50 homes at Land North of Gibbas Way, Pembroke

The site

The 2.3-hectare site was agricultural grassland beside existing housing, sloping towards a wooded valley and crossed by a foul sewer.

“The application site is 2.3 Ha in area and comprises agricultural land that is laid to semi- improved grassland. The site is predominantly enclosed to the south, east and west by the rear boundaries of existing modern housing development off Callans Drive and Gibbas Way. The site slopes gently from 19 metres Above Ordnance Datum (AOD) in the south west to 6.5 metres AOD in the north east, falling into a shallow wooded valley, beyond which lies further agricultural land.”

Officer report

Earlier planning history

A small public open space on the site was provided through permission for 37 homes granted in 2014.

“The application site accommodates a small parcel of public open space (approximately 400 sq.m.) delivered as part of a planning permission granted to deliver 37 dwellings on land at Gibbas Way under reference 12/1102/PA approved 17 th June 2014.”

Officer report

Why officers recommended refusal

Officers recommended refusal because planning obligations were unresolved and a positive Appropriate Assessment could not be reached without mitigation.

“It is recommended that the application is REFUSED for the following reasons:”

“The proposed development has been screened in accordance with Natural Resources Wales (NRW) interim advice to Chief Planners dated 25th July 2025 and it is concluded that a full Screening and Appropriate Assessment (AA) in compliance with the Habitats Regulations (2017) in consultation with NRW is required. However, until such time as appropriate mitigation measures are identified it will not be possible for an AA to conclude positively.”

Officer report

Concerns raised

One representation raised concerns about increased traffic, drainage, privacy, and construction noise and dust.

“One representation has been received raising concerns at the proposed development, namely traffic, drainage, privacy and construction dust and noise. Issues relating to traffic, drainage and amenity impacts (privacy) are addressed above. Controls over construction activity can be secured through the imposition of a condition requiring the preparation and implementation of a Construction & Environment Management Plan (CEMP).”

Officer report

Who spoke

The agent explained progress on nutrient mitigation and viability, but said the obligations could not yet be confirmed.

What members debated

Members discussed further deferral, nutrient mitigation, viability, affordable housing and unresolved planning obligations, with several supporting refusal.

“Councillor Alec Cormack asked whether the application was being treated differently from other cases affected by nutrient neutrality. The Chief Planning Officer confirmed this was not the case, explaining that applications acceptable in all other respects were paused, whereas those with additional unresolved issues, such as viability and Section 106 obligations, were recommended for refusal.”

“Councillor Simon Hancock stated that repeatedly deferring the application was not a good use of Committee time and highlighted fundamental issues, including the absence of a planning obligation and unresolved nitrate mitigation. While expressing sympathy for the applicant, he stressed that approval was not possible and confirmed his opposition to further deferral, supporting refusal as recommended.”

Minutes

The committee vote

The refusal motion was carried by 11 votes to one, with one abstention.

“Councillor Simon Hancock Moved the recommendation for refusal; Seconded by Councillor Tony Wilcox.”

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

Minutes

The decision

The application was refused for the reasons set out in the officer recommendation.

“That the Application be REFUSED subject to the reasons outlined in Section 1.1 of the report.”

Minutes