Author Archives: Robbie

LDP 2010 Table “Allocations” (BDOG 05)

demonstrated that the proposal would not unduly overburden existing community infrastructure provision. The affordable housing target for the Plan period is 530 residential units.

4.208 Planning guidance on affordable housing prepared jointly with Pembrokeshire County Council will require updating.

Table 7. Allocations of Housing Sites (see Proposals Map and Appendix 2) [154]

Location Proposals Map ID Site Name Area Hectare Residential Units % Affordable Units Affordable Housing Provision expected
Tenby HA377 Brynhir 6.35 168 60 101
Tenby HA723 former cottageHospital Site 0.17 10 60 6
Tenby HA724 Rectory Car Park 0.94 50 60 30
Tenby HA727 West of Narberth Road 1.14 25 60 15
Tenby HA752 Butts Field Car park, Tenby 0.94 80 60 48
Tenby HA760 Reservoir Site, Tenby 0.33 12 60 7
Crymych HA750 Depot Site 0.37 15 50 8
Newport HA825 North of Feidr Eglwys 1.50 20 70 14
St David’s HA385 North of Twr-y- Felin 0.92 13 (current permission for 0 affordable/ renewal 50%)
St David’s HA737 St Davids West Glasfryn Road 3.80 90 50 45
St David’s HA789 Adj Ysgol Bro Dewi, Nun Street 0.56 10 50 5
Broad Haven HA734 South of Driftwood Close 0.66 8 50 4
Dale HA382 Castle Way 0.55 12 80 10
Dinas Cross HA387 Opposite Bay View Terrace 0.25 12 100 12
Herbrandston HA732 East of Herbrandston Hall 0.38 12 50 6
Jameston HA436 North of Landway Farm 0.32 7 (current permission for 1 affordable/ renewal 50%)
Jameston HA730 Opposite Bush 1.69 35 50 18

(emphasis added)

[154] Please see Background Papers “Site Criteria” and Housing Background Paper for more information. Only sites for 5 or more dwellings are allocated. Please also see Table 3 Mixed Sites for housing and affordable housing contributions.

PEMBROKESHIRE COAST NATIONAL PARK LOCAL DEVELOPMENT PLAN 76

Inspector Juniper’s Report & Recommendations on HA825 (BDOG 04)

“BDOG 04” PCNPA LDP – Inspector’s Report (Mr.Juniper) – 01/09/2010

Housing Allocations – Newport

” 3.33 Despite Newport’s status, conferred by Policy 2, as a Tier 3 Local Centre, there remain some doubts about 3 of the 4 housing allocations. The site for the mixed use allocation at Feidr Pen y Bont (MA232) is the subject of a planning permission for an industrial development[18] and so the 6 live/work units[19] may not be [-p.14] provided. However, development has not commenced and it seems to me reasonable to allow the allocation to stand, to be reconsidered at the first review of the Plan if the permitted scheme proceeds.

3.34 Two other housing allocations, however, form part of an active and evidently well used caravan park off Parrog Road (HA220 and HA609). It was clear from the proprietors’ stance at the hearings that there is little prospect of this business altering its mode of operation and removing pitches to accommodate the proposed housing. I have come to the view that these allocations are not soundly based and I recommend that they should be deleted.

3.35 Of the alternative sites put forward for my consideration, those within the defined Centre Boundary on the Proposals Map seem to me to be suitable for development provided the broader criteria of the LDP are met although there are some access difficulties which would be likely to restrict their availability. Those outside the Centre Boundary are all in locations where the impact of built development on the wider landscape would be unacceptable.

3.36 I looked carefully, however, at the allocated site on land north of Feidr Eglwys (HA825) and the land immediately to the north, Alternative Sites reference Alt1056 and Alt1057. The western part of Alt1056 as depicted on the relevant Alternative Sites Proposals Map – AltC23 Newport/Trefdraeth – is within the existing churchyard and this has been acknowledged as a drafting error. The rest of this land, with the safeguards set out in the NPA’s analysis of HA825, would be suitable for an expansion of that site. It is reasonably well screened from local viewpoints and in the more distant prospect of the town from the north any built development here would be seen within the context of the surrounding housing and against the background of the steeply rising ground around the Castle. Although the NPA’s site analysis exercise did not specifically include this land, all important aspects are either satisfactorily covered in the investigation into HA825 or could be dealt with during the processing of any subsequent planning application.

3.37 In coming to this view I am conscious that some additional traffic would need to use the somewhat constricted road network in the immediate vicinity. The site is well related to all the facilities in the centre of the town, however, and many trips to access these would be likely to be made by foot, not least because of the parking constraints in the town centre. There was limited evidence about accidents in this part of the road network and that which was available was largely anecdotal, which limits the weight I can give it.

3.38 The highway authority has acknowledged that the hedgebank along the southern edge of the site would need to be set back to achieve [-p.15] proper safety standards and I am content that the techniques to achieve this successfully are now well established. With improved width and visibility at the junction thus provided, the highway authority considers that a total of about 20 dwellings could be safely accessed on HA825 and a small site, Alt824, to the south of Feidr Eglwys. Since the latter site is only likely to be suitable for one or two dwellings I consider that an expanded HA825 could accommodate up to 20 units. The 8 additional units would still not fully compensate in the assessment of overall provision for the loss of the 15 proposed for HA220 and HA609, but I see no prospect of the whole of the desirable provision being achieved in Newport, given its environmental constraints. I therefore recommend that site HA825 be expanded accordingly.

Recommendation 6

Delete sites HA220 and HA609 from the Proposals Map, Inset C23 and from Table 7; adjust the figure in sub-para (b) of Policy 32 from 210 to 195 and remove the entry for site HA220 from Appendix 2.

Recommendation 7
Expand Site HA825 on Proposals Map Inset C23 to take in the areas of Sites Alt1056 and Alt1057, except for that part of Alt1056 which falls within the existing churchyard and adjust Table 7 to allow for 20 residential units of which 14 would be affordable housing. The site area in column 4 and the relevant totals will also need to be amended.

[18] Document No. Exam 36
[19] Table 3, following Policy 30 of the Deposit LDP

(emphasis added)

LDP Deposit Plan (2009) Appendix 2 (BDOG 02)

BDOG 02
Appendix 2 Allocations

Extract from Development Plan –

Site Reference Location Commentary
HA825 North of Feidr Eglwys, Newport Development of this site will need to respect the character and setting of the Conservation Area and church and additional and significant planting within the site area will be required. The density of development will need to limited to 12 dwellings to ensure that it does not harm the character of the area and to meet access constraints. It is not known whether there is an archaeological resource on site which would further constrain the development of this site. Geophysical survey and trial trenching are recommended by Dyfed Archaeological Trust prior to submitting an application in order to ascertain the type and extent of the resource.

PEMBROKESHIRE COAST NATIONAL PARK LOCAL DEVELOPMENT PLAN (emphasis added)

LDP Appendix 2 (BDOG 07)

BDOG 07

PEMBROKESHIRE COAST NATIONAL PARK LOCAL DEVELOPMENT PLAN 122 (emphasis added)

Site Reference Location Commentary
St.Davids development of any part of this site. It is considered that the housing allocation HA737 can fund this road improvement (costs caculated in June 2006) using the Three Dragon’s Toolkit. However, Pembrokeshire County Council is also exploring public funding options that might assist in the delivery of this road improvement. The sewage treatment works may require upgrading to accommodate development but no investment bid has been included in the current programme. Development may have to be delayed until after 2015 if a developer funded study shows the sewage treatment works to have insufficient capacity unless the developer(s) pays for any necessary improvements. Phasing is also proposed to help the development be absorbed into the town. Please also see options for low and zero carbon renewable technologies available for this site in the Background Paper “Housing Site Assessment – Options for low and zero carbon technologies”. Site has been identified as having likely significant effect on Natura 2000 sites and should be subject to Habitats Regulations Assessment.
HA789 Adjacent to Ysgol Bro Dewi, Nun Street, St Davids Additional planting within the site, particularly within the north-western portion will be required to assimilate this site into the sensitive landscape.
HA825 North of Feidr Eglwys,Newport Development of this site will need to respect the character and setting of the Conservation Area and church and additional and significant planting within the site area will be required.
The density of development will need to limited to 12 dwellings to ensure that it does not harm the character of the area and to meet access constraints. It is not known whether there is an archaeological resource on site which would further constrain the development of this site. Geophysical survey and trial trenching are recommended by Dyfed Archaeological Trust prior to submitting an application in order to ascertain the type and extent of the resource. Site has been identified as having likely significant effect on Natura 2000 sites and should be subject to Habitats Regulations Assessment.
HA220 Caravan Park, Parrog Road, Newport The number of units on this site is restricted by the junction of Parrog Road with the A487. Additional landscaping along the northern boundary of the site is required to help assimilation in the landscape.
HA750 Depot Site, Crymych This site is located at the southern edge of Crymych. Well designed perimeter planting to the site is required to achieve enhancement of the local landscape character.
HA734 South Driftwood Close, Broad Haven The upper edges of any development should be well-vegetated to provide definition to the edge and properly assimilate any development into the landscape which will enhance the special qualities of the National Park. Improvements are needed to the sewage treatment works. If the works are not included in Dwr Cymru’s programme of improvements (due November 2009) then developer contributions will be required to upgrade the sewerage system. Site has been identified as having likely significant effect on Natura 2000 sites and should be subject to Habitats Regulations Assessment.
HA704 Junction of Sandyke Road and Millmoor Way, Broad Haven See housing site HA813 New Hedges for advice from the Coal Authority which also relates to this site. A future growth arrow indicates that further land is considered suitable for development beyond the plan period to the south-east of the allocated site, at a similar density. Site has been identified as having likely significant effect on Natura 2000 sites and should be subject to Habitats Regulations Assessment.
HA382 Castle Way, Dale An estate road is required to access the development of this site.
HA732 East of Herbrandston Hall, Herbrandston A flood consequence assessment will be required due to potential sewer system overload/capacity levels. A buffer zone of 7m alongside the stream is required.

PEMBROKESHIRE COAST NATIONAL PARK LOCAL DEVELOPMENT PLAN 122 (emphasis added)

Feidr Bentinck Development Proposal

Huge new development now proposed for Newport

This proposal, if approved, would be the largest ever allowed in Newport. Many people will feel it is out of all proportion in terms of the effect on the environment and the impact on the community.  An opposition group has been set up, and a website can be found at http://bentinckdevelopment.org.uk  This contains full details of the development. Therefore there is no longer any need to put up more information here.

Legal Grounds for Objecting to Feidr Bentinck Proposal

Summary of current Legal Advice as to why Planning Application NP/15/0194/FUL – ought to be refused by the PCNPA

  • The two respective provisions of the PCNPA-Local Development Plan (2010), setting out the number of “units” associated with the residential development on Housing Allocation “HA825” – “Land north of Feidr Eglwys” in Newport, Pembrokeshire are completely internally inconsistent and irreconcilable.
  • Whereas, the mere numerical data appearing in Table 7 “Allocations of Housing Sites” (p.76), as against the entry for this Allocation, states it to be for “20 units”: the following sentence appears in the full expository reasoned justification, at the equivalent entry, in the table at Appendix 2 “Allocations” (p.122) namely “The density of development will need to ..[be].. limited to 12 dwellings to ensure that it does not harm the character of the area and to meet access constraints”
  • This conflict has come about as the result of a grave oversight and serious lapse by the Planning Inspector concerned, (albeit compounded by the PCNPA staff) who simply failed to make adequate Recommendations, when he found that the original site, as proposed in the 2009 Deposit Plan, could in his view be “expanded” to the north, so as to include two further proposed additional so-called “alternative” sites.
  • Notwithstanding this, the said Plan as approved by the Welsh Assembly Government and adopted by the PCNPA in 2010, now sets out a simple unconditional factual statement with respect to the limit of “12 dwellings” acceptable for inclusion within the Allocation site so identified. As a matter of law the general public is now entitled to rely upon that statement and to expect it to be honoured and implemented by the NPA, whatever the earlier failings of the Planning inspector, or indeed its own staff.
  • The fact of the internal inconsistency, and the history of the Planning inspector’s oversight, are not legitimate further “material planning considerations” which the Development Management Committee of the NPA may take into consideration in their determination of the present planning application for 35 units on the site instead.
  • Such is the gravity and substantive significance of the oversight or lapse here involved, that the PCNPA is most certainly not at liberty to treat it as if it were a mere minor administrative error instead (i.e. equivalent of a typo); and attempt a quick fix solution by the simple expedient of adding it to its existing “erratum” document, which in any event is without stated authority.
  • The established lawful statutory mechanism for making any such rectification, as it may be deemed in future it is appropriate to make, lies instead under the LDP “review and revision” procedure, per ss.69 & 70 of the 2004 Act.
  • Any person who can show that, in the course of the past 5 yrs since its adoption, theyhave indeed enquired of this Plan and so became aware of this “12 dwellings” limitation, has thereby gained a substantive “legitimate expectation” that the NPA will honour and respect this commitment, when considering a planning application, such as the present, to develop on the site. They may thus have grounds to launch a subsequent challenge on a judicial review, were the Authority to simply ignore it instead.
  • The figure of only a 40% proportional commitment to “affordable housing” associated with this allocation, as now appears in the 2014 “supplementary planning guidance” document ; is not consistent with, but rather clearly and deliberately intended to be in conflict with, the previous commitment to a 70% proportion instead, as stated at Policy 45 in the LDP. Such inconsistency is expressly contrary to 2005 WAG planning guidance. Furthermore, it seeks to “delegate the criteria for decisions on planning applications” to supplementary planning guidance ,which again is contrary to WAG guidance.
  • Finally, whilst the current contemporary advice of PCC Highways regarding the changed proposal for principal vehicle access off Feidr Bentinck rather than Feidr Eglwys instead, must naturally bear greatest weight, as a material planning consideration. Nonetheless, their former advice, at the time of the Planning Inspector’s public examination of the Deposit Plan, and his professional views upon it as an integral aspect of his approval for the “expansion” of this Housing allocation site, are nonetheless also a further such material planning consideration.