internal or external alteration and shall only be used for the sale of convenience goods and for no other purpose including those set out in Class A1 of the Schedule to the Town and Country Planning (Use Classes) Order 1987, or in any provision equivalent to that Class in any statutory instrument revoking, amending or re-enacting that Order with or without notification. (For the avoidance of doubt convenience goods shall be taken to mean: Food, and non-alcoholic beverages, alcoholic drink, tobacco, non-durable household goods, newspapers and magazines). Reason: To prevent other retail uses or changes to the format of retail sales which would need to be fully considered separately by the Local Planning Authority in terms of development plan policies and/or government planning guidance. 3. Unit 1 shall be used only for financial and professional services (A2) and shall not exceed 82.5 sq.m. net in floor space, either by internal or external alteration. Reason: For the avoidance of doubt

177

4. H7G Plant Noise 5. G7Q Future Kitchen Extraction 6. There shall be no arrival, departure, loading or unloading of delivery vehicles between the hours of 20:00hrs and 07:30 hours. Reason: To ensure that the amenities of occupiers of other premises in the vicinity are protected. 7. No activities shall be carried out which create noise audible at the boundary of any residential accommodation outside of the hours of 07.00 to 23.00 hours Monday to Saturday and 08:00hrs to 22:00hrs Sunday. Reason: To ensure that the amenities of occupiers of other premises in the vicinity of the site are protected. 8. The premises shall not be open to the public between the hours of 23:00 and 07:00 Mondays to Saturdays and 22:00 and 08:00 Sundays and Public Holidays. Reason: To ensure that the use of the premises does not prejudice the amenities of the area. 9. The proposed vehicles parking and manoeuvring areas shall be laid out in accordance with the approved details before the development is brought into beneficial use and be thereafter maintained and retained at all times for those purposes in association with the development. Reason: To make provision for the parking and loading / unloading of vehicles clear of the roads so as not to prejudice the safety, convenience and free flow of traffic. 10. Prior to beneficial occupation of the development hereby approved details showing the provision of cycle parking spaces shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The approved details shall be implemented prior to first beneficial use. Thereafter the cycle spaces shall be maintained and shall not be used for other purposes. Reason: To ensure that adequate provision is made for the sheltered and secure parking of cycles. 11. Prior to first beneficial occupation of the development hereby detailed drawings of the new raised crossing facility shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The scheme to include (but not be limited to) details of a tabled Zebra Crossing and associated works on Heol Llanishen Fach, including carriageway construction, re-surfacing, dropped kerbs, tactile paving, edging, drainage, street lighting, carriageway markings, signing, illuminated beacons, poles, ducting and cabling. The approved scheme shall be implemented prior to beneficial use of the development to the satisfaction of the Local Planning Authority. Reason: To ensure that the additional pedestrian / cycle demand crossing Heol Llanishen Fach is catered for and to facilitate access to the development.

178

12. Prior to the commencement of development a scheme of construction management shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The submitted scheme shall include details of construction traffic routes, site hoardings, site access, parking of contractors vehicles and wheel washing facilities. The development construction shall be managed strictly in accordance with the scheme so approved. Reason: In the interests of highway safety and public amenity. 13. Parking spaces nos. 15 to 18, along with the 3no. motorcycle parking spaces shall not be used between the hours of 21:00 to 08:00. Reason: In the interests of the amenities of adjacent residential occupiers. 14. Prior to first beneficial use of the development hereby approved, details shall be submitted of a moveable vehicle barrier to be installed in order to restrict the use of parking spaces 15 to 18 and the motorcycle parking. The submitted details shall be approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority and implemented prior to first beneficial use of the development hereby approved. The approved barrier shall be maintained thereafter. Reason: In the interests of the amenities of adjacent residential occupiers. 15. Prior to first beneficial use of the development hereby approved details of bollards to be installed in front of the glazed facades of the building shall be submitted to, and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority and installed in accordance with the approved details. The bollards shall be maintained thereafter. Reason: In order to discourage ram-raiding and ensure safety of pedestrians. 16. A scheme of lighting shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority prior to its installation on site. All lighting is to be designed to avoid spillage outside the site footprint and specifically toward neighbouring residential occupiers. Reason: To protect the amenities of neighbouring occupiers. 17. C4P Landscaping Design & Implementation Pro 18. C4R Landscaping Implementation 19. Details of CCTV coverage for the store and car park shall be submitted to the Local Planning Authority and approved in writing. The approved CCTV scheme shall be implemented prior to beneficial use of the development and thereafter maintained. Reason: In the interests of security and crime prevention. 20. Details of litter bins to be provided on site shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority, and the approved details shall be implemented prior to beneficial use of the development hereby approved.

179

Reason: In the interests of the local environment. 21. E1B Samples of Materials RECOMMENDATION 2: To protect the amenities of occupiers of other premises in the vicinity 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. Further to this the applicant is advised that no noise audible outside the site boundary adjacent to the curtilage of residential property shall be created by construction activities in respect of the implementation of this consent outside the hours of 0800-1800 hours Mondays to Fridays and 0800 - 1300 hours on Saturdays or at any time on Sunday or public holidays. The applicant is also advised to seek approval for any proposed piling operations. RECOMMENDATION 3: The highway improvement works will be subject to an agreement under Section 278 of the Highways Act 1980. The works shall include the zebra crossing and any other work to the existing or adopted public highway. RECOMMENDATION 4: The applicant be aware of the requirement to obtain the consent of the Operational Manager Street Operations prior to undertaking any works within the adopted highway. RECOMMENDATION 5: It is advised that public transport and non-car mode information is provided by the retail / commercial development in order to encourage more sustainable modes of travel by staff and / or visitors / customers. Liaison with Cheryl Owen (tel: 02920 873722) of Transport Policy, can be sought to help achieve this. 1. 1.1 DESCRIPTION OF PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT This application seeks planning permission for a change of use of the ground floor from a car showroom, ancillary valeting bays and workshops into 2 separate units, (Unit 1 -Use Class A2 and Unit 2 Use Class A1) at ground floor level with B1 Office use being retained at first floor level and forming Unit3. The application also includes external alterations, including alterations to fenestration and doorways, an increase in the height of a single storey element to the north western elevation to raise a pitched roof by 900mm and convert to a flat roof. DESCRIPTION OF SITE The application site measures 2980 square metres and consists of a part two storey, part single storey building which was most recently used for car sales, valeting bays and workshops. The building is surrounded by hard surfacing and parking, which is predominantly to the north of the building.

2. 2.1

180

3. 3.1 4. 4.1

SITE HISTORY None relevant. POLICY FRAMEWORK The site is identified as being located within a residential area as defined in the City of Cardiff Local Plan. Relevant National Planning Guidance: Planning Policy Wales, 5th Edition (November 2012) is relevant. MIPPS 01/2008: Planning for Good Design TAN 4: TAN 11: TAN 12: TAN 18: TAN 21: TAN 22: Retailing and Town Centres Noise Design Transport Waste Sustainable Buildings

4.2

4.3

The application should be considered against the following policies of the adopted City of Cardiff Local Plan: (i) 11 Design and Aesthetic Quality (ii) 17 Parking and servicing requirements (iii) 18 Provision for Cyclists (iv) 19 Provision for Pedestrians

4.4

The following policies of the Deposit Cardiff Unitary Development Plan (October 2003) are relevant: (i) 2.20 Good Design (ii) 2.34 Retail Development (iii) 2.57 Access, circulation and Parking Requirements (iv) 2.64 Air, Noise and Light Pollution (v) 2.74 Provision for Waste Management Facilities in Development

4.5

The following Supplementary Planning Guidance: (i) Access, Circulation and Parking Requirements, Standards, January 2010; (ii) Waste Collection and Storage Facilities, March 2007.

5. 5.1 5.2

INTERNAL CONSULTEE RESPONSES Land Use Policy (see analysis). The Operational Manager Environment (Pollution Control) has no objections

181

subject to conditions restricting: (i) Hours of operation; (ii) Delivery times; (iii) Plant Noise; (iv) Future kitchen extraction; (v) The northern most section of the car park (in proximity to the boundary with the dwelling at no.2 Heol Irwin) being gated between the hours of 09:00 hours and 08:00 hours, in order to reduce noise adjacent to the boundary and to protect the amenities of the occupiers of the dwelling. In addition, an advisory note relating to construction site noise and the provisions of the Control of Pollution Act 1974 is recommended. 5.3 The Operational Manager Transportation advises: A Transport Assessment (TA) was submitted in support of the application which examines the likely effect of traffic associated with the proposed development. The assessment is based upon surveys that were undertaken on Tuesday 16th October 2012 between 07:00 to 09:00 and 16:30 to 18:00 at the following junctions: A469 Thornhill Road / Heol Llanishen Fach Signalised Junction; Heol Llanishen Fach / Site Access; Heol Llanishen Fach / Heol Erwin Junction; and Heol Llanishen Fach / Heol Y Deri Junction;

The TA identifies that an additional 86 (2 way) trips and 105 (2 way) trips will likely occur as a direct result of the proposal during the AM and PM peak periods respectively. The analysis of the junctions listed above has been undertaken on this basis and predicts that generally any impact would not be significant, although at the site access / Heol Llanishen Fach the impact is predicted to be 5.2% and 7.9% during the AM and PM peak periods respectively; Within the TA the current LinSig model predicts queues beyond the site access along Heol Llanishen Fach. As such access / egress of the development traffic could have an impact on the effective use of the green time currently provided at the signal junction at Heol Llanishen Fach / Thornhill Road. The provision of a CCTV camera would ensure that the situation could be effectively monitored and if necessary the SCOOT model adjusted. As such the provision of a CCTV camera at the junction of Heol Llanishen Fach / Thornhill Road is considered essential due to the potential impact of the predicted trip generation (from the development) on the existing traffic flows / situation at this location; A new tabled zebra crossing is included within the proposals on Heol Llanishen Fach in order to provide for the increased demand in terms of

182

pedestrian and cycle movement and also to provide such a facility for existing users. The exact dimensions of the table top and location to be agreed at the detail design stage. These works will be implemented by way of a S278 Agreement and as such the associated Technical Approval process will need to be gone through prior to the related condition being discharged and any works commencing on site; The proposed car parking layout provides parking for 25No spaces (incl. 5No disabled bays), which is accepted in principle. It is understood that pollution control have proposed that those spaces to the northern end of the car park, together with the motorcycle parking should be closed off after 9:00pm. It would be recommended that only spaces 15 to 18 (4 spaces) plus the motorcycle parking be closed off after this time; It is understood that a Servicing Management Plan is to be submitted prior to beneficial occupation of each of the units. In order to secure this and to ensure that there will be no conflict in terms of deliveries to the site, i.e. timings / type of vehicles, a requirement for this is included within the S106 matters below; The TA has been independently audited by TPA Planning Associates and examined by Officers and is considered to be generally acceptable, subject to those mitigation measures outlined above and other matters being secured by way of condition / S106 below; On the basis of the above, Transportation has no objection, subject to the following: Conditions (i) Vehicle Parking Within Site (ii) Cycle Parking (iii) Zebra Crossing Facility (iv) Footway Improvement Works (v) Construction Management Plan Recommendations (vi) Section 278 Agreement The zebra crossing works conditioned above and any other works to the existing or adopted public highway are to be subject to an agreement under Section 278 / 38 of the Highways Act 1980; (vii) Travel Information - It is advised that public transport and non-car mode information is provided by the retail / commercial development in order to encourage more sustainable modes of travel by staff and / or visitors /

183

customers. Liaison with Cheryl Owen (tel: 02920 873722) of Transport Policy, can be sought to help achieve this; S106 Matters: (viii) Servicing Management Plan Prior to occupation of each of the units a Servicing Management Plan shall be submitted to the Local Planning Authority for approval. The owner shall then service the development / unit in accordance with the terms of the approved servicing management plan at all times; (ix) Financial Contribution (1) - That a financial contribution be secured for the provision of a CCTV camera at the junction of Thornhill Road / Heol Llanishen Fach in order that the interaction between the existing traffic and that which will be generated by the proposed development can be monitored and traffic signal timings altered if necessary, to ensure the efficient operation of the highway network at this location. This figure to be 26,000 (incl. the 4%) and secured by way of a S106 Agreement; 5.4 Waste Management has no objections to the proposals and advises that litter bins will be required within the development for the A1 premises Tree Officers request an upfront landscaping scheme for the site. The applicant is currently providing further information to address this requirement. The additional information, along with Tree Officer comments will be reported to Committee. The Operational Manager Waste Management (Drainage) has been consulted and any comments will be reported to Committee. EXTERNAL CONSULTEE RESPONSES Dwr Cymru has no objections and requests standard conditions relating to the separate drainage of foul and surface water from the site and no surface water being allowed to drain into the public sewerage system. A public sewer crosses the site the correspondence has been forwarded to the applicant. The Police Architectural Liaison Officer advises: 1. The existing building is of a flat roof design and care should be taken to prevent access to roof by climbing and securing any points of possible entry from the roof reason to prevent burglary and theft. Lighting in the car park area needs to be reviewed to ensure it is appropriate in terms of proposed change of use, if this is to be used as a supermarket or store then would recommend lighting BS 5489:2003 and C/TR 13201 standards reason for the safety of pedestrians and vehicles on site.

5.5

5.6

6. 6.1

6.2

2.

184

3.

Proposed large glazed areas be protected by bollards or heavy plantersreason to prevent burglary or theft by ram raiding. It is recommended that CCTV be installed internally and externally to cover vulnerable areas reason to prevent and detect crime The proposed new retail outlets should be protected by South Wales Police Alarms Policy compliant monitored alarm system reason to prevent crime.

4.

5.

7. 7.1

REPRESENTATIONS Representations have been received from Councillors J. Cowan, E. Sanders and A. Robson. The letter requests that a Committee site visit is undertaken and raises the following objections: (i) Impact upon local shops policies 49 and 50 of the Local Plan discusses the protection of a retail hierarchy. A supermarket on Heol Llanishen Fach could challenge the future of smaller and independent shops on Heol Llanishen Fach, which provide a crucial service. (ii) Concerns regarding delivery movements into the site and the resultant conflict with parked vehicles within the site and potential for delivery vehicles to have to reverse out onto the main road, which is experiences high levels of traffic and the application site is located on a very busy junction (iii) The hours of operation are too long in such close proximity to residential properties. In addition further information is required as to the hours which access is required to the building. (iv) Concerns that the already congested neighbouring streets will be used as overflow parking for the application site, to the detriment of the amenities of neighbouring occupiers. (v) Potential for a increase in anti social behaviour associated with the store. (vi) Noise disturbance for neighbouring residential occupiers from machinery /air conditioning units etc at the proposed store.

7.2

A petition of objection has been received signed by 657 local residents. The petition raises the following objections: (i) Increase in traffic; (ii) Access to the site; (iii) Delivery to the shop; (iv) The impact of this proposal on existing local shops, more specifically on Heol Llanishen Fach. A petition of objection have been received, containing 28 signatures

7.3

185

requesting the Local Planning Authority to refuse planning permission. The petition does not state reasons for objection. 7.4 Rhiwbina Civic Society objects to the proposed development on the following grounds: Unproven need for the retail element. There are already existing local shops which would suffer financially if the proposed development proceeds. (ii) The previous use of the site was restricted to daytime business hours. The proposed use would result in late night noise disturbance and light pollution for local residents; (iii) Inadequate number of customer parking spaces, which would lead to overspill parking on a very busy junction and within Heol Erwin, which is already congested and a bus route; (iv) The predicted numbers of cars to visit the store is unrealistic and the suggestion that many people will walk or cycle to the store is unlikely, and any future parking restrictions along Heol Erwin or Heol Llanishen Fach are unlikely to be effective; (v) A hatched yellow box would be required on Heol Llanishen Fach in order to allow access through the usual junction queue. Such markings would have to join to the adjacent existing ones at Heol Erwin and it is unlikely that drivers will leave such a long gap, as many ignore the yellow box, forcing vehicles to wait until the queue moves. The layout could result in cars queuing onto Thornhill Road. (vi) Deliveries and required manoeuvring will cause further traffic congestion. (vii) No traffic survey was carried out during the hours of 3.30pm and 4.30pm at the Heol Llanishen Fach / Thornhill Road junction, when school traffic congests the junction. (viii) The development proposes to extend the 2 lane junction approach back along Heol Llanishen Fach, to be effective it would have to go beyond Heol Erwin taking out the existing grass verge and trees in front of the houses. This will not increase traffic flow through the junction but merely increase storage. 7.5 Representations have been received from: (no address) Bedavere Close, no. 481 Caerphilly Road, nos. 11 and 68 Cefn Graig, (no address) Clos Fach, no. 19 Cefn Nant, nos. 2 an 9 Clos Cromwell, no. 5 Clos-yr-Aer, no.2 Clos-Yr-Hafod, no. 6 Coed Briwnant, no. 8 Edgehill Avenue, no.21 Gron Ffordd, nos. 6,11 and 36 Heol Briwnant, nos. 2,3,5,7,11,14,17,21,32,54 and 83 Heol Erwin, nos. 31 and (no address) Heol Hendre, no.19 Heol Isaf, Nos. 25,120 Heol Lewis, Nos. 74,77,146 and 156 Heol Llanishen Fach, Nos. 11 and 28 Heol Mabon, no. 13 Heol Nant Castan, no.40 Heol Tyn y Coed, nos. 21,72,76 and 110 Heol Uchaf, no. 48 Heol y Bryn, No. 45 Heol y Coed, Nos. 9, 18, 22, 24, 27, 29 Lon Cae Porth, no. 35 Norwood, nos. 57 and 64 Thornhill Road and no.3 Lochaber Street (first floor flat), three representations were not addressed. (i) Development would exacerbate traffic and parking problems (i)

186

Too close to residential properties Would lead to anti social behaviour incidents Increase in noise, particularly during the evenings Traffic along Thornhill Road is held up every half hour by the passage of a funeral cortege. (vi) Thornhill garage used to sell petrol this was stopped due to traffic congestion (when vehicular numbers were much lower than present) (vii) Development would harm the viability of the shops within Heol Llanishen Fach, forcing the local shops out of business; (viii) There are more than adequate existing shopping facilities within the area including a recently extended Sainsburys in the Thornhill Centre and Morrisons in Llanishen which is currently being extended. (ix) No details of traffic accidents included in the assessment (x) Deficiencies in the traffic assessment undertaken, such as times of assessment being 8am-9am and 5pm-6pm. Traffic being heavy throughout the day and most notably at school drop off and pick up times. (xi) Safety concerns for school children walking to the local primary school, due to vehicles regularly crossing the footway; (xii) Insufficient numbers of off street parking spaces; (xiii) late opening hours of the store would prejudice amenities of neighbouring occupiers; (xiv) Light pollution from car headlights entering and egressing the raised site; (xv) Disruption during building works; (xvi) Anti social behaviour exacerbated by sale of alcohol (xvii)No need for additional retail in the area, already well served by other shops. 8. 8.1 ANALYSIS The proposed development involves the part change of use of 351 sq m of existing floorspace to retail use. In terms of the A1 element of the application the site is within an out-of-centre location in terms of retail policy. Planning Policy Wales Edition 5 is clear that planning applications for retail developments in out-of-centre locations should be assessed against the following tests:(i) compatibility with a Community or up-to-date Development Plan Strategy; (ii) consideration of need; (iii) the sequential approach to site selection; and (iv) the impact on existing centres. 8.2 Policy 50 of the Local Plan and Policy R4 of the South Glamorgan (Cardiff Area) Replacement Structure Plan provide the development plan policy framework. Local Plan Policy 50 only allows for retail development other than those defined in Policies 34, 47 and 49 if the proposal would meet the following criteria:-

(ii) (iii) (iv) (v)

8.3

187

(i) (ii) (iii) (iv)

(v) (vi) (vii) (viii) (ix)

the proposal cannot be satisfactorily accommodated within or adjoining an existing or planned centre and; there is no need to preserve the site for its existing or allocated use, assessed against the relevant policies of the plan and; the proposal in not within the countryside or urban fringe; and the proposal would not cause or contribute unacceptable harm to the vitality or viability of existing or planned centres, or strategies aimed at sustaining or enhancing such centres; and the proposal would not cause or contribute harm to approved regeneration schemes; and resultant traffic flows, travel patterns, energy use and other emissions would be minimised; and the proposal would be well located by reference to public transport and for those wishing to travel other than by car; and car parking provision and servicing facilities are adequate; and the proposal is acceptable in terms of scale, design and amenity considerations.

8.4

The agents have provided a retail statement in support of the application that aims to address the need for the proposed store, the sequential approach to site selection and an assessment of the impact of the proposed store on centres with development plan status. The agents findings for quantitative need for the proposed retail floorspace are summarised as follows:Retail Need The proposed store is predicted to turnover 2.6 million per annum, 90% of which would be associated with the sale of convenience goods and 10% with the sale of comparison. In Zone 3, in which the proposed store would be located (as defined by Cardiff Council Retail Capacity Study), between 2008 and 2016 expenditure on convenience goods is forecast to increase by 11m. The forecast growth in expenditure on convenience goods in the catchment of the store of 11m is sufficient to accommodate the proposed store which is predicted to turnover 2.6m per annum.

Sequential Test Planning Policy Wales requires that proposals for out-of-centre retailing to demonstrate that there are no sequentially preferable sites available, suitable and viable that could accommodate the proposal. The agents findings in relation to the sequential test are summarised below: The district centres of Thornhill, Rhiwbina and Llanishen are considered in relation to the sequential approach to site selection. In Thornhill District Centre, Sainsburys are already the anchor tenant and there are no vacant units.

188

There are no vacant units in Rhiwbina or Llanishen and both centres are constrained by the presence of other uses residential, church and school such that opportunities to extend the centre are limited.

Impact In terms of impact the agents conclude the following: The proposed store is predicted to turnover 2.6m per annum. 2.3m of which is turnover of convenience goods. Due to the location of the proposed store on the strategic highway network and the location of the identified centres, any impact from the development is unlikely to be concentrated on any one centre and the impact will be widespread. It is anticipated that the main trade draws of the proposed store will be from the Sainsburys store at Thornhill (25%) and Morrisons at Caerphilly Crossroads (18%). Trade draw from Rhiwbina and Llanishen is forecast to be 2% and 3% respectively.

8.5

Policy Conclusions As required by development plan policies and national guidance, the application has been assessed against the relevant retail tests of need, sequential approach to site selection and the impact of the proposal on existing centres. In relation to quantitative need, the retail assessment has demonstrated that the turnover of the proposed store is small in comparison with forecast growth in expenditure on convenience goods and given the scale of the proposal will not harm the vitality and viability of centres with development plan status. The retail assessment has satisfactorily demonstrated that due to the historic and compact nature of the nearest designated centres and the lack of vacant units within the centres, there are no sequentially preferable alternative sites capable of accommodating the proposed store and therefore the application satisfies a sensible and appropriate application of the sequential approach to site selection. The retail assessment has also demonstrated that the greatest impact of the proposed store will be on Sainsburys at Thornhill and Morrisons at Caerphilly Crossroad. The remainder of the impact will be spread across a number of other stores and centres and no one centre will experience impact significant enough to adversely affect its vitality and viability. In addition the proposed store will create 25 jobs which is a material consideration in the determination of this application. In summary the proposed store is not considered to result in any adverse impact on the Councils retail strategy of national objectives for retail as set in

189

Planning Policy Wales. 8.6 The proposed external alterations consist of the repositioning of fenestration and doorways, the blocking up of redundant apertures and a minor increase in height of the rear single storey roof. The external alterations are considered to be minor and would be likely to improve the appearance of the building, which would benefit from investment. The intention is to install new shopfronts and signage and this will be the subject of future planning applications, if this application is successful. It is not considered that the proposed change of use or subdivision of the building would prejudice the amenities of neighbouring occupiers. Conditions will control the hours of opening to the public, noise levels and delivery times. External lighting details will be required in order to ensure that light pollution does not prejudice the amenities of neighbouring occupiers. In order to ensure that the occupiers of residential properties to the north of the application site, particularly no.2 Heol Erwin, (which shares a boundary with the site) are not prejudiced by noise from vehicles within the car park the applicants are required to submit details of a gate / bollards to prevent the use of parking spaces 15 to 18 and the motorcycle parking between the hours of 21:00 and 08:00. The Operational Manager Transportation has no objections to the proposed development subject to the provision of a Zebra crossing of Heol Llanishen Fach and a CCTV camera at the junction of Heol Llanishen Fach and Thornhill Road, in order to monitor traffic using the junction. The applicant advises that they do not believe planning permission is required for the change of use of Unit 2 to retail (A1) as the units previous use was for car sales, (which is sui generis) and a change of use between car sales and retail is permitted development. However, the Local Planning Authority maintain the position that planning permission is required due to the subdivision of the premises. In response to objections received which have not already been addressed within the report: (i) The Police Architectural Liaison Officer has no objections with regard to anti social behaviour, but does recommend CCTV be installed. Condition 16 requires details of CCTV prior to use of the store. (ii) The sale of alcohol at the premises will be controlled through Licensing legislation. (iii) The retail premises in Heol Llanishen Fach are not afforded any protection through the City of Cardiff Local Plan, as they are not categorised as being within a Local or District Centre. (iv) The Operational Manager Transportation has no objections in terms of traffic generation, access into, or egress from the site. It should be noted that this is an existing building which would previously have generated a significant number of vehicular movements, including deliveries by large vehicles such as car transporters.

8.7

8.8

8.9

8.10

190

191

192

193

PETITIONS FOR AND AGAINST LOCAL MEMBER OBJECTIONS


COMMITTEE DATE: 13/02/2013 APPLICATION No. ED: APP: TYPE: APPLICANT: LOCATION: PROPOSAL: 12/2068/DCO PENYLAN Full Planning Permission APPLICATION DATE: 03/12/2012

Mrs Alison Harrison & Mrs Sarah Arabestani 77 KIMBERLEY ROAD, PENYLAN, CARDIFF, CF23 5DP CHANGE OF USE FROM RESIDENTIAL (PREVIOUSLY A1 RETAIL SHOP) TO A D1 BABY NURSERY ON GROUND FLOOR ONLY FOR A MAXIMUM NUMBER OF 19 BABIES ___________________________________________________________________ RECOMMENDATION 1: That planning permission be GRANTED subject to the following conditions: 1. C01 Statutory Time Limit 2. The premises shall be used only for the purposes specified in the application and for no other purpose (including any other purpose in Class D1 of the Schedule to the Town and Country Planning (Use Classes) Order 1987 or in any provision equivalent to that Class in any statutory instrument amending, revoking or re-enacting that Order). Reason: The use of the premises for other purposes within Class D1 would be likely to detract from the amenities of nearby occupiers and permission for the particular use applied for is only granted because of the special considerations peculiar to it. 3. This permission shall relate to the ground floor of the premises only. Reason: For the avoidance of doubt as to the extent of the permission. 4. A maximum of 19 children shall be present on the site at any one time. Reason: To ensure that the amenities of occupiers of other premises in the vicinity are protected and to ensure that the proposed development does not interfere with the safety, convenience and free flow of traffic passing along the highway abutting the site, in accordance with policy 17 of the Cardiff Local Plan and policies 2.24 and 2.57 of the deposit Cardiff Unitary Development Plan. 5. No more than 3 children shall be permitted to remain in the outdoor amenity area at any one time. Reason: To ensure that the amenities of occupiers of neighbouring properties are protected, in accordance with policies 2.24 and 2.64 of the deposit Cardiff Unitary Development Plan.

194

6. No child shall be accepted for attendance at the nursery between the hours of 08.40 and 09.10 during school term times of the nearby Marlborough Junior and Infants Schools. Reason: To ensure that the amenities of occupiers of other premises in the vicinity are protected and to ensure that the proposed development does not interfere with the safety, convenience and free flow of traffic passing along the highway abutting the site, in accordance with policy 17 of the Cardiff Local Plan and policies 2.24 and 2.57 of the deposit Cardiff Unitary Development Plan 7. Before the development hereby approved is brought into beneficial use, sound insulation works to the party wall structure between Nos.77 and 79 Kimberley Road shall be implemented in accordance with the soundproofing scheme and cross section diagram received on th 16 January 2013. Reason: To ensure that the amenities of occupiers of the adjoining property are protected, in accordance with policies 2.24 and 2.64 of the deposit Cardiff Unitary Development Plan. 8. The use of the premises as a pre-school nursery shall not be carried out otherwise than between the hours of 08.00 to 18.00 hours Monday to Friday and shall not be carried out at any time on weekends and bank holidays. Reason: To ensure that the amenities of occupiers of other premises in the vicinity of the site are protected, in accordance with policies 2.24 and 2.64 of the deposit Cardiff Unitary Development Plan. 9. If at any time the use of the premises is to involve the preparation and cooking of hot food the extraction of all fumes from the food preparation areas shall be mechanically extracted to a point to be agreed with the Local Planning Authority, and the extraction system shall be provided with a de-odorising filter. Details of the above equipment shall be submitted to, and approved by, the Local Planning Authority in writing and the equipment installed prior to the commencement of use for the cooking of food. The equipment shall thereafter be maintained in accordance with the manufacturers' guidelines, such guidelines having previously been agreed by the Local Planning Authority in writing. Reason: To ensure that the amenities of occupiers of other premises in the vicinity are protected, in accordance with policy 2.24 of the deposit Cardiff Unitary Development Plan. 10. Before the development hereby approved is brought into beneficial use, two sheltered and secure cycle parking spaces shall be provided in accordance with details that shall have been previously submitted to and approved in writing by the local planning authority. The approved cycle parking spaces shall be maintained thereafter and shall not be used for any other purpose. Reason: To ensure that adequate provision is made for the secure parking of cycles in accordance with policy 18 of the Cardiff Local Plan and policy 2.57 of the deposit Cardiff Unitary Development Plan.

195

1. 1.1

DESCRIPTION OF PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT The application seeks planning permission for a change of use of the ground floor of an end-of-terrace house from residential to baby nursery, for a maximum number of 19 babies. The first floor of the building would remain in residential use as a 2 bedroom flat for the manager of the nursery. The flat would have its own separate entrance from Blenheim Road. At ground floor level there would be two play rooms (one for babies 0-15 months and one for 15-22 months), a cot room, a sleep area, a kitchen and staff lockers and toilets. The party wall between the nursery and 79 Kimberley Road would be soundproofed. The main entrance to the nursery would be from Blenheim Road. There is a small, enclosed, external yard to the rear of the building that would contain a secure bin area, cycle and buggy store and 2m x 1m sensory area. The proposed opening hours are 08:00 to 18:00, Monday to Friday. The nursery would operate as full day care only, with no half day sessions. There would be 7 members of staff (1 manager and 6 nursery nurses) and a cook/housekeeper would visit each day. DESCRIPTION OF SITE The site is a two storey end-of-terrace building with an almost triangular footprint, located at the junction of Kimberley Road and Blenheim Road. At ground floor level the elevation facing Kimberley Road comprises a glazed shopfront with recessed entrance door. The shop has been converted to residential use and the small forecourt is now enclosed by a low metal fence. Access to the building is from Blenheim Road, as is access to its rear yard which is enclosed by a 2 metres high wall. The site is within a residential area where small-scale commercial uses originally operated at ground floor level in some of the properties at the road junction. The application property is no longer in commercial use but there is a health spa operating from the property on the opposite side of Kimberley Road. 75 Kimberley Road on the opposite side of Blenheim Road is also a former commercial premises and retains traditional shopfronts in both the front and side elevations. It is used in part as an art studio (rarely open to the public) and on a very small scale for teaching the Alexander Technique, but its predominant use is as a dwelling house. SITE HISTORY 89/01885/R Change of use from antiques shop to extension of existing living accommodation.

1.2

1.3

1.4

2. 2.1

2.2

3. 3.1

196

4. 4.1

POLICY FRAMEWORK Cardiff Local Plan 17 (Parking and Servicing Facilities); 18 (Provision for Cyclists); 19 (Provision for Pedestrians); 20 (Provision for Special Needs Groups); 26 (Conversion or Redevelopment of Residential Accommodation). Supplementary Planning Guidance - Access, Circulation and Parking Standards (January 2010); Waste Collection and Storage Facilities (March 2007); Buildings for Childcare (September 1998). Deposit Cardiff Unitary Development Plan 2.24 (Residential Amenity); 2.25 (Change of Use of Residential Land or Properties); 2.57 (Access, Circulation and Parking Requirements); 2.64 (Air, Noise and Light Pollution); 2.74 (Provision for Waste Management Facilities in Development). Planning Policy Wales (2012): 3.1.4: The effects of a development on health, public safety and crime can be material planning considerations as in principle can public concerns relating to such effects. 3.1.8: While the substance of local views must be considered, the duty is to decide each case on its planning merits. Local opposition or support for a proposal is not, on its own, a reasonable ground for refusing or granting planning permission. The Courts have held that the perceived fears of the public are a material planning consideration. 3.4.3: Developers should consider the need to make buildings accessible for all those who might use them. 4.4.3: Planning policies and proposals should (inter alia) Locate developments so as to minimise the demand for travel, especially by private car Promote access to employment, shopping, education, health, community facilities and green space Promote employment opportunities Encourage diversity in the local economy 4.11.12: Local Authorities are under a legal obligation to consider the need to prevent and reduce crime and disorder in all decisions that they take. 7.6.1: Local planning authorities should adopt a positive and constructive approach to applications for economic development. In determining applications for economic land uses authorities should take account of the likely economic benefits of the development based on robust evidence; key factors include: the numbers and types of jobs expected to be created or retained on the site; whether and how far the development will help redress economic disadvantage or support regeneration priorities, for example by enhancing employment opportunities or upgrading the environment;

4.2

4.3

4.4

197

a consideration of the contribution to wider spatial strategies, for example for the growth or regeneration of certain areas. 8.4.2: Local Authorities should ensure that new developments provide lower levels of parking than have generally been achieved in the past. Minimum parking standards are no longer appropriate. 8.7.5: planning conditions and obligations may be used in appropriate circumstances to secure on-site or off-site facilities or improvements in public transport, walking and cycling where such measures would be likely to influence travel patterns to the site. 13.15.1: Noise can be a material planning consideration, e.g. where proposed new development is likely to generate noise. 4.5 Technical Advice Note 11 Noise (1997): 8. Local planning authorities must ensure that noise generating development does not cause an unacceptable degree of disturbance. They should also bear in mind that if subsequent intensification or change of use results in greater intrusion, consideration should be given to the use of appropriate conditions. INTERNAL CONSULTEE RESPONSES Operational Manager Transportation: Mindful of the concerns raised by residents and local members Ive carefully considered the highway implications of the proposed change of use, and visited the site between 8.30 9.00 am in order to assess the existing conditions. I observed that though Kimberley Road was fairly heavily parked there were still a number of kerbside spaces available in the vicinity of the application site, while kerbside space was readily available on Blenheim Road. Traffic flow seemed fairly light and I did not perceive any vehicles driving at excessive speeds. Though the SPG (Access, Circulation and Parking) does not make specific reference to nursery uses, the primary consideration is that there should be adequate kerbside space available to accommodate short stay parking by parents dropping off/collecting children at the start and end of the day. On the basis of past survey work a typical length of stay for such purposes may be expected to be between 3 and 5 minutes, and in this instance would involve a maximum of 19 such manoeuvres during the morning and evening periods. Though there will inevitably be some degree of overlap involved, these manoeuvres may be reasonably expected to be spread out over a period of time with only a small number of vehicles dropping off/picking up at any one time, and on the basis of my observations on site I am satisfied that in practice there will be adequate kerbside space available to accommodate the short stay needs of parents without leading to the double parking scenario envisaged by some of the objectors especially since the main entrance to the premises will be off Blenheim Road where I observed kerbside space to be readily available. I understand that the proposed nursery will employ 6 nursery assistants together with a manager (who will also occupy the existing first floor flat) and,

5. 5.1

5.2

5.3

198

whilst this has the potential to generate additional parking demand, it seems unlikely that the number of such staff driving to the premises would be high and Im further encouraged in this respect by the staff profile information provided with respect to the nearby Sandringham nursery which is also operated by the applicants. This shows that of 12 staff at that nursery only 2 drive to work with 2 others car-sharing. I also take into account the parking demand associated with the existing residential use of the premises, and on balance I am therefore satisfied that the additional parking demand, over and above that for existing, which would be associated with the proposed change of use can be adequately and safely accommodated on street. Im mindful also that the short stay parking demand associated with the nursery would occur only during short spells at the start and end of the working day. Taking the foregoing considerations into account I consider that an objection on highway grounds would be difficult to sustain at appeal and I would therefore have no objection on highway safety grounds, subject to a condition relating to the provision of at least 2 cycle stands in order to encourage this mode of travel by staff. I make the presumption that, were consent to be granted, then it would be conditioned to relate to the number of children stipulated on the application form, and to use of the ground floor only as a nursery. 5.4 I note the comments of Cllr Kelloway and others regarding the hazardous nature of the Blenheim Road/Kimberley Road junction, with this concern having been reported to City Development who were to carry out an investigation. I can confirm that this investigation, which has now been completed, revealed 85 percentile vehicle speeds of 29mph on Blenheim Road in the vicinity of its junction with Kimberley Road. Peak two-way hour traffic flows on Blenheim Road of 214 and 187 were recorded during the am and pm peaks, with the corresponding figures being 135 and 120 for Kimberley Road, while the police collision data base showed 4 recorded accidents at the Blenheim Road/Kimberley Road junction over a 5 year period. On this basis it has been concluded that this junction is not inherently dangerous and that there is no justification for altering the existing road layout at the present time. Its also worth noting that improvements have carried out to this junction and others in recent years in the form of the construction buildouts to both improve visibility and reduce junction radii (and thereby also reduce vehicle speeds). Pollution Control (Noise & Air): No objections subject to approval of a scheme of sound insulation for the party wall structure, restriction of the hours of operation to 08:00 18:00 and approval of details of kitchen extraction equipment. Chief Officer Highways and Waste Management (Waste): A change of use to D1 may lead to an increase in the production of waste. The bin storage area identified within the plans is acceptable; this must be retained in order to prevent waste being stored on the highway. Childcare Strategy Unit (Nurseries): All local authorities in Wales have a duty within the Childcare Act 2006 to ensure there is sufficient childcare in their area for working parents and those in training and education. In addition to this Councils must annually assess the supply and demand for childcare,

5.5

5.6

5.7

199

identify the gaps in provision and make plans to address these gaps. These plans are submitted to Welsh Government Children, Young People and Families Division each March. 5.8 As part of the Cardiff Childcare Sufficiency Assessment 2012-13, we have identified a shortfall of full day-care places in both English and Welsh Medium in the electoral divisions of Plasnewydd and Penylan. The waiting list held by Sandringham Nursery forms part of this evidence. It is on the basis of this evidence that the Childcare Strategy Unit within the Council has supported this very much needed development in meeting parents childcare needs in the area. Sandringham Nursery, established in September 2003, currently have a full day care nursery housed within a converted Edwardian semi detached house within a residential area. They are registered with CSSIW, who are the legal and regulatory body for childcare in Wales, for 30 children. The nursery accommodates 12 babies in the baby room, 8 toddlers in the toddler room and 10 pre-school children. During the past nine and half years they have never received complaints from neighbours regarding parking and noise. They do have a closed door policy between 08:40 and 09:10 to alleviate any parking problems and have considered this for their nursery at Kimberley Road. Due to waiting lists at Sandringham Day nursery, the proprietor has been supported to open a second nursery to accommodate 19 babies at 77 Kimberley Road. This is much needed as they have no flexibility for their existing children to change rooms when they have reached their age and stage of development and nor do they have flexibility for existing children whose parents working pattern may change. They are unable to accommodate sibling requests at the moment due to current occupancy levels. Kimberley Road would provide places for babies currently on the waiting list for Sandringham Nursery as well as enabling the applicants to provide a wrap around service for Cylch Meithrin Nant Llecu, which has been requested by Welsh speaking families and which, due to demand and waiting lists at Sandringham, is unavailable at present. EXTERNAL CONSULTEES RESPONSES Welsh Water: Foul and surface water discharges must be drained separately. No surface water shall be allowed to connect to the public sewerage system unless agreed by the local planning authority. No land drainage will be permitted to discharge to the public sewerage system. Care and Social Services Inspectorate Wales (CSSIW): No comments received. REPRESENTATIONS

5.9

5.10

5.11

6. 6.1

6.2

7.

200

7.1

The application has been advertised by site notice and neighbour notification. 10 letters and a petition of 73 signatures have been received in opposition to the proposal whilst a petition of 78 signatures has been received in support of the application. The objections are as follows; (1) The site is on a busy and dangerous junction where there have been a number of road traffic accidents in recent years; (2) The development will lead to an increase in traffic congestion in the area; (3) There is insufficient capacity for additional car parking in the surrounding streets; (4) The proposed use will disturb the quiet nature of this residential area; (5) There will be disturbance to the quiet needed for the health spa business opposite the application site; (6) The character of the area will be affected by the loss of a residential use and encroachment of another commercial/non-residential use (there is already a nursery on Sandringham Road); (7) There will be a detrimental effect on the architectural character of the nearby conservation area; (8) The proposed facilities are poor there will be no outdoor play space and there is an outside toilet with no wash basin; (9) The adornment of the windows, which is a characteristic of such uses, would be detrimental to the streetscape as this property is in a prominent corner location; (10) It is not clear from the plans how the building would be arranged internally to allow for access to the first floor or how additional drainage would be provided for the new toilets; (11) The area is becoming overdeveloped there is a care home for vulnerable adults in the vicinity and a new sheltered housing development is being constructed nearby; (12) The disposal of clinical waste will be a problem rats are already a nuisance in the area and if waste is collected daily it will add to traffic problems. Councillors Bill Kelloway and Joe Boyle have submitted the following objections to the application: 1. We note that the application is for change of use of the ground floor of the premises to use class D1which would enable the property to be used as a child care facility. Whilst the current applicant has specified that it is the intention that the property would be used for "babies", the D1 use class would enable the premises to be used for older children as well should the current applicant or a future operator decide to do so. 2. The proposal is likely to result in nuisance to neighbours resulting from noise generated by children being dropped off and picked up. 3. The proposal is likely to result in nuisance to neighbours resulting from noise created by children within and outside the building. 77, Kimberley Road is an end of terrace, corner house and its change of use to a

7.2

7.3

201

nursery would be likely to cause noise nuisance particularly to the occupants of 79, Kimberley Road, which adjoins the application site, and 2, Blenheim Road, which is to the rear of the site. 4. The property is situated at the hazardous junction of Kimberley and Blenheim Roads which has been the site of a number of fairly serious motor accidents during the last twelve months, at least one of which has resulted in personal injury to those involved. The hazardous nature of this junction has been reported to City Development by local Councillors and members of the public and it is understood that the Council's initial assessment has indicated that further investigation is needed in order to determine the most appropriate measures to be implemented. The frequency and speed of traffic and the accident record at this junction are such that it would not be an appropriate place to locate a child care facility, which would involve the parking of vehicles to drop off and pick up young children, without prejudicing the safety of those children and other road users. 5. The parking situation outside 77, Kimberley Road is already congested at certain times of the day and the dropping off and picking up of children at the proposed nursery could only be achieved by parents "double parking" outside the nursery. This will add to existing parking congestion, create a highway obstruction and pose a road safety hazard at this location. 6. There is no off street parking provision at 77, Kimberley Road to meet the parking needs of staff employed at the nursery. Increased on street parking by employees would create extra pressure on limited parking in the area and would be likely to create tensions with the local residential population. 7. The proposed change of use conflicts with the Council's Supplementary Planning Guidance, entitled "Buildings for Child-care", in a number of respects: (i) Paragraph 3.2 states: "Because of their effect on residential amenity, the preferred location for child-care facilities is within employment areas or shopping centres - either in new buildings or through the conversion of suitable premises." 77, Kimberley Road is not "suitable premises" in the terms set out in the relevant SPG. (ii) Paragraph 3.5 states: "Proposals to convert or redevelop residential property for commercial use generally fall to be considered against Policy 26 of the Local Plan which seeks to safeguard both existing dwellings and the amenity of residential areas from commercial encroachment." The application site has been in residential use for about 20 years and Kimberley Road is a predominantly residential road which is entitled, therefore, to enjoy the protection afforded by Policy 26 of the Local Plan. (iii) Paragraph 3.6 states that change of use from residential to childcare can be considered: "Provided that demonstrable harm is unlikely to be caused to the amenity of neighbouring residents." As outlined in points 1 - 6 above, it is likely that such a change of use

202

(iv)

(v)

(vi)

will harm the amenity of nearby residents. Also paragraph 3.7 of the SPG specifies the types of residential properties that would be likely to cause least harm to residential amenity. These include detached properties, pairs of semi-detached properties or a semi detached property which adjoins an existing commercial property. Neither of these exceptions applies in the case of 77, Kimberley Road. Paragraph 3.7 also makes reference to the importance of maintaining the "essential residential character of an area." It is likely that the residential character of this section of Kimberley Road will be eroded by a change of use, from residential to childcare, at 77, Kimberley Road. Paragraph 3.7 also states that due regard must be taken of the number of children to be cared for and the staffing requirements together with the impact these will have upon factors such as traffic, parking, play requirements without adversely affecting highway safety or causing nuisance to neighbours. It is clear, as outlined above, that the proposed change of use would be likely to prejudice highway safety and cause nuisance to neighbours. Paragraph 4.2 states: "Child-care facilities can generate considerable short stay car parking immediately outside the premises and along adjacent side streets. This can cause a hazard and inconvenience neighbours and local residents, especially during peak periods when most children are dropped off and collected. Proposals which might encourage short stay parking near to junctions, traffic lights, pedestrian crossings, bus stops and double yellow lines are unlikely to be acceptable. Properties which enable dropping-off and collection to take place within the site will be more acceptable." 77, Kimberley Road does not have provision for on site dropping off/picking up. It is situated on a busy commuter route, on a road that is heavily parked at times and at a road junction that is an acknowledged accident black-spot. In several important and crucial respects, therefore, 77, Kimberley Road is in a location that is "unlikely to be acceptable" in terms of the guidance set out in paragraph. 4.2 of the SPG.

In brief, we believe the application should be refused because: the proposed change of use is likely to result in nuisance to neighbours resulting from noise generated by children being dropped off and collected from the nursery and within and outside the building; the siting of a nursery at this location, which is an existing accident black-spot, would not be acceptable in road safety terms serving only to make this junction more hazardous and the application premises are not of the type favoured by the Council's "Buildings for Childcare Supplementary Planning Guidance." 7.4 Councillors Kelloway and Boyle also add that although the supporting statement from the applicant refers to 3 accidents at this junction in the past 7 years, these figures do not include 2012 data and they would like the Committee to be aware that a serious accident took place at the junction of Kimberly Road and Blenheim Road on Thursday, March 1, 2012. Reference

203

to this is made in their earlier submission. One of the cars had been flipped onto its roof and the passengers had sustained considerable injuries. This accident gets to the heart of the objections to these plans. 7.5 The petition in support of the application states that the signatories support the planning application due to an additional need for local childcare places. ANALYSIS The application site falls within an existing residential area, as defined by the Local Plan Proposals Map. The application should be assessed against policy 26 of the Local Plan and supplementary planning guidance on Buildings for Childcare (1998). Paragraph 3.6 of the SPG states that, as an exception to the general provisions of Policy 26, applications for change of use from residential accommodation to childcare facilities will be considered favourably, provided that demonstrable harm is unlikely to be caused to the amenity of neighbouring residents. Paragraph 3.7 states that, in determining whether demonstrable harm is likely to be caused, regard should be given to the type of property; the character of the area and the number of children to be cared for and staff employed. Preferable properties are identified as being detached, pairs of semi-detached or semi-detached adjoining an existing commercial property. The property is an end of terrace house, where the ground floor was historically used for commercial purposes, but has since been converted to residential use. Although the property falls within a residential area, it is an area where properties on the road junctions have traditionally accommodated small-scale commercial uses at the ground floor level. It is noted that the proposal would retain a residential flat at first floor level. Taking the above factors into consideration, the proposal does not raise any significant land use policy concerns. The main considerations in determining the application should therefore be residential amenity and transportation/highway safety issues. The development would have little impact on residential amenity. The party wall between the nursery and the adjoining house would be soundproofed and babies would not be taken outdoors into the amenity area other than no more than 3 at a time to use the sensory area. Older children, who might be expected to generate more disturbance, could not attend the nursery. The premises will be registered with the CSSIW for 19 children under the age of 2 years and this could not be changed without re-applying for registration, and the limited outdoor space would not be deemed suitable for children over the age of 2 therefore the premises could not be registered for that age group. With regard to issues of highway safety, transportation and parking, the Operational Manger, Transportation, has no objections to the application. These issues are discussed in more detail in the following response to the objections received.

8. 8.1

8.2

8.3

8.4

8.5

204

8.6

Regarding the objections (see paragraph 7.2): (1) An investigation into traffic speed and traffic flow carried out by City Development along with the data from police accident records demonstrate that, although the fact that a number of accidents have occurred in what seems like a short space of time makes the frequency of accidents at this location seem significant, this junction is not inherently dangerous. Also, improvements have been carried out in recent years in the form of the construction build-outs to improve visibility and reduce vehicle speeds. The lack of evidence that the junction is hazardous means that, in my opinion, it would not be possible to justify the refusal of planning permission on the grounds of highway safety. (2) The increase in traffic will be limited to specific times of day and will be within the current capacity of the surrounding road network. The Operational Manager, Transportation, has raised no objections on these grounds. If granted, planning permission could be subject to a condition to ensure that babies are not dropped off and picked up at times when the surrounding road network is busiest, i.e. to avoid the school run associated with the nearby Marlborough Primary School. Such a condition was imposed on the planning permission for the nursery on Sandringham Road. (3) The nursery staff will mostly walk to the site or travel by bus and the manager will live on site. Whilst this has the potential to generate additional parking demand, it seems unlikely that many of the staff would drive to the premises. The staff profile information for the nearby Sandringham nursery, which is also operated by the applicants, shows that only 2 of the 12 staff drive to work with 2 others car-sharing and the majority walking or arriving by public transport. The staff profile is likely to be similar for the proposed nursery and will include staff moving over from the existing nursery. Short stay parking will be needed for dropping off/picking up children but demand for this can be managed via the use of opening hours conditions. Also, many of the parents bringing children to the nursery are likely to live within walking distance of the premises. The applicant has provided details of their current customers at the Sandringham nursery which shows that more than 50% live within close walking distance. Many of the customers on the waiting list for a nursery place live very close to the application site. It should also be noted that the previous use of the property as a shop (before it was converted to fully residential use) would have generated parking demand throughout the day rather than just at the times when children are dropped off and picked up. The Operational Manager, Transportation, has raised no objections on parking grounds and on balance I am satisfied that the additional parking demand over and above that for the existing use can be adequately and safely accommodated on street. (4) Soundproofing will ensure that the use does not affect neighbouring

205

residents and the only noticeable increase in activity will be for short periods of time when children are being dropped off and picked up and when children are taken in buggies to the local park. This will not constitute unacceptable disturbance. There will be more visitors to the property than would be expected for a house but this activity will occur only twice per day and not at unsociable hours. The entrance to the nursery will be in the side elevation, which is not adjacent to any residential property. (5) The only noise generated by the development will be the type of noises that are normally heard in residential streets. The health spa is located directly adjacent to a well-used road junction in a residential area and it would be unreasonable to expect higher standards of peace and quiet than are commonly found in such locations. (6) A residential unit will remain on the site on the first floor of the property and the ground floor nursery use will not appear out of character with the area. The ground floor was previously in commercial use and the shop window will remain in place. The area is characterised partly by the inclusion of small-scale non-residential uses (e.g. the neighbouring health spa and studio). (7) The boundary of the conservation area is around 52m to the south, beyond the rear of the houses on the southern side of Kimberley Road. No external alterations to the property are proposed. This development would have no effect on the architectural character of the conservation area or on its setting. (8) The standard of the facilities at nurseries is controlled by other legislation via the Care and Social Services Inspectorate for Wales. If planning permission is granted for the nursery use, other regulations will also have to be complied with before the nursery can operate. The lack of outdoor play space is not considered unacceptable given that the nursery will be for babies only up to the age of 22 months, who will not require a large space for outdoor exercise. (9) Had the premises remained in use as a shop, it would be expected that there would be a window display, as there is at the health spa on the opposite side of the road. Adornment of the windows will not necessarily be detrimental to visual amenity and could enhance the appearance of the property. The Council will be able to control the future display of advertisements at the premises in accordance with the Town and Country Planning (Control of Advertisements) Regulations. (10) Internal alterations to this dwelling house do not require planning permission and the matter of connecting new facilities to the drainage system is dealt with under the Building Regulations. (11) The character of the area will remain predominantly residential and given that no substantial detrimental impacts have been identified, it is not

206

considered that the area would become overdeveloped as a result of this proposal. (12) No concerns have been raised by the Chief Waste Management officer with regard to the storage or disposal of waste from the development. 8.7 With regard to the objections raised by Councillors Bill Kelloway and Joe Boyle: 1. A planning condition could be imposed which would restrict the use specifically to that applied for. 2. The issue of noise is discussed above. The dropping off/picking up of children would be restricted to certain times of day and these would not be unsociable hours. 3. Soundproofing will be used to prevent noise nuisance to the adjoining building and there will be no external play area. 4. The accidents that have occurred, and safety issues at the road junction, are discussed above. 5. and 6. The Operational Manager, Transportation, raises no objections on parking grounds. The parking situation in this location is discussed above. 7. The proposed change of use does not conflict with the Council's Supplementary Planning Guidance "Buildings for Child-care". (i) The preferred location for child-care facilities may be within employment areas or shopping centres but this does not preclude the granting of planning permission for such facilities in other areas provided the development would be in accordance with development plan policies such as the protection of residential amenity etc. The proposal has been considered against Policy 26 of the Local Plan (see paragraphs 8.1 8.3 above). There is no evidence to suggest that the change of use would result in demonstrable harm to the amenity of neighbouring residents. Regarding the preferred type of property for childcare, the property is effectively semi-detached as it is at the end of a terrace adjacent to a road junction. The Pollution Control division considers that the proposal will be acceptable provided soundproofing is installed between the nursery and the adjoining house. There would not be any significant impact on the character of the area, as discussed above. The issues of traffic, parking, play requirements, highway safety and nuisance are discussed above. There is no evidence that the proposed change of use would prejudice highway safety or that it would cause nuisance to neighbours. The issue of parking is discussed elsewhere in this report. The property is close to a road junction but the works that have been carried out to the highway (build-outs, bollards and road markings) effectively prevent parking close to the junction. The Operational Manager, Transportation, raises no objections on parking or

(ii) (iii)

(iv) (v)

(vi)

207

highway safety grounds. 8.8 It should also be noted that paragraph 7.6.1 of Planning Policy Wales (2012) encourages local planning authorities to adopt a positive and constructive approach to applications for economic development and to take into account, in determining applications, factors such as the numbers and types of jobs expected to be created on the site and whether and how far the development will help redress economic disadvantage or support regeneration priorities, for example by enhancing employment opportunities. The 3 jobs that will be generated by this change of use may seem relatively insignificant but they will include apprenticeships for young people from the local area, and, given the evidence of the waiting list for the applicants existing nursery, the Childcare Strategy Units identification of a shortfall of nursery places in this part of Cardiff and the petition in support of the application, it is clear that there is a need for a development such as this and that it would provide a valuable childcare service that would enhance opportunities for local people with young children to return to employment or education. In conclusion, the proposed change of use is considered to be in accordance with the relevant development plan policies and supplementary planning guidance and, although a number of objections have been raised, there is no evidence to suggest that the potential detrimental impacts referred to by the objectors would be likely to occur. The proposed development would bring benefits to the area in terms of childcare provision and employment, and, on balance, it is considered that the application should be approved subject to the conditions set out in Recommendation 1 above.

8.9

208

209

210

211

212

213

214

Minat Terkait