Page No 13
REPORT OF THE CHIEF PLANNING OFFICER – Date 10th May 2004
Community / Code No / Applicant / Recommendation / Page NoWRO / P/ 2004/0077 / Gordon Mytton Developments Ltd / GRANT / 3 - 10
COE / P/ 2004/0088 / Co-Operative Group (CWS) Limited / GRANT / 11 - 14
CEF / P/ 2004/0107 / Mr W P Jurkojc / GRANT / 15 - 18
COE / P/ 2004/0138 / Mr R Forrester / GRANT / 19 - 23
HOL / P/ 2004/0154 / Mr E Linton / GRANT / 24 - 28
ABE / P/ 2004/0175 / BT / GRANT / 29 - 31
BRO / P/ 2004/0200 / The Church In Wales / GRANT / 32 - 37
MIN / P/ 2004/0205 / Mr & Mrs A P And N J Davies / GRANT / 38 - 41
CEF / P/ 2004/0221 / Mr D Broadhurst / GRANT / 42 – 46
OVE / P/ 2004/0222 / Mr Garth Kennerley / GRANT / 47 – 50
MIN / P/ 2004/0228 / A R DeBolla / GRANT / 51 – 52
MAR / P/ 2004/0235 / Mrs L Ellis / REFUSE / 53 – 55
GWE / P/ 2004/0243 / Mr & Mrs Moore / GRANT / 56 – 58
WRR / P/ 2004/0244 / L Rowland & Co (Retail) Ltd / GRANT / 59 – 60
HOL / P/ 2004/0246 / Mr J R Jones / GRANT / 61 – 63
ROS / P/ 2004/0253 / Kingmead Limited / GRANT / 64 – 66
COE / P/ 2004/0254 / Mr & Mrs R & K Hughes / GRANT / 67 – 70
GWE / P/ 2004/0259 / First PMT Ltd
Mr Nick Truscott / GRANT / 71 – 73
ROS / P/ 2004/0271 / Mr & Mrs Fontes / GRANT / 74 – 76
WRR / P/ 2004/0274 / Mr & Mrs D Peters / REFUSE / 77 – 79
WRR / P/ 2004/0276 / Mr & Mrs B Chowdhury / GRANT / 80 – 84
RHO / P/ 2004/0315 / Mr P Bell / GRANT / 85 – 89
GRE / P/ 2004/0323 / Mr R Eckford / REFUSE / 90 – 93
BAN / P/ 2004/0332 / Mr Richard McCelland / GRANT / 94 – 96
CEF / P/ 2004/0346 / Mr Tony Hodkinson / GRANT / 97 – 99
BRY / P/ 2004/0352 / J Daly / GRANT / 100 – 104
GRE / P/ 2004/0353 / Beryl Blackmore / GRANT / 105 – 107
GRE / P/ 2004/0368 / Mr M Aird / GRANT / 108 – 111
RUA / P/ 2004/0376 / Mr & Mrs J Edwards / GRANT / 112 – 114
WRR / P/ 2004/0390 / Mr Richard Kenny / GRANT / 115 – 118
WRR / P/ 2004/0404 / Mr M Willis / GRANT / 119 – 121
WRO / P/ 2004/0405 / Mr & Mrs C Whiting / GRANT / 122 – 124
CHI / P/ 2004/0457 / Mr & Mrs I Roberts / GRANT / 125 - 127
Total Number of Applications Included in Report – 33
All plans included in this report are re-produced from Ordnance Survey Mapping with the permission of the Controller of Her Majesty’s Stationery Office. Ó Crown Copyright. Unauthorised reproduction infringes Crown Copyright and may lead to prosecution or civil proceedings.
WCBC Licence No. LA0902IL
All plans are intended to be illustrative only and should be used only to identify the location of the proposal and the surrounding features. The scale of the plans will vary. Full details may be viewed on the case files.
APPLICATION NO:P/2004 /0077
COMMUNITY:
Offa
WARD:
Hermitage / LOCATION:
Kingscroft Kingsmills Road Wrexham
DESCRIPTION:
Erection of 16 No. apartments in two/three storey block
APPLICANT(S) NAME:
Gordon Mytton Developments Gordon Mytton Developments Ltd / DATE RECEIVED:
26/01/2004
CASE OFFICER:
JGK
AGENT NAME:
Parry Davies Partnership
______
THE SITE
Kingscroft, Kingsmill Road, Wrexham.
PROPOSAL
Erection of 16 no apartments in two/three storey block.
RELEVANT HISTORY
Demolition of existing building and erection of 18 no apartments with associated roads and landscaping. Refused 07.04.03.
P/2003/0103 Removal of 13 no trees (4 no of which covered by TPO No WMBC 135). Granted 26.02.03
P/2002/1048 Erection of 18 flats refused appeal dismissed 19.09.03.
DEVELOPMENT PLAN
Within settlement limit of Wrexham as shown in Wrexham Unitary Development Plan. UDP Policies PS1, PS2, GDP1, EC4 and H2 apply.
Local Planning Guidance Notes 7 – Landscape and Development, 10 – Public Open Space in New Housing Development, 15 – Cycling, 16 – Parking Standards, 17 - Trees and Development and 21 – Space around Dwellings.
CONSULTATIONS
Community Council: Objects as follows:
· No significant difference to previous refusal
· Proposals are over intensive
· Properties on Hill Court will be overlooked
· Adverse affect upon the bungalows of 5 and 6 Kings Oak Court
· Original highway objections have not been overcome
Local Member: Supports comments made by community council.
Highways: Conditional approval.
CCW: Recommends the undertaking of bird nest and bat roost surveys by specialised consultants. If present, the applicant to propose and deliver appropriate conservation schemes.
Coal Authority: Applicant to be advised of instability.
Welsh Water: Condition and notes as follows:
· No surface water to discharge into public sewerage system
· Submission and approval of integrated drainage scheme.
Site Notice: Expired 23.02.04.
Other Representations: Objections received as follows:
· Building should only be two storey
· Lack of privacy
· Inadequate visibility at present onto a very busy A525
· Inadequate pavement width
· Proposals are over intensive
· Boundary trees and hedges should be left intact
SPECIAL CONSIDERATIONS/ ISSUES
Background: The site contains a 2 storey former nursing home and is surrounded on three sides by modern housing – 2 and 3 storey flats and terraced housing at Weale
Court to the west and detached bungalows at Kings Court to the east and south-east. There are trees alongside the site boundaries and front driveway, some of which are the subject of a Tree Preservation Order. In February 2003 consent was given by the Council for the removal of 4 trees protected by the Order and 9 Cherry trees tin the garden to be removed. A similar proposal to the one under consideration (P/2002/1048 – see above) was refused in April 2003. It was considered that the development would be too intensive due to the scale of the proposed building and it would have an adverse effect upon adjoining properties and trees. A subsequent appeal was dismissed in September 2003 with the Inspector finding that the impact of the particular scheme in terms of scale and layout would be harmful to the residential and visual amenities of the locality. The applicant has amended the proposals to take account of most of the Council’s previous concerns and addressed issue highlighted by the Inspector.
Policy: There are no policy objections in principle to the proposal as the site is within the settlement limits of Wrexham (Unitary Development Plan Policy PS1 refers). However, the Unitary Development Plan Policies PS2, GDP1 and EC4 list criteria for consideration when processing applications for housing development. The Local Planning Guidance Notes detailed above supplement these. I comment as follows:
Highways: No objection was raised on highway grounds to the original proposal. The applicant submitted a traffic survey and analysis, which again was acceptable and accorded with best practice. The current highway proposals are unchanged (but the traffic generation is reduced from 18 to 16 units) and include the following:
· Appropriate visibility splays of 2.4m x 90m
· A 2m footway along the frontage of the site with the highway
· Access to the site in accordance with guidance
· Pedestrian refuge crossing on Kingsmills Road
· Parking and turning area for 16 cars
In lieu of the shortfall of car parking spaces I have asked for the submission and subsequent approval of cycle parking facilities in accord with LPG 15 – Cycling and LPG 16 – Parking Standards.
The implementation of all the above prior to occupation of the first of the flats is conditioned.
Trees: The Eucalyptus (T6) which is an impressive tree and prominent in views from Kings Court is now to be retained. In the case of other trees within the site I am satisfied that the care and method statement now submitted and amended accords with best practice and its implementation would generally allow all trees worthy of retention to be kept and protected during construction.
Amenity: I am satisfied that the re-submitted proposal has taken account of the original concerns and carefully considered the comments of the Inspector. The changes are detailed as follows:
· The rear block has been reduced from 3 storeys to 2 storeys
· Third floor windows facing Hill Court consisting of bathroom, kitchen and bedroom – the bathroom window will be totally obscured glazed and the kitchen and bedroom window to be obscured glazed to 1.5m in height
· The parking to the east of the property has been reconfigured to increase the area of amenity and retain the Eucalyptus tree (T6).
· An acoustic barrier is proposed next to the boundary hedge extending along the eastern boundary
· Bay windows on the rear south-east elevation have been omitted
In light of the above I consider that the amended scheme is a substantial improvement from that originally considered and refused. I do not consider that the current proposal causes demonstrable harm to the amenity of adjoining properties or the area in general.
Ecology: Prior to demolition the existing building and/or the felling/pruning of any trees on the site a bat roost and bird breeding survey will need to be produced using specialist consultants. If present then the applicant must propose and deliver appropriate conservation schemes and ‘reasonable avoidance measures’. I have attached an appropriate condition.
Conclusion: The site is within the settlement limits of Wrexham and I consider that it is in accord with Wrexham Unitary Development Plan policies and the relevant Guidance Notes. I do not consider that the development of the site, subject to the satisfactory compliance with the attached conditions, will have an adverse impact upon local residents or the area in general.
P/2004 /0077
RECOMMENDATION That permission be GRANTED
CONDITION(S)
1. The development hereby permitted shall be begun before the expiry of five years from the date of this permission.
2. The development shall only be carried out in strict conformity with the details shown on the approved drawings and in the application documentation.
3. No part of the development shall be commenced until samples of all external facing and roofing materials have been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The development shall only be carried out in strict accordance with such details as are approved.
4. The proposed access shall have a visibility splay of 2.4m x 90m in both directions measured along the nearside edge of the adjoining carriageway over land within the control of the applicant and/or the Highway Authority. Within the splays there shall be no obstruction in excess of 1 metre in height above the level of the adjoining carriageway. The splay shall be provided to commencement of use/occupation of the development hereby approved and shall thereafter be retained clear of such obstruction.
5. Cycle parking facilties shall be provided within the curtilage of the site in accordance with details to be submitted for the further approval of the Local Planning Authority. Such facilities shall be made available prior to occupation of the first of the flats and shall thereafter be retained.
6. Before any flat is/are first occupied, the car parking and manoeuvreing areas indicated on the approved Drawing No 4154/1 Revision J shall be laid out and marked out. They shall thereafter be kept available solely for those uses at all times.
7. No flat shall be first occupied until the new footways along Kingsmills Road and the pedestrian crossing indicated on Drawing No 4154/1 Revision J have been completed to highway adoptable standard.
8. The highway frontage to Kingsmills Road between the new footway and the southerly extremity of the site shall be regraded to provide for the construction of the proposed footway to a standard 2m width. The works shall be completed prior to the occupation of the first of the flats hereby approved.
9. The tree related work as described in the arboricultural implication study/method statement submitted (ref RSG/4145/MethStat/A) and Drawing No 4154/1 Revision J shall be fully implemented in accordance with a timescale to be further approved by the Local Planning Authority.
10. No development or other operations shall commence on the site until adequate steps, which shall have been previously agreed with the Local Planning Authority, have been taken to safeguard against damage or injury during construction works, all trees on the site or whose root structure may extend within the site, which are subject of No 135 Tree Preservation Order 1994. In particular, no excavations, site works, trenches or channels shall be cut or pipes or services laid in such a way to cause damage or injury to the trees by interference with their root structure and no soil or waste shall be deposited on the land in such a position as to be likely to cause damage or injury to the trees by affecting their root structure.
11. No part of the development hereby permitted shall be commenced until full details of both hard and soft landscape works for the site have been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The works shall be implemented in accordance with a timescale to be approved in conjunction with the scheme of details.
12. Existing boundary hedgerows shall be retained at a minimum level of 2m above ground level.
13. A bat roost and breeding bird survey shall be undertaken by specialist consultants to be able to assess the likely impacts. The report, which will assess the existing building known as Plas yr Waun and any trees that may have to be felled or pruned, must also propose and deliver appropriate conservation schemes and 'Reasonable Avoidance Measures' and be submitted to and approved by the Local Planning Authority. Any mitigation measures required shall be implemented in accordance with time scales to be agreed as part of the measures before development commences on site.