Revised dwelling plans at Bluestone View, Llangwm, Haverfordwest

What was proposed

The application sought revised plans for an approved dwelling and detached garage, changing their scale, orientation, layout, appearance and design.

“This application seeks permission under Section 73 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 to vary condition 2 (approved plans) of planning permission 08/1262/PA which granted permission for the renewal of planning permission 03/0284/PA for the erection of one dwelling. This application was conditionally approved on 13 th of April 2014.”

“The approved development comprises of a two-storey dwelling, together with a detached single storey garage, on-site parking and associated access arrangements. The dwelling was originally designed with an L-shaped footprint and as a dormer bungalow design, with the first-floor bedrooms within the roof space.”

Officer report

The site

The site is a rectangular plot with a garage, hedging, hardstanding and access from Ashdale Lane, surrounded by homes and an agricultural field.

“The application site comprises a rectangular parcel of land, with an existing single storey garage, existing hedging to the front of the plot and small patch of hardstanding associated with an access. The site is located within the Large Local Village of Hill Mountain, as defined by the Local Development Plan for Pembrokeshire. The site is flanked by neighbouring properties of mixed designs. Each neighbouring dwelling has residential curtilage and on-site parking.”

Officer report

What officers recommended

Officers recommended approval subject to conditions covering the plans, drainage, biodiversity, surface water and highway visibility.

“It is recommended that the application be APPROVED subject to the following conditions:”

“Standard time limit for commencement of development • Development in accordance with the submitted plans and indicative amended block plan • Details of specification, siting and maintenance regime of Package Treatment Plant and drainage field to be submitted for approval • Submission of details of and implementation of biodiversity and Green Infrastructure enhancement features • Details of surface water disposal to be submitted for approval • Visibility splay of 2.4m over…”

Officer report

Why officers supported it

Officers considered the amended design acceptable, found no significant amenity harm, justified the package treatment plant and gave substantial weight to the existing permission.

“With respect to residential and visual amenity, the proposed amendments to the dwelling are considered to be acceptable in terms of the design, scale, form and appearance. The amendments would not give rise to any unacceptable overlooking, overshadowing, overbearing impact or loss of privacy. As such it is considered that the proposal would not result in a significant detrimental impact on local amenity. The amendments would not adversely affect the…”

“Welsh Government Circular 008/2018 (Planning requirement in respect of the use of private sewerage in new development, incorporating septic tanks and small sewage treatment plants July 2018) provides information and guidance to be used by planning authorities when considering proposals for new development in areas with no available public sewerage system.”

Officer report

Consultation and representations

consultees raised drainage and nutrient matters but did not object overall, and one third-party representation supported the application while requesting an address correction.

“The private drainage system can be screened out of requiring a HRA”

“Publicity of the application has been undertaken, one third party representation has been received in support of the proposal but referring to the following which should be corrected…”

Officer report

Who spoke

The planning officer presented the application, the applicant addressed the committee, and the local member spoke about the vacant plot and local family connections.

Committee debate

Members discussed sewer connection options, package treatment plant and biodiversity information, non-mains drainage guidance and the absence of a dark skies policy.

“The Chief Planning Officer advised Members that, with regard to the conditions referred to by the Applicant, when the report was being compiled, the information available mentioned a make and a manufacturer’s specification for the package treatment plant but the information provided related to a number of different treatment plants of different sizes. Provided the details were clarified, the conditions for the application could be modified accordingly. With regards to the…”

“In response to a concern raised by Councillor Alec Cormack regarding mains drainage assessment reports, the Head of Planning advised that applicants were attempting to overcome the nutrient neutrality issues by proposing non-mains drainage solutions such as package treatment plants and emphasised that care be taken where sites for development were located within mains sewered areas.”

Minutes

The vote

The motion was carried by roll-call with twelve votes in favour, no votes against and no abstentions.

“The vote, undertaken by way of a roll-call, was carried. The votes were recorded as follows:”

“There were no votes against and no abstentions.”

Minutes

The decision

The committee approved the application subject to the conditions set out in the officer recommendation.

“That the application be APPROVED subject to the conditions outlined in Section 1.1 of the report.”

Minutes