representations on the swansea deposit draft ldp …...representations on the swansea ldp deposit 1....

August 2016

Representations on the Swansea Deposit Draft LDP (June 2016) Land South of Rhyd y Pandy Road Pantlasau

Prepared for:

Edenstone Homes Ltd

Prepared by:

Savills (UK) Ltd 12 Windsor Place Cardiff CF10 3BY

Representations on the Swansea LDP Deposit

Contents Contents ................................................................................................................................................. 2

1. Introduction ............................................................................................................................... 3

2. Site Description and Context .................................................................................................. 4

3. Key Planning Policy Context and Analysis............................................................................ 7

4. Analysis & Justification ......................................................................................................... 14

5. Conclusions ............................................................................................................................ 20

Appendix 1 – Site for Inclusion as Housing Allocation ......................................................................... 22

Appendix 2 – Candidate Site Assessment ........................................................................................... 23

Appendix 3 – Recent Appeal Decision ................................................................................................. 24


1. Introduction

1.1 This statement sets out the justification for inclusion of a site at Rhyd y Pandy Road as a

housing allocation within the Swansea LDP. The site is identified by the red line on the plan

reproduced at Appendix 1.

1.2 This statement explores the context of the site, the planning history and sets out the justification

in planning terms for the allocation of the site and/or its inclusion within a settlement boundary.

1.3 The context to the site, the Deposit LDP and the shortage in housing land supply are examined

in detail given that they are highly material to the case to allocate the site.

1.4 The recent planning appeal decision is considered as part of this appraisal. The key reason for

dismissing the appeal was the green wedge designation. This has now been deleted following

a full review of the green wedges across the plan area. The Inspector found the site to be in a

sustainable location and acceptable in all technical regards. The removal of the green wedge

allocation as part of the LDP provides significant justification for the allocation of the site for

housing purposes.

1.5 The Council’s own assessment under the Candidate Site Assessment undertaken previously

concludes that the site should be included within the settlement boundary and/or as an

allocation. The representations are accompanied by a copy of the CSA which doubles as a

Sustainability appraisal in line with the Council’s requirements when new sites are suggested.

This is appended to this report at Appendix 2.

1.6 The Council’s own assessment and the assessment undertaken within this and through

previous applications is compelling to support the allocation of the site for housing purposes.

1.7 The representations seek an allocation of the site for housing purposes for 13 dwellings, as

tested by the previous application. The appeal decision is reproduced at appendix 3.


2. Site Description and Context

The Site

2.1 The application site is an irregular shaped plot of land which lies to the south of existing

residential development along Rhyd Y Pandy Road and to the north of Mynydd Gelli Wastad

Road.

2.2 The site extends to 0.64 hectares and currently comprises greenfield land.

2.3 The site is located within the suburb of Pantlasau, directly west of Morriston Hospital and north

of the M4 motorway. The boundaries are defined by Rhyd Y Pandy Road to the west and

Mynydd Gelli Wastad Road to the south. A residential dwelling and associated residential

curtilage lies to the east of the site and residential properties and their gardens lie to the north

of the site.

2.4 It benefits from mature hedgerows on its western, eastern and north eastern boundaries. The

strong defensible boundaries provided by the adjoining roads, the hedgerows and existing

development to the north, provide an opportunity for sensitive infill development.

Statutory Designations

2.5 The site is subject to a Tree Preservation Order relating to some of the trees which form a

boundary to Rhyd y Pandy Road. There are no other statutory designations affecting the site.

Access and Connections

2.6 Access is provided via a farm gate to Rhyd y Pandy Road.

2.7 There is a bus stop approximately 150m from the site (Pantlasau Cross) and a further bus stop

within 200m of the site at Morriston Hospital. Services numbers 4, 31 and 141 all provide

regular bus links into Swansea City Centre and the suburbs of Swansea.

2.8 Footpath links along Mynydd Gelli Wastad Road link to Morriston Hospital or Cyril Evans Way,

and beyond those to Cwmrhydyceirw via a pedestrian/cycle bridge over the M4.

Use of the Land and Agricultural Value

2.9 The existing use of the land is nil use. The land has been used for grazing in the past but is not

considered to have any merit in terms of its size or quality for agricultural purposes. It does not

therefore represent best and most versatile agricultural land.


Ecology

2.10 The ecological significance of the site has been assessed through a Phase 1 Habitat Survey

and Bat survey report undertaken in May 2015. The findings are set out in detail within the

TerrAqua Ecological Services report that accompanies the application. The context can be

summarised as follows:

• The site is not covered by any National or International designation with regard to its

importance for wildlife conservation.

• No part of the site is covered by a local designation for its value or importance to wildlife,

and no site of interest to nature conservation (SINC) abuts any part of the site.

• No records were found for any protected, rare or locally important species for any location

within or immediately adjacent to the survey boundary. Records were found for protected

WCA 1981 species for areas within 2km of the site however no habitats are present

within the site boundary suitable to support all life stages of those species with the

exception of bats.

• The semi improved grassland of the three small fields covering the majority of the site has

a low floristic diversity and has been the subject of considerable agricultural improvement.

The ward has been assessed as representing an NVC MG6 or MG6 sub community. The

poor diversity of the grassland means that this area is the least ecologically valuable of

the features within the site and is the most suitable area for development

• The hedgerow system bordering the site has been identified as being of high ecological

value.

• The dividing hedgerows are very short and while having good diversity connect only to

the eastern hedgerow boundary and have no other links to the wider countryside. As such

the loss/partial loss of these hedgerows is unlikely to have a significant loss to the overall

ecological value of the site.

• None of the trees within this area have been identified as bat roosts and all have been

classified as having low/moderate potential for use by individual bats.

• The western boundary comprises a row of mature individual oak trees. These trees are

the most valuable ecological feature within or abutting the site and should be retained.

Although not identified as bat roosts a small number of trees were identified as having

high potential for use by bats therefore ecological supervision would be advised should

any works on these trees be required

• The bat activity and emergence surveys have concluded that none of the trees within the

site are currently used by roosting bats. The overall use of the grassland as a foraging

area by bats has been assessed as being low and its loss is unlikely to have a significant


impact on any bat species. The eastern hedgerow and western tree line boundary were

identified as being used by a small number of bats commuting routes from unknown

locations north and north east of the site to open grasslands west of the site boundary

and these should wherever possible be retained.

• The western tree line and adjacent lane has also been identified as a feeding area for a

small number of individual bats of various species.

• No evidence of badger was found within any area of the site and no records for an

historic badger presence was found therefore badgers are unlikely to be affected by the

development.

2.11 As a consequence, the investigations undertaken have concluded that the site does not have

any overriding biodiversity constraints to development.

Flood Risk

2.12 The site is not subject to any existing flood risk and is identified as being within Zone A within

the TAN 15 flood maps.

2.13 As a consequence, there is no need to undertake an assessment of how any flood risk would

impact upon development.

Trees

2.14 A tree survey report carried out to British Standard 5837:2012 accompanies the application.

The site is not covered by any Conservation Area designations, although there is a TPO

affecting some of the trees forming the boundary to Rhyd y Pandy Road. A number of mature

trees and hedgerows are included within the site. The mature trees are mainly positioned on

the boundary of the site, with small hedgerows crossing it.

2.15 The trees have been assessed for their health and amenity value. A mix of category A, B, C

and U trees make up the trees stock. The trees perform a screening function and, as identified

by the ecology report, serve a limited biodiversity function.

Summary

2.16 The site lies in the urban fringe outside the Green Wedge in the Deposit LDP. It lies in a

sustainable location, with an existing access and the potential for a new pedestrian/cycle

access to link into the existing footpath network. Surveys have identified that the site is suitable

for development in terms of its arboriculture and limited ecological value. It is not affected by

flood risk and is not constrained by any statutory designations other than a small number of

trees that are subject to TPO, that will be retained.


3. Key Planning Policy Context and Analysis

3.1 This section reviews the pressing need to deliver Housing Land Supply within Swansea. This

is recognised in the recent appeal decision and provides justification for the allocation of a

number of smaller sites which offer a range and choice for housebuilders and, can be delivered

in the short term in advance of the large strategic sites allocated elsewhere within the plan.

Summary of 5 Year Housing Supply

3.2 The City & County of Swansea Joint Housing Land Availability Study 2015 documents the most

up to date housing land supply situation for Swansea, with a base date of April 2015.

3.3 The report concludes that Swansea has a 3.0 year supply, which follows a downwards trend in

supply since 2009 and a drop of 0.3 years since the original application was submitted.

3.4 As a response, a developer guidance note was published in November 2015. The note seeks

to prioritise the delivery of the LDP strategic sites and resists the submission of outline

applications that are contrary to the adopted UDP. A number of criticisms have been made of

the Developer Guidance Note, some of which were accepted by the appeal Inspector.

3.5 It is evident that whilst the guidance note provides a sensible approach to ensuring that the

LDP delivers on strategic sites in due course, it does not offer a solution to addressing the short

term housing land supply shortage. In the interim period, sites such as this are essential, no

matter what the scale, to maintain crucial housing land supply.

3.6 The site would provide as close to an immediate supply as is possible and could be complete

before adoption of the LDP.

3.7 The 2016 JHLAS, due to be published later this year, is likely to show a further worsening in

housing land supply. Figures presented verbally at the appeal hearing relating to the site in

April 2016 suggested a shortfall in supply compared to the annual requirement.

3.8 Furthermore, in order to allow the LDP to be adopted in 2018, Swansea will need to be able to

demonstrate a 5 year supply (paragraph 3.2 of TAN1). If the residual method is applied to the

current LDP requirements, the following calculation can be calculated on a date of April 2015.

A – total housing requirement (2010 – 2025) = 17,100 B – completions (2010 – 2015) = 2,366 (taken from September 2015 JHLAS) C – residual requirement – 17,100 – 2,366 = 14,734 D – 5 year requirement = 7,367 E – Annual need = 1,473 F – total 5 year land supply = 2,828 G – total land supply in years = 1.9

3.9 This calculation shows that the emerging LDP will likely not go far enough to deliver a 5 year


housing land supply and regardless of the allocations set out within the deposit plan, further

releases of housing land will be required.

3.10 This indicates that the reliance upon windfalls set out within the LDP Housing Growth policies

and the allowance of a 10% flexibility is inadequate and will lead to an inevitable early failure to

deliver a 5 year housing land supply. Therefore there is a need to increase the number of

housing allocations to a) reduce the reliance upon windfalls and b) build in greater flexibility into

the plan facilitate a healthy housing land supply.

Summary

3.11 The current 2 year shortfall in Housing Land Supply in Swansea is significant. A calculation of

the housing land supply in relation to the LDP requirements shows a 3+ year shortfall. The task

to address the shortfall is not to be underestimated and the considered analysis of the strategy

published by the Council to address it reveals that the reliance upon strategic sites will not

address the pressing short term need.

3.12 Ignoring the contribution that smaller scale sites such as the appeal site can make to

addressing the short term supply/requirement to deliver a sound plan is considered counter

productive to meeting Government aims to improve housing supply and choices for the

population.

3.13 The overview of the 5 year Housing Land Supply and the requirements of TAN1 lead to the

clear conclusion that Swansea Council has an insufficient supply of housing land which will not

be resolved in the short term and, the need to increase that supply should be given

considerable weight in favour of allocating further sites with the LDP, such as this site.

3.14 This is reinforced by the Inspectors conclusions in the recent appeal decision at paragraph 12:

“Although the Council maintains that some of the strategic sites could be brought forward for

construction starts as early as 2017, I tend to share the Appellant’s scepticism that these will not

make any significant impact on the housing shortfall for several years. In the mean time, it is

appropriate to give considerable weight to the need to increase supply when dealing with planning

applications.”

3.15 At paragraph 13 the Inspector stated: “I consider the need to increase housing supply to

warrant considerable weight, albeit bearing in mind that the scheme would deliver only a

relatively small number of houses.” ... clearly indicating that the 13 houses that the scheme

would provides is highly significant.

3.16 The current shortfall and the poor outlook for the current strategy is compelling context for the

allocation of more sites and a greater flexibility in the plan to make it sound.

TAN 1: Joint Housing Land Availability Studies


3.17 TAN1 was published in January 2015. The aim of TAN 1 is to ensure that sufficient housing

land is available to stimulate an increase in housing development in Wales. Paragraph 2.1

states:

The requirement to maintain a 5-year supply of readily developable housing land in each local planning authority across Wales remains a key planning policy requirement of the Welsh Government

3.18 TAN1 provides the LPA with a clear basis by which a strong case can be made in support of

appropriate housing schemes, to address the inadequate housing supply and in the spirit of

adopting a more permissive approach towards new housing development.

3.19 The overview of the 5 year Housing Land Supply and the requirements of TAN1 lead to the

clear conclusion that Swansea Council has an insufficient supply of housing land which will only

worsen when the 2016 JHLAS is published and, the need to increase that supply should be

given considerable weight in favour of the allocation of further sites through the LDP.

Planning Policy Wales

3.20 On housing land supply PPW states:

9.2.3 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 judged against the general objectives and the scale and location of development provided for in the development plan…..There must be sufficient sites suitable for the full range of housing types. For land to be regarded as genuinely available it must be a site included in a Joint Housing Land Availability Study. The Welsh Government will monitor development plans and their implementation to ensure that sufficient housing land is brought forward for development in each local planning authority and that economic development and related job opportunities are not unreasonably constrained.

3.21 Section 4.3 sets out the key principles for sustainable development which include:

§ Putting people and their quality of life now and in the future, at the centre of decision

making

§ Taking a long term perspective to safeguard the interests of future generations, whilst

at the same time meeting needs of people today

§ Respect for environmental limits

3.22 Section 4.4 sets out the policy objectives. These include:

§ Promoting resource efficient and climate change resilient settlement patterns that

minimise land take and urban sprawl

§ Locating developments so as to minimise the demand for travel, especially by private

car

§ Facilitating development that produces emissions of greenhouse gases in any


sustainable manner

§ Facilitating sustainable building standards

§ Contributing to the protection and the improvement of the environment

§ Ensuring the conservation of historic environment and cultural heritage

§ Maximising the use of renewals resources and sustainable materials

§ Ensuring that all local communities have sufficient good quality housing for their needs

§ Promoting access to employment, shopping, education, health, community facilities etc

§ Fostering social inclusion through ensuring development is accessible by means other

than the private car

3.23 The following sections analyse the proposals against these requirements, concluding that the

site meets them.

Draft Deposit LDP Context

3.24 Since the planning application was considered, the Council’s Deposit LDP was presented to the

Council in June 2016 and is currently undergoing consultation.

3.25 The Proposals Map displays strategic sites, non-strategic housing allocations and the location

of both the settlement boundary and green wedges. The relevant extract is displayed below:


3.26 The extract shows that, whilst the site remains outside of the settlement boundary, it is does not

carry a Green Wedge designation.

3.27 The ‘Green Belt and Green Wedge Designation Review’ (June 2016) provides the firm

evidence base for the removal of the Green Wedge designation as part of the Deposit LDP.

Therefore the proposal to free the site from Green Wedge designation is fully supported.

3.28 Additionally, the site is adjacent to land identified for the expansion of Morriston Hospital, which

has received further endorsement through the allocation within the deposit plan (LDP Policy SI

4).

3.29 The plan below is an adaptation of the Draft LDP Proposals Map showing how the extent of the

built up area as a result of the allocations proposed, regardless of whether any changes to the

settlement boundary are endorsed. The Plan clearly shows the site to be part of the built up

area.

3.30 The image published below in an article in the South Wales Post dated 27 July 2015 shows the

application site in the context of the expansion plans that the health board have for Morriston

Hospital, which are reinforced by the emerging plan allocations above.


Source: South Wales Evening Post

3.31 The context of the application site will become more urban than it already is with the planned

expansion of the hospital.

3.32 The LDP has a requirement to make provision for the endorsed level of growth over the Plan

period from 2010 – 2025 for 17,100 new homes. The urgency to deliver on the identified

requirement is heightened by the lack of a 5 year land supply.

3.33 The supporting evidence to the LDP is clear that there will be a significant increase in

population over the LDP period, and that the Plan will need to facilitate significant levels of

house building and new jobs.

3.34 The Strategic sites will take a considerable time to start delivering new units to address

Housing Land Supply and therefore there is a need for a range and choice of smaller sites that

can deliver housing quickly. This is exactly such a site.

Summary

3.35 This headline policy review has identified the following key points:

§ There is a recognised shortage of housing land in Swansea. This is unlikely to improve

unless the flexibility of the LDP is improved through additional housing allocations and

greater diversity of allocated sites.

§ The Green Wedge designation in the UDP has been reviewed through a specific

background study to support the LDP. The review concludes that the designation no


longer serves a meaningful purpose and as a result it has not been continued into the

Deposit LDP.

§ The allocation within the Deposit Draft for the expansion of Morriston Hospital is

material to the context of this site and its future position within the landscape as it will

bring the site further into the built up setting. Furthermore, it will provide a logical

location for new housing for the increased workforce envisaged through the hospital

expansion.

§ This site presents a sustainable opportunity for new housing, but unlike the long lead in

times to delivering units on the larger sites, can be delivered in the very short term.


4. Analysis & Justification

4.1 Having established the context and constraints affecting the site and the planning policy

background, this section seeks to answer the key questions that will be facing the decision

takers in assessing the acceptability of the proposals, namely:

i. Is the principle of the allocation of this site acceptable in terms of National Planning

Policy?

ii. How does the recent appeal decision on the site relate to the consideration of this

proposal?

iii. Can it be demonstrated sufficiently that the site can be developed whilst addressing the

sustainability criteria of PPW and is the development acceptable in all other regards,

including the principles of access, neighbouring amenity and deliverability?

4.2 These questions are answered in turn below.

Is the principle of the allocation of this site acceptable in terms of National Planning Policy?

4.3 This question has effectively been answered through the Planning Policy analysis set out in the

previous section. It is evident that the pressing need for housing development in Swansea and,

the lack of 5 year supply is a very strong material consideration in favour of the allocation, a

point which is set out within TAN 1.

4.4 The presumption in favour of sustainable development is established in PPW. The proposals

are considered compliant with the policies of PPW (set out under section 4.3) for the following

reasons:

§ Developing the site will deliver a resource efficient and climate change resilient settlement

pattern that minimises land take and urban sprawl by virtue of making use of an infill, urban

fringe location, well located to make use of existing facilities.

§ The Transport Statement demonstrates that the site is well located to key facilities and

amenities in the area, many of which are just a short walk or cycle away. This will help

towards the central goal of fewer car-based trips by reducing the need to travel. Therefore

the development has the potential to minimise the demand for travel, especially by private

car.

§ The environment will be protected through careful design.

§ It will provide the local community with good quality housing for their needs


§ The context promotes access to existing employment, shopping, education, health,

community facilities etc.

§ Social inclusion will be promoted through ensuring the development is accessible by means

other than the private car.

Candidate Site Assessment

4.5 The above conclusions are reinforced by the Candidate Site Assessment (CSA) undertaken by

officers in support of the original recommendation to include the site within a revised settlement

boundary within the LDP. The CSA is reproduced at appendix 2.

4.6 It is highly relevant that the assessment against LDP objectives and the assessment against

the sustainability assessment objectives returned a positive result (+4 and +5 respectively) –

see pages 21 and 22. Of the 24 LDP objectives that the site is measured against, 8 are not

applicable and 2 could only be assessed at a more detailed stage. Those criteria that the

assessment scores negatively against are those that are an inevitable by product of developing

greenfield land, and against which almost all sites to be allocated will score negatively. The

methodology document that accompanies the assessment identifies that if candidate sites

return a positive result then they are likely to be taken forward as allocations. The site has

therefore been deemed to pass the assessment and meets the criteria required to be supported

as an allocation.

4.7 As a result of the assessment the application site was deemed suitable to be included within a

revised settlement boundary and free from green wedge designation.

4.8 The CSA contains a number of questions marks which have subsequently been addressed as

part of the application consultation:

§ It has been proven through the Transport Statement and its assessment that a means of

access can be established and that peak traffic congestion is not a constraint to

development, due to the low levels of traffic generated.

§ In terms of biodiversity, the Habitat Surveys have proven that the site is suitable for

development.

§ Natural Resources Wales did not raise any objections to developing the site.

§ Comments from the Llangyfelach Community Council related to objections on green

wedge grounds, loss of established trees, privacy and highways. All of these have been

reviewed and concluded that the objections are not barriers to development.

4.9 Therefore, the CSA undertaken can be viewed in an even more positive light following the

application / appeal determinations.

4.10 Consequently, subject to the ability to address the detailed issues affecting the proposals, the


matters of principle are supported through PPW. This was recognised in the Inspectors appeal

decision notice at paragraph 13 where he concluded that the proposal complies with many

national and development plan policies, particularly many elements of sustainability due to the

location of the site just outside the settlement boundary and the availability of public transport.

4.11 To conclude on this point, it is evident that the site:

§ is well located in terms of its urban fringe location;

§ is surrounded by existing built development and furthermore will be surrounded by

allocations to allow the expansion of Morriston Hospital;

§ is not included within any Green Wedge designation within the Deposit LDP;

§ benefits from a high frequency public transport service;

§ is well located in relation to a large employer and other existing services;

§ will deliver family houses in the short term in the context of a significant shortage in

housing land supply.

§ has been supported on sustainability grounds as a good location for housing

development by both the local authority and the appeal inspector.

How does the recent appeal decision on the site relate to the consideration of this proposal?

4.12 The Inspector’s decision notice is helpful in clarifying the suitability of the location for

development (other than the Green Wedge designation), the considerable weight that should

be attached to the housing that will be delivered (even though only a relatively small number of

houses are involved) and, the technical acceptability of the proposals.

4.13 The focus of the Inspector in reaching his conclusion on the appeal was on the Green Wedge

designation set out in the UDP. The decision to dismiss the appeal was largely taken on the

basis that the Green Wedge designation would continue in the LDP, which hadn’t been

published at that stage and, that the UDP carried weight in terms of the Green Wedge

designation.

4.14 The Inspectors view was that the harm to the openness of the Green Wedge would not be

outweighed by the benefits that he clearly attributed to short term delivery of new housing in an

otherwise suitable location.

4.15 The lack of Green Wedge designation within the Deposit LDP is a fundamental change. The

weight that can be attributed to the effective removal of the designation is significant.

4.16 The detrimental impact upon the openness of the Green Wedge was the fundamental reason

that the appeal was dismissed. This counterbalance to all of the positive aspects of the

proposals has been removed.


Can it be demonstrated sufficiently that the site can be developed whilst addressing the sustainability criteria of PPW and is the development acceptable in all other regards, including the principles of access, neighbouring amenity and deliverability?

4.17 The candidate site assessment at appendix 2 is material to the site’s sustainability credentials

and establishes the following:

§ CCS Highways believe access to be possible, the site has a 10 minute frequency bus

service, and whilst traffic impacts will need to assessed they raise no in principle

objections.

§ There are no in principle objections from the utilities providers

§ The assessment of the site against both the LDP Objectives and the SEA/SA

Objectives returns a positive result (+4 and + 5 respectively). The Candidate Site

Assessment Methodology document states that if these assessments return a positive

result then they are likely to be taken forward as allocations.

4.18 Detailed studies have been undertaken in order to understand and address the constraints

within the site. The conclusions of the reports can be summarised as follows:

Trees

4.19 An assessment of the trees on site and the impact of the development upon them is set out the

accompanying tree survey and DAS.

4.20 A layout has been devised which demonstrates that the root protection areas for all but a small

number of trees on site can be respected. The layout allows for retention of all important trees,

with the loss of only T14, G30 and G53, which are all Category C (low value) trees.

4.21 Enhanced planting within the site can reinforce the landscape setting of the site and mitigate for

the low tree loss required.

4.22 Appropriate conditions can ensure that the trees are protected during construction and once the

development is complete.

Ecology

4.23 As set out in section 2, the site has been surveyed for habitat as well as having had detailed

surveys for Bats. The full details are set out within the Ecology reports that accompanied the

planning application. A bat roosting potential survey has been undertaken on the trees within

the site. When cross referenced with the arboricultural survey and the trees that require

removal, it is clear that none of the trees on site with bat roost potential are required to be

removed.

4.24 The report recommends retaining as much of the border hedgerows as possible and this can

be achieved.


Access and Transport

4.25 The Transport Statement produced by Corun has undertaken an assessment of the vehicular

access proposed, concluding that an appropriate visibility and access arrangement for the site

has been designed.

4.26 The Transport Statement has also demonstrated that the site is accessible by means of

transport other than the car due to the proposals to include dedicated pedestrian access points.

4.27 The site lies within a 44m walking distance of bus facilities which have good services to the city

centre and a wide range of other areas.

4.28 The opportunities for walking to the major employer at Morriston Hospital are self evident.

4.29 The layout is designed to accommodate refuse vehicles and to allow all emergency and

delivery vehicles to manoeuvre within it.

4.30 The site is accessible and has good access existing facilities and the urban area.

4.31 The proposed development would generate approximately 1 vehicular movement every 7.5

minutes, which is clearly an insignificant increase and probably within normal daily variations in

traffic flow of +/-10%.

4.32 The impact of development traffic on the surrounding highway network in highway capacity and

safety terms will be negligible.

4.33 The site is situated within an extremely sustainable location in terms of travel opportunities by

non-car modes. The location of the site is adjacent to a variety of land uses and therefore trip

attractors, which increases the likelihood that trips will be undertaken on foot or bicycle. For

trips further afield, there are numerous bus services linking the site to key destinations in

Swansea City Centre; rail travel is also possible via Llansamlet station located approximately

5.8km away.

The site is therefore concluded to accord with the LDP vision, its objectives, and indeed the

LDP Preferred Strategy. The site is also compliant with transport planning policy at national

level.

Layout

4.34 The layout considered at appeal demonstrates that the site can be designed in such a way as

to fully respect the privacy and amenity of neighbouring residential properties. Privacy

distances are respected and overlooking has been avoided. The proposed buffers between

existing and proposed dwellings can be appropriate and extensive screening can be provided

through the retained trees.

Landscape Impact

4.35 The site is well located in relation to the existing built up area, will not impact upon wider views


into the urban area and will not intrude into the countryside.

4.36 The site is very well screened to the countryside to the north, both by boundary treatment (to be

retained) and by woodland immediately to the north of Rhyd Y Pandy Road which is subject to

a TPO and forms a dense landscape barrier to wider views into the site.

4.37 Likewise, views out into the countryside will not be harmed given that the buildings will sit within

the context of existing built development, the existing urbanised context provided by Morriston

Hospital buildings and, the allocations for the expansion of the hospital will further add to the

urbanised context within which the site sits.

4.38 Consequently, the allocation will not have any harmful impact in terms of the views of the

countryside, or the broad character of the area.

Drainage and Flood Risk

4.39 The planning application was accompanied by a flood risk assessment and drainage strategy.

The flood risk assessment confirms that there are no flood risk constraints to the development

and that it can be drained without increasing flood risk elsewhere.

4.40 Early consultation has taken place with Welsh Water which has led to a system to limit surface

water discharge to a combined system through hydro brakes. This will limit run off rate to

existing green field rates and to allow a 30% additional capacity and to account for climate

change.

4.41 The site can be serviced for foul water via the existing adopted sewer within Rhyd Y Pandy

Road.

4.42 The site is therefore suitable in drainage terms for the development proposed and drainage can

be accommodated without risk to existing systems or potential for flooding elsewhere.

Summary

4.43 The answer to the third question therefore is that the site can be developed by taking careful

account of the known constraints within it and without harm to them.

4.44 The site is well located in relation to the existing built up area and the facilities provided within it

and therefore meets the sustainability criteria of PPW and is deemed acceptable in all other

regards including impacts upon ecology, trees, providing a safe access and respected

neighbouring amenity.

4.45 The site is deliverable technically and in land ownership terms and can deliver new, much

needed family housing in the short term. This position is reinforced by the results of the

application and appeal already determined which resulted in no objections on technical or

sustainability grounds.


5. Conclusions

5.1 This report has set out the justification for the inclusion of the site as an allocation for 13

dwellings and/or the inclusion of the site within the settlement boundary limits. Whilst an

appeal has recently been dismissed for the same proposal a fundamental change has taken

place since the appeal decision, instigated by the Authority, as a result of the publication of the

Deposit LDP in June 2016.

5.2 The review of the Green Wedge designations around Swansea and the subsequent (effective)

removal of the Green Wedge designation over the application site represent a sound and

compelling reason to reconsider the allocation, particularly as it was only excluded from the

LDP as a result of local member concerns over highways, which have been assessed positively

as part of the appeal process.

5.3 This statement describes and assesses the proposals against the key planning policy context

affecting the site, updating the previous assessments in the light of the change to the

designations effecting the site. The conclusions are as follows.

5.4 The allocation of the site would be sustainable and technically sound. The previous

application and appeal established that the proposals are acceptable in terms of layout,

character of buildings proposed, landscaping, urban design, highways safety and ecology. The

site is agreed to be in a sustainable location being as it is within an urban area and well located

in relation to a range of employment opportunities, existing facilities and public transport

linkages.

5.5 There is a significant and pressing housing land supply problem. Swansea has a 3 year

housing land supply. In considering the emerging LDP Housing Land Requirements, the land

supply is even worse at 1.9 years. There is therefore a need for more allocations and a wider variety of suitable sites to deliver the housing land requirements.

5.6 In combination with the allocation for the extension of the hospital and the existing pattern of

built development around the site, the inclusion of the land provides a logical rounding off to the

existing settlement pattern and a sustainable location to accommodate future demand for

housing arising from the hospital expansion.

5.7 The detrimental impact upon the openness of the Green Wedge was the fundamental reason

that the appeal was dismissed. This counterbalance to all of the positive aspects of the

proposals has been removed. The evidence behind the LDP (i.e. the Green Wedge Review)

outweighs the Green Wedge designation set out within the UDP, for the reasons set out above.

5.8 The overall conclusion therefore is that the proposals represents a sustainable form of


development which will deliver much needed family housing in the short term.

5.9 This statement has provided significant justification for the inclusion of the site either as an

allocation for 13 dwellings or for the extension of the settlement boundary around it to allow the

site to be considered favourably for residential development. This assessment accords with the

Council’s own officer’s professional opinions presented a part of the original Candidate Site

Assessment. Subsequent removal of the Green Wedge designation and assessment of the

traffic impacts indicates that objections to the inclusion of the site as an allocation can no longer

be justified.

5.10 A change to Proposals Map 12 – Llangyfelach is sought to include the land identified in red at

Appendix 1 as a housing allocation for 13 units. The settlement boundary should also be

revised to include the land identified.


Appendix 1 – Site Plan for Inclusion as Housing Allocation


Appendix 2 – Candidate Site Assessment


Appendix 3 – Recent Appeal Decision

Penderfyniad ar yr Apêl Appeal Decision Gwrandawiad a gynhaliwyd ar 13/04/16 Ymweliad â safle a wnaed ar 13/04/16

Hearing held on 13/04/16 Site visit made on 13/04/16

gan Clive Nield BSc(Hon), CEng, MICE, MCIWEM, C.WEM

by Clive Nield BSc(Hon), CEng, MICE, MCIWEM, C.WEM

Arolygydd a benodir gan Weinidogion Cymru an Inspector appointed by the Welsh Ministers

Dyddiad: 28/04/16 Date: 28/04/16

Appeal Ref: APP/B6855/A/15/3137926 Site address: Land south of Rhyd y Pandy Road and north of Mynydd Gelli Wastad Road, Pantlasau, Swansea

The Welsh Ministers have transferred the authority to decide this appeal to me as the appointed Inspector.

The appeal is made under section 78 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 against a refusal to grant planning permission.

The appeal is made by Edenstone Homes Ltd against the decision of the City and County of Swansea Council.

The application Ref 2015/1581, dated 30 July 2015, was refused by notice dated 29 October 2015.

The development proposed is the erection of 13 new family homes with private gardens, a new vehicular access off Mynydd Gelli Wastad Road, hard and soft landscaping, and all associated works.

Decision

1. The appeal is dismissed.

Main Issues

2. The main issues in this case are the effects of the proposed development on the character and openness of the green wedge, the significance of the housing land supply deficiency, and whether there are very exceptional circumstances sufficient to clearly outweigh any harm to the green wedge.

Reasons

Green Wedge

3. The appeal site lies in the open countryside, outside the settlement boundary, and within the Pant-Lasau green wedge. In this context, the key development plan policies are Unitary Development Plan policies EV22 (which controls development in the countryside), EV23 (which identifies the green wedge locations and only permits development that maintains the openness and character of the green wedge and that does not contribute to the coalescence of settlements or adversely affect the setting of the urban area), EV1 (which requires good design, including relationship to existing development patterns) and EV2 (which gives preference to the use of previously developed land over greenfield sites and requires regard to be had to its

Appeal Decision APP/B6855/A/15/3137926

2

surroundings). The explanatory text for Policy EV23 refers to the additional protection to be given to land in a green wedge in line with Planning Policy Wales (PPW), and the policy guidance provided in PPW is an important material consideration in this case.

4. It is not disputed that the proposed development falls outside the definition of appropriate development as defined in UDP Policy EV23 and within the PPW definition of inappropriate development. PPW further advises that there is a presumption against inappropriate development in a green wedge and that substantial weight should be attached to any harmful impact a development would have on a green wedge. It also says that planning permission should not be granted for inappropriate development except in very exceptional circumstances where other considerations clearly outweigh the harm that would be caused to the green wedge. Although UDP Policy EV23 is not

the aims of PPW, and I consider the proposal should be considered a

5. The Appellant argues that the harm to the green wedge would be negligible but I disagree. Although the site is well screened by mature vegetation on some sides and the development would fill a gap amongst several existing residential properties, it would be prominent in views from Rhyd y Pandy Road and its access road would be prominent on Mynydd Gelli Wastad Road. The development would substantially increase the density of the built development between the 2 roads, eroding its open character and significantly increasing the effects of urbanisation in this location on the urban fringe. I understand the Council intends to introduce an allocation in the emerging Local Development Plan (LDP) for development of a nearby area of land on the northern side of Mynydd Gelli Wastad Road in connection with Morriston Hospital but that does not justify further erosion of this important area of countryside and green wedge land.

6. The proposal would not only harm the semi-rural character of this edge-of-settlement area of countryside but would also significantly affect the openness of the green wedge, which is its most important attribute. The Appellant argues that the development would not affect perceptions of openness in any public or private views. However, I do not agree with that assessment. Openness is a matter of fact rather than a perception of visual impact, and the introduction of 13 new houses into this open space would significantly affect the openness of this part of the green wedge.

7. I conclude that the proposed development would conflict with UDP policies EV22 and EV23 (and to some extent with policies EV1 and EV2) and with national policy in Planning Policy Wales. As advised by PPW, I attach substantial weight to these harmful impacts on the green wedge.

8. It is common ground that the green wedge and settlement boundaries are subject to review in the current preparations for the emerging LDP, and the Appellant has submitted that both might be subject to change in this location. It is not disputed that

candidate site assessment for the appeal site and recommended that the settlement and green wedge boundaries be changed in this location. However, the local planning authority members rejected those recommendations, and it is likely that the deposit draft of the emerging LDP will not propose any changes. The LDP is the proper vehicle for the consideration of these matters, and I have considered the appeal on the basis of the current boundaries and designations. The UDP remains the extant adopted development plan, even though it is now becoming dated in some respects.


3

Housing Land Supply

9. Turning now to the matter of housing land supply, the most recent Joint Housing Land Availability Study (September 2015) concluded that there is only a 3 years supply of housing land available in Swansea, substantially less than the 5 years supply prescribed in national policy. authorities must ensure that sufficient land is genuinely available or will become available to provide a 5-year

, and TAN1 (Joint Housing Land Availability Studies) advises that, where a housing land supply shortage exists, the need to increase supply should be given considerable weight when dealing with planning applications, provided that the development would otherwise comply with national planning policies.

10. In conjunction with its preparations for the emerging LDP, the Council has produced a Guidance Note, Planning Applications for Non-householder Residential Development, which aims to provide a clear strategy to address the housing land shortfall and includes advice to prospective developers on how the planning authority intends to deal with planning applications for sites not currently allocated within the UDP. The main principle is to bring forward several strategic sites recommended for allocation in the emerging LDP.

11. In principle this is a commendable initiative by the Council. However, the Appellant submits that it is hopelessly inadequate and is unlikely to significantly improve the situation on the rate of housing development for some years. It is argued that the shortfall will get worse over the next few years, particularly as such strategic sites usually take several years to bring forward, and it is suggested that proposals like the appeal scheme can help to bridge that gap. The appeal development could be ready to start construction in just a few months.

12. Although the Council maintains that some of the strategic sites could be brought

scepticism that these will not make any significant impact on the housing shortfall for several years. In the mean time, it is appropriate to give considerable weight to the need to increase supply when dealing with planning applications.

13. The current proposal complies with many national and development plan policies, particularly many elements of sustainability due to the location of the site just outside the settlement boundary and the availability of public transport. Its main conflict is in respect of the matters in the first main issue above, i.e. harm to the openness and character of the green wedge and the open countryside. However, notwithstanding these conflicts, I consider the need to increase housing supply to warrant considerable weight, albeit bearing in mind that the scheme would deliver only a relatively small number of houses.

Overall Conclusion

14. I have reached conflicting conclusions on the 2 main issues and now have to consider the planning balance. Several precedents have been drawn to my attention that might help this exercise. Firstly, the Appellant has referred to the strategic sites likely to be put forward in the emerging LDP. Many of these would be on land currently designated in the UDP as green wedge, and the boundaries of the various green wedges are to be reviewed through the LDP process. It is argued that that demonstrates the need to use green wedge land in order to achieve the required supply of housing land, and that is not disputed. However, it does not justify disregarding the current development


4

plan policies for protection of other parts of the green wedges and areas of open countryside.

15. The Appellant has also referred to several appeal decisions elsewhere. In his decision for Pont Adam Close, Ruabon (App/H6955/A/14/2229577) the Inspector reached the conclusion that very limited harm to a green barrier could be outweighed by the pressing need to increase housing land supply. In the decision for Garn Goch Cottage, Llewitha, Swansea (App/B6855/A/15/3084330) another Inspector concluded that the objectives of UDP Policy EV22 to safeguard the countryside would be met by a small development outside the settlement boundaries but which would form a logical rounding off of an existing group of dwellings. The third decision, for Old Hall Road, Ewloe (App/A6835/A/14/2220730), provides a useful conclusion on the weight to be attributed to a housing land supply deficiency when considering a site outside the settlement boundary, and the proposal had a number of similarities with the current appeal proposal.

16. Whilst these appeal decisions provide useful guidance, none of them is directly comparable to the current appeal where I have concluded that the proposed development would cause significant harm to the openness and character of the green wedge. In view of the PPW advice that substantial weight should be attached to any harmful impact on a green wedge, my overall conclusion is that the shortfall in housing land supply in this case does not amount to very exceptional circumstances sufficient to clearly outweigh the harm to the green wedge. For the reasons given above I conclude that the appeal should be dismissed.

Clive Nield Inspector


5

APPEARANCES

FOR THE APPELLANT:

Mr Paul Williams Associate Director, Savills Agent.

Mr Stuart Rodden Edenstone Homes Ltd.

Mr Richard Kelso Edenstone Homes Ltd.

FOR THE LOCAL PLANNING AUTHORITY:

Ms Alison Thomas Senior Planning Officer, City & County of Swansea Council.

INTERESTED PERSONS:

Mr Keri Thomas DKT Planning Associates representing interested local residents.

Mr David Gwyn Ditto.

Mr David Bines Neighbouring resident.

DOCUMENTS SUBMITTED AT OR AFTER THE HEARING

1 Letter of Notification and list of persons notified.

2

submitted by DKT Planning.

3 Closing arguments on behalf of Appellant.

4 Email from Agent, dated 14 April 2016, re HC challenge to appeal decision referred to by Council.

5 Email from Council, dated 19 April 2016, responding to above.

representations on the swansea deposit draft ldp …...representations on the swansea ldp deposit 1....

Documents