ITEM NUMBER: 2

APPLICATION NUMBER: 11/06852/OUT

APPLICANTS NAME(S): Mr Stephen Humphreys

SITE ADDRESS: Former Ysgol Thomas Stephens Ystradfellte Road

Pont Nedd Fechan Neath Powys

SA11 5UW

GRID REF: E: 290216 N:208006

COMMUNITY: Ystradfellte

DATE VALIDATED: 8 August 2011

DECISION DUE DATE: 7 November 2011

CASE OFFICER: Mr Rhodri Davies

PROPOSAL Demolition of former school buildings and the construction of up to 12 no. dwellings and associated infrastructure (outline)

ADDRESS Former Ysgol Thomas Stephens, Ystradfellte Road, Pontneddfechan

CONSULTATIONS/COMMENTS

Consultee Received Comments Powys County Council Waste Management

No comments have been received to date.

Countryside Council For Wales

12th Aug 2011 CCW are currently assessing the above planning application. It appears that part of the bat roost mitigation statement is missing. The portal shows bat roost mitigation statement 1 and 2 but it appear both documents are the same. Can you please confirm the mitigation statement goes no further than page 4 and stops at bullet point 5?

Countryside Council For Wales

8th Sep 2011 CCW do not object to the application providing appropriately worded conditions requiring the implementation of the mitigation measures are attached to any planning permission your Authority is minded to grant. The conditions should address the following: - The scheme shall be implemented in accordance with the recommendations set out in section 4.3 Alternative Roost Provision of the report Bat Roost Mitigation Method Statement undated completed by Rob Colley Associates - Architectural drawings detailing the provision of four bat lofts and bat access points in four of the proposed new buildings on site shall be submitted and agreed with the Local Planning Authority and CCW. We also advise that a European Protected Species licence is obtained from the WG prior to any development commencing.

Dwr Cymru Welsh Water

13th Sep 2011 The proposed development would overload the existing public sewerage system. However improvements are planned for completion by 1st April, 2013. DCWW suggested a condition to safeguard their security of service to customers and the protection of the environment. Conditions relating to foul water, surface water and land drainage run-off are also requested. The proposed site is crossed by a public sewer. No part of the building will be permitted within 3m either side of the centreline of the public sewer.

We note that the developer intends for surface water generated by the development to communicate with the public sewerage system. However, surface water can be suitably controlled on virtually any development via the integration of one of the many forms of SuDS techniques available. A very good justification would be required not to incorporate a sustainable approach on the development. This should be investigated fully and any representations can be made to this office to be discussed further. No problems are envisaged with the Waste Water Treatment Works for the treatment of domestic discharges from this site. The proposed development is crossed by a trunk/distribution watermain. It may be possible for the watermain to be diverted under section 185 of the Water Industry Act 1991, the cost of which will be re-charged to the developer.

Dwr Cymru Welsh Water - Developer Services

13th Aug 2012 I attach a file copy of our response to the applicant which I hope is self-explanatory: "We thank you for your letter dated 11 April 2012 regarding the above, and wish to reply as follows: A site visit carried out on the 15 May 2012 by our Inspector Mr Mark Parsons, confirmed that the roof and front yard area of the existing school drains into the public sewerage system. Therefore in principle we would allow the domestic foul flows from the proposed 12 dwellings to communicate with the public sewer in advance of our improvement works. The communication with the public sewerage system would be subject to the satisfactory submission of the Section 106 WIA 1991 documentation. Such an arrangement is however strictly conditional on no surface water from the proposed development entering the public sewerage system. Surface Water flows must therefore be disposed of by other means, i.e. by utilising soakaways, or draining directly to a watercourse in liaison with the Land Drainage Authority and / or Environment Agency. Please confirm how the surface water flows derived from the development will be disposed of. A copy

of the percolation test results would suffice. Upon receipt of the above we would then be in a position to write to the Local Planning Authority asking them to remove the Grampian Objection and replace it with a suitably worded condition, stating that no surface water will be permitted to enter the public sewerage system."

Dwr Cymru Welsh Water - Developer Services

29th Nov 2013 A scheme to address the sewerage network issues in Pontneddfechan has been completed and delivered.

NP Head Of Strategy Policy And Heritage

19th Nov 2013 Following statutory adoption of the Brecon Beacons National Park Local Plan 1999 (hereinafter called 'the Local Plan'), work on the Brecon Beacons National Park Unitary Development Plan (hereinafter called 'the UDP') commenced in 2000. The UDP was subject to all the statutory consultations and procedures associated with the preparation of development plans, including a local inquiry and an Inspector's report. The Brecon Beacons National Park as the Local Planning Authority received a direction from the Welsh Assembly Government under Section 17(1) of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 (as amended) in relation to the safeguarding of sand and gravel in the National Park. The Authority resolved not to comply with the WAG direction to modify the UDP as it was not considered that the quality of the resource had been adequately established or that the environmental constraints relating to the sites had been sufficiently considered. The UDP was subsequently approved by the Authority for development control purposes in March 2007 and sets out the policies and proposals to guide development in this area from 2001 to 2016 and beyond. As a point of clarification, the direction from the WAG relates solely to sand and gravel issues and does not relate to any matters raised in this application. Whilst the adopted Local Plan and its associated Structure Plans remain the formal statutory policy framework for the area, the UDP provides a more up-to-date and relevant planning framework in line with current National Planning Policy. Planning Policy Wales advises that the weight to be attached to emerging plans will increase as successive stages are reached.

The examination into the LDP has been completed, and on the 30th October the NPA received the Inspectors Report into the examination. This report has concluded that the LDP, subject to the changes listed within the Inspector's report is sound. The Authority aim to adopt the LDP for development control purposes by resolution of its membership on the 17th December 2013. For this reason, the emerging LDP has significant weight in the consideration of this proposal, especially in areas where there is substantial divergence between the policy positions of the UDP and LDP. For the above reasons I will give my observations in relation to the proposals compliance with the UDP but where policy areas of the LDP present a different direction of travel I will highlight this and make comment accordingly Proposal The proposal relates to outline permission for 12 new dwellings on an area of land currently occupied by the former Ysgol Thomas Stephens in Pontneddfechan. The development site is located within settlement boundaries as indicated on both the UDP and LDP proposals Map. Policy Observations The principal of development on this site is acceptable in policy terms. In accordance with policy ES29 of the UDP all proposals for 3 or more units must make a contribution towards affordable housing. Under the UDP policy this requirement would be for 20% affordable housing. I note from the file that the applicant's Planning Statement states 'The applicant will enter into negotiations with the LPA regarding an appropriate level of affordable housing at the appropriate time'. However, I note from the file that there is some suggestion that 2 of the units would be provided as affordable housing, subject to findings of viability assessments. The LDP takes a different approach to affordable housing. It splits the National Park in to 3 submarket areas and uses averaged residual land values to

determine the level of developer contribution towards affordable housing. This proposal lies within the Heads of the Valleys and Rural South submarket area. Through the examination process of the LDP it became apparent that residual land values within the submarket area are at a point which cannot sustainably support the provision of affordable housing through developer contributions. As such Policy 13 of the LDP 'Affordable Housing Contributions' sets out that there is a 0% developer contribution towards affordable housing. As the LDP is based upon more up-to-date viability evidence than the UDP and is about to be adopted for development control purposes, it would only seem reasonable to accept the developers viability assessment, and agree that the provision of 20% affordable housing would cause detrimental impact on the viability of the proposal. As such in this instance, although it would amount to a technical departure to the approved UDP, I can see that there is a reasoned case to accepting 0% contribution towards affordable housing. Recommendation: The policy team have no objection to make in relation to this proposal. It is noted that the applicant have concerns regarding the provision of affordable housing on site. Given the policy direction of the LDP and the viability evidence underpinning the affordable housing policy, it is agreed that in this instance, it is acceptable for the developer to not have to make a contribution towards affordable housing.

NP Planning Ecologist 13th Sep 2011 Thank you for the opportunity to comment on the above application. Having reviewed the information provided, including the Rob Colley bat and barn owl survey report and method statements, I wish to offer the following comments and recommendations. Comments 1.0 I am satisfied with the scale of survey effort as described in the Rob Colley survey report (September 2010). However the report acknowledges that the survey was concluded late in the season when bats may have dispersed from any roost. Despite this limitation I accept the conclusion of the report that the former school building is used

as a maternity roost for Myotis bats (most likely Whiskered/Brandt's bats). This conclusion is based on the scale of droppings present within northern section of the building and the emergence of a single Myotis bat. 2.0 The survey report accepts that the proposed development of the site, which will include the demolition of the existing former school building followed by the construction of up to 12 new houses, will result in the loss of the recorded Myotis bat maternity roost and potential roost sites for small numbers of pipistrelle bats. Consequently the report highlights in Section 10.3 that a Welsh Government European Protected Species (EPS) licence will be necessary in support of the proposed development. To support the current planning application and any related EPS licence application mitigation measures are provided in form of a Method Statement appended to the survey report. The principal mitigation measure is the provision of a purpose-built bat house to be installed within the application site. 2.1 The Method Statement recognises the need for the bat house to be in place in advance of the proposed school building demolition, and loss of the roost. The suggested position of the proposed new bat house building is illustrated within the Method Statement, however it is unclear whether this sits fully within the red line of the application site. I accept the principle of the proposed mitigation, but recognise the need to effectively control the detailed design of the proposed structure, the timing of its delivery and ultimately the mechanism by which it is maintained and monitored post development. This may need to be achieved through a combination of conditions/Reserved Matters and Section 106 obligations. The provision of the mitigation will also be the subject of an EPS licence condition. 2.2 Following our brief discussion it is my understanding that the control over the provision of the bat house is the most pressing issue in considering the current application. The Method Statement recommends the construction of the bat house in the spring prior to the breeding season to allow bats the opportunity to become familiar with the structure prior to the demolition of the existing roost in the former school building in the autumn of

the same year. I note that CCW have not objected to this application on the basis of the provision of conditions. I would nevertheless welcome from the applicant's bat consultant additional evidence-based justification for a single seasons familiarisation period. In my view the existing roost building should not be demolished until there are clear monitoring results demonstrating that the Myotis bats are using the new bat house. 3.0 A second Method Statement is also appended which recommends the additional provision of roost sites in the roof structures of four of the proposed new dwelling houses. These additional roosting opportunities are recognised in the Planning Obligations Statement of Intent, provided by the applicant in support of the current application, as biodiversity enhancements. I welcome and accept the proposed measures, and would add that they may also be considered as additional mitigation to address any potential weaknesses in the bat house. Securing these enhancement measures may be most appropriately achieved as a Section 106 planning obligation, but will also need to be the subject of 'detailed design' under Reserved Matters. Recommendations Should the National Park Authority be minded to grant permission for this outline application I recommend that the following matters are effectively controlled by means of appropriate condition, Reserved Matter and planning obligation. I have not considered here which one of these methods of control is most appropriate and would ask that you give this further thought. I would also ask that you initially seek clarification on the following matter. 1.0 Clarification is sought from the applicant's bat consultant that a single summer season is a sufficient time period between the provision of the proposed alternative roost and the loss of the existing roost. 2.0 The demolition of the former school house as part of the proposed development shall not commence until a replacement roost in the form of a purpose-built bat house, as outlined in Method

Statement 2 appended to the Rob Colley survey report (September 2010), has been provided within the application site. 3.0 No development works shall commence until the detailed design and location of the proposed bat house has been provided for the approval of the National Park Authority. 4.0 No development works shall commence until the principle of the biodiversity enhancement scheme, as outlined in Method Statement 2 appended to the Rob Colley survey report (September 2010), has been accepted and secured by the National Park Authority. 5.0 No development works shall commence until the detailed design and location of the biodiversity enhancement scheme has been provided for the approval of the National Park Authority. 6.0 No development works shall commence until the mechanism for the adoption, maintenance and long-term monitoring of the efficacy of the bat house replacement roost has been accepted and secured by the National Park Authority. Post development monitoring of the enhancement scheme should also be included as a long term programme.

NP Planning Ecologist 4th Jan 2012 Further to our discussions regarding the above application in relation to the applicant’s letter of 25th November 2011. You will recall from my previous comments (attached) that I did not interpret the two options as presented in the Method Statements as ‘alternatives’. It was my assessment from the application supporting documents that the ‘bat house’ constituted ‘mitigation’ and the replacement roost in the roofs are considered as ‘enhancements’ To me the issue relates largely to timing. It is my view that it should be possible to provide the detailed design of the ‘bat house’ within the scope of the current application, and construct it within the application site prior to the demolition of the former school building. I appreciate that application status is ‘outline’ and therefore construction of the ‘bat house’ prior to demolition may be only possible following the discharge of reserved matters at a later

stage. I have expressed a concern in my previous comments regarding the brevity of the time period as currently proposed between the provision of the ‘bat house’ and the loss of the roost. As the former school building supports a maternity roost for Myotis bats it is my view that it would not be acceptable to have potentially significant lag time between the loss of the roost and the delivery of the replacements in the proposed dwelling houses. Perhaps the best way to progress this matter would be a site visit with the applicant and their bat specialist to determine what constraints exist to the delivery of the ‘bat house’ mitigation option as currently proposed in the Method Statement.

NP Planning Ecologist 16th Feb 2012 Following our recent discussion I have now spoken directly to the applicant, Mr B Humphreys, about the protected species issues arising from the above outline planning application. I would like to offer the following further comments and recommendations. Comments 1.0 On the basis of my conversation with the

applicant and re-visiting the planning application I now appreciate that it is possible to construct a number of the proposed properties within the application without the need to directly affect the former school building which holds the suggested maternity roost for Whiskered bats.

1.2 At this stage it is not exactly clear from the

application the number of houses that need to be built in advance of the demolition of the former school to provide the necessary bat mitigation measures. The Bat Mitigation/Method Statement 1, as provided by the bat specialist, Rob Colley, states in Section 4.3 that, “Multi-animal roost potential (attic, roof skin & under-ridges) will be provided at the roofs of four properties [properties 7,8, 9 & 10] to be built at the north of the proposed development site (i.e. at the playing field) ...” In My conversation with Mr Humphreys he suggested that two properties with mitigation will be built prior to the loss of the bat roost in the former school house. There is no standard guidance available to specify the

number of properties containing mitigation measures prior to the loss of a recorded bat roost. It is my opinion that the advanced provision of two properties with agreed mitigation measures would be sufficient to support the continued ecological function of the recorded bats and therefore satisfy the requirements of the Habitats Regulations 2010 in maintaining these species in a favourable conservation status.

1.3 The Rob Colley Bat Mitigation/Method

Statement 1 describes and illustrates the typical physical bat mitigation measures, notably access points into various void spaces in the roof structures, that are suggested be installed within properties 7, 8, 9 and 10 of the proposed development. As the application is of an outline nature it will be necessary for National Park Authority to control the delivery of these recommended mitigation measures as a condition or as part of the detailed design to be submitted under Reserved Matters. I am satisfied in principle that the measures recommended in the Section 4.3 of the Rob Colley Bat Mitigation/Method Statement 1 would offer adequate mitigation for the loss of the recorded roost sites in the former school building. I would strongly encourage the applicant/architect to design in the bat mitigation measures in direct consultation with the retained bat specialist.

1.4 It is my opinion that securing the range of

bat roosting opportunities in a total of four properties will both conserve and enhance the biodiversity interests associated with this site. By controlling the delivery of the agreed mitigation/enhancement measures the National Park Authority can demonstrate their due regard for the requirements of the Habitats Regulations 2010, the NERC Act 2006 and the first statutory purpose of the National Park. It could be argued that the provision of two properties prior to the loss the former school building roost could constitute mitigation and the delivery of roosting opportunities in a further two buildings post-demolition would represent a

biodiversity enhancement. 2.0 The timing for the advanced delivery of the

mitigation measures is outlined in Section 4.2 of the Rob Colley Bat Mitigation/Method Statement 1. This points to the construction of the properties supporting the required bat mitigation measures in the spring (March/April) followed by the demolition, under a Welsh Government European Protected Species licence, of the former school building in September/October, i.e. after the breeding season but before winter hibernation. I would support the principles of this suggested timing. Again it will be necessary to control this restricted timing through the planning process.

3.0 As the current application is an outline

proposal it understandably does not provided details of external lighting. To avoid conflicts between desired external lighting and the necessary bat mitigation measures it is my view that this matter needs to be controlled under a condition attached to this outline application or as part of the detailed design prepared under Reserved Matters. I would argue that the details of the bat mitigation and external lighting for properties 7, 8, 9 and 10 should be fully illustrated on appropriate plan and elevation design drawings. I note that Rob Colley has recommended that the bats should have access to the attic space as well as the roof skin (battened space under roof slates) and the void under the ridge tiles. The dimensions of the attic space being dedicated to bats should be adequately illustrated on the design drawings.

4.0 A further matter that requires control under

a condition attached to this outline application or via Reserved Matters is the need for post development monitoring to assess the outcome of the agreed mitigation. As the mitigation measures will be delivered part way through the development it is my view that it should be set to commence following the completion the specific properties that are agreed to be built as the

advanced mitigation. I would suggest that summer season evening monitoring visits are completed in years 1 and 3 following the completion of the agreed properties. The delivery of the monitoring should be the subject of a condition attached to this outline application or as part of the Reserved Matters.

Recommendations Should the National Park be minded to grant permission for the above application I would recommend that the following matters are confirmed and appropriately conditioned or captured under Reserved Matters. 1.0 In line with the recommendations in the Rob

Colley Bat Roost Mitigation/Method Statement 1 confirmation should be sought from the applicant as to the number and location of specific properties that will be developed containing the required bat mitigation measures prior to the demolition of the former school building and the location and number of properties containing enhancement measures post-demolition.

2.0 Detailed design drawings of the agreed

properties illustrating the bat mitigation/enhancement measures described and illustrated in Section 4.3 of the Rob Colley Bat Roost Mitigation/Method Statement 1 shall be submitted to the National Park Authority for approval. The approved drawings should be implemented in full.

3.0 A design drawing illustrating the external

lighting design which avoids conflict with the approved bat mitigation/enhancement measures shall be submitted to the National Park Authority for approval. The approved drawing should be implemented in full.

4.0 The demolition of the former school building

shall take place in September/October under the direct supervision of a retained bat specialist in accordance with the methodology stated in Section 4.4 of the Rob

Colley Bat Roost Mitigation/Method Statement 1, and following receipt of the necessary WG EPS licence. The agreed properties supporting the bat mitigation measures shall be fully completed in the spring (March/April) prior to the licensed destruction of the recorded bat roost.

5.0 To determine the effectiveness of the

approved mitigation/enhancement measures summer seasonal monitoring observations, by means of an evening emergence survey, should be completed in Years 1and 3 following the completion of the development. A brief written report confirming the outcome of each annual monitoring event should be submitted to the National Park Authority.

6.0 I would advise that the following standard

informative notes are also provided with any decision notice:

6.1 Work should halt immediately and CCW

contacted for advice in the unexpected event that bats or other protected species are discovered during the course of the development. To proceed without seeking the advice of CCW may result in an offence being committed. CCW, Cantref Court, Brecon Road, Abergavenny, NP7 7AX. Tel. 01873 737000.

6.2 The timing of development works should be such as to avoid conflict with the bird nesting season.

Powys Affordable Housing Officer

17th Aug 2011 I have had several telephone conversations with the applicant regarding this site which he has stated he feels is not suitable for affordable housing. My response was that such an argument would need to be proven to this Authority. In the meanwhile I emphasised to him that there is a known and evidenced need for affordable housing in the area and this is increased by the fact that the next settlement, Glynneath, is literally across the road from Pontneddfechan. I feel that there should be a normal policy requirement for affordable housing on this site and that the details of that should be agreed prior to granting of permission.

In order to achieve a full picture of the requirement I will need to consult with my opposite number in Neath Port Talbot to assess the impact of Glynneath. This can be undertaken at a stage to suit your timetable.

Powys County Council Education

11th Dec 2013 As there are no details of the exact number of dwellings and their type, you could use the broad guide from the policy of £6,011 per dwelling. We have closed the next three nearest schools in Powys - Coelbren, Caehopkin and Penycae. We replaced them with Ysgol y Cribarth and this actually has surplus places but I wouldn't want to lose the potential contribution if it was previously agreed. The nearest school to the site is probably Maesmarchog which is in NPTCBC area. It is quite a large school but I don't know if it has surplus places. I don't know how you want to play it because strictly speaking the school in Powys closest to the site (but probably not the closest school for children from the development) has surplus places. You could simply quote the policy and leave it for the developer to argue on the surplus places point.

Powys County Council Highways

3rd Oct 2011 This application should be refused. Whilst residential development on this site is accepted, in principle, I consider the number of multiple access points undesirable in terms of the potential hazards they will generate. The plans also extend only to the limit of the site frontage and do not reveal the vertical and horizontal change in the carriageway to the south west. I believe that because of this road alignment the visibility splays suggested in the table on BHYSG/01 are not achievable. Should the applicant wish to show clearly that visibility can be provided by providing survey plans extending well beyond the site in each direction I will review my comments.

Powys County Council Highways

14th Nov 2012 I have had a look at the latest plans submitted by Mr Humphries and whilst having the usual concerns about the multiple access points being inappropriate for this rural location the visibility splays, when checked against previously supplied information, do seem to be achievable. I will have negative comments to make regarding the provision of pedestrian accesses for plots 1-6 which

can result in on-street parking in this blind location so if they can be reduced in number by being paired or removed I would see this as a positive improvement. Overall I think the quality of the drawing in reflecting of the features in the location remains poor and the proximity of non-related accesses opposite or adjacent should be shown to enable the true picture to be considered.

Powys County Council Highways

28th Oct 2013 I refer to the re-consultation of 8th October 2013 and would make the following comments. I consider the layout remains undesirable in terms of the multiple access points both vehicular and pedestrian which are likely to encourage on-street parking and obstruct visibility across the south-western part of the site frontage. The proposed access serving the rear of plots 1-6 may be capable of meeting an adoptable standard along its initial length but does not include a suitable turning head and is too narrow to the rear of the properties for the purpose of reverse manoeuvring from the parking bays. As this layout should be considered as a potential adoptable road due to the scope to access into the remaining land within the ownership of the applicant the Highways Authority will be duty bound to serve Advance Payments Code Notices upon receipt of building regulation approval for plots 1-6. There are a number of discrepancies relating levels shown on the plans, in particular the proposed layout has two different finished floor levels for plots 11/12. There is considerable infill proposed as shown on the proposed sections and emphasised on section C and D and no information is provided as to how this ground will be retained along the rear boundary of the site. There is a level difference at the site boundary as great as 1.214m according to the proposed sections drawing. There is also a level difference between the finished floor level on Section E to the existing ground level of some 2.7m. I consider this should be explained or detailed so that it is apparent the matter will not become an insurmountable problem at a later date. Finally, plots 7-12 are being shown with just two parking spaces per unit but the scale of the units appears in keeping with plots 1-6 which have been

shown with three spaces per unit. I am therefore naturally concerned that if permitted at 12 units overall the layout proposed could result in inadequate off-street parking and undesirable on-street parking. However, although these matters raise serious concerns I do not believe they represent adequate grounds for refusal as the access points do appear to be capable of meeting the appropriate standards of visibility and the number and scale of the dwelling units is still a matter for consideration at a later date. I would therefore recommend that the following conditions be included on any permission granted at this stage and hope that in future an alternative layout can be found which better meets the Highways Authority's requirements and still suits the site constraints. HC1 Any entrance gates shall be set back at least 5.5 metres distant from the edge of the adjoining carriageway and shall be constructed so as to be incapable of opening towards the highway. HC2a The gradient of each domestic access shall not exceed 1 in 15 for the first 5.5 metres measured from edge of the adjoining carriageway along the centre line of the access. HC2b The gradient of the access road shall not exceed 1 in 15 for the first 10.0 metres measured from edge of the adjoining carriageway along the centre line of the access. HC3 The centre line of the first 5.5 metres of any access measured from the edge of the adjoining carriageway shall be at right angles to that edge of the said carriageway. HC4 Within 5 days from the commencement of the development any access shall be constructed so that there is clear visibility from a point 1.05 metres above ground level at the centre of that access and 2.4 metres distant from the edge of the adjoining carriageway, to points 0.26 metres above ground level at the edge of the adjoining carriageway and 70.0 metres distant in each direction measured from the centre of that access along the edge of the

adjoining carriageway. Nothing shall be planted, erected or allowed to grow on the area(s) of land so formed that would obstruct the visibility and the visibility shall be maintained free from obstruction thereafter. HC7a Within 5 days from the commencement of the development the area of any domestic access to be used by vehicles is to be constructed to a minimum of 410mm depth, comprising a minimum of 250mm of sub-base material, 100mm of bituminous macadam base course material and 60mm of bituminous macadam binder course material for a distance of 5.5 metres from the edge of the adjoining carriageway. Any use of alternative materials is to be agreed in writing by the Local Planning Authority prior to the access being constructed. HC7b Within 5 days from the commencement of the development the area the access road to be used by vehicles is to be constructed to a minimum of 410mm depth, comprising a minimum of 250mm of sub-base material, 100mm of bituminous macadam base course material and 60mm of bituminous macadam binder course material for a distance of 10.0 metres from the edge of the adjoining carriageway. Any use of alternative materials is to be agreed in writing by the Local Planning Authority prior to the access being constructed. HC8 Prior to the occupation of any dwelling, provision shall be made within the curtilage of the site for the parking of an appropriate number of cars per dwelling excluding any garage space provided together with a turning space such that all vehicles serving the plot may both enter and leave in a forward gear. The parking areas shall be retained thereafter and the turning areas shall be maintained at all times free from obstruction. HC10 The gradient from the back of the footway/verge to the vehicle parking areas shall not exceed 1 in 15. HC11 Within 5 days from the commencement of the development provision shall be made within the curtilage of the site for the parking of all construction vehicles together with a vehicle turning area. This parking and turning area shall be

constructed to a depth of 0.3 metres in crusher run or sub-base and maintained free from obstruction at all times such that all vehicles serving the -site may park within the site and both enter and leave the site in a forward gear. HC12 The width of the access road carriageway shall be not less than 6.0 metres for a minimum distance of 30.0 metres along the access measured from the adjoining edge of carriageway of the county highway. HC13 A radius of 6.0 metres shall be provided from the carriageway of the county highway on each side of the access road to the development site. HC14 Any internal side-road junctions shall have a corner radii of 6.0 metres. HC17 A 2.0 metre wide footpath shall be provided on the both sides of the site access road and along the full frontage of the site onto the existing county class III road, C0180. HC19 No building shall be occupied before the estate road carriageway and one footway shall be constructed to and including binder course level to an adoptable standard including the provision of any salt bins, surface water drainage and street lighting in front of that building and to the junction with the county highway. HC20 The estate road carriageway and all footways shall be fully completed, to a standard to be agreed in writing by the Local Planning Authority, upon the issuing of the Building Regulations Completion Certificate for the last house or within two years from the commencement of the development, whichever is the sooner. HC21aPrior to the occupation of any dwelling on plots1-6 the area of the access road to be used by vehicles is to be finished in a 40mm bituminous surface course for a distance of 10.0 metres from the edge of the adjoining carriageway. HC21bPrior to the occupation of any dwelling on plots7-12 the area of each access to be used by vehicles is to be finished in a 40mm bituminous surface course for a distance of 5.5 metres from the

edge of the adjoining carriageway. HC30 The centreline of any new or relocated hedge should be positioned not less than 1.0 metre to the rear of any visibility splay. HC31 The area of each private drive and any turning area is to be metalled and surfaced in bituminous macadam, concrete or block paviours, prior to the occupation of that dwelling. HC32 No storm water drainage from the site shall be allowed to discharge onto the county highway. I am also aware that the matter of surface water drainage has not been addressed in detail and recommend that this issue be investigated with some urgency as it is far from clear where or if, within the site, soakaways could be located.

Powys County Council Land Drainage Department

20th Sep 2011 The Land Drainage Authority would wish the following recommendations/ observations be applied: The Authority holds no historical flooding information relating to the site. The Authority would encourage the adoption of surface water control techniques whereby attenuation to the 100 year standard is achieved whilst limiting continuation flow to the existing 1 in 1 year Greenfield run-off for the connected impermeable areas. Surface water from the dwellings and other impermeable area of the site shall discharge to soakaway systems designed and constructed in accordance with BS EN 752-4 or BRE Digest 365 Soakaway design (or other best management practice Sustainable Drainage Systems). Foul drainage from the proposed development should be conveyed to the main foul sewer, subject to agreement by DCWW. There must be adequate capacity at the receiving sewage treatment works to treat the additional flows.

Powys County Council Leisure And Recreation

No comments have been received to date.

Powys County Council Public Open

No comments have been received to date.

Space Ystradfellte Community Council

No comments have been received to date.

CONTRIBUTORS

Mr. J E Thickens, Cilgerran, Ystradfellte Road Mr. D M Thomas, Arfryn, Ystradfellte Road Jan and Tim Mosley, Brynawel, Ystradfellte Road Mr. Neil Davies, Forester's House, Pontneathvaughan Mr. Meirion Thomas June and John Nelson, Wern Villa The Occupier, Bryn Ffynnon, Ystradfellte Road Paul and Sarah Mahoney, Plas Mynydd, Ystradfellte Road Mr. Keith Bowman, Ty’r Dderwen, Ystradfellte Road Mr. Graham Hirst, Cil Haul, Ystradfellte Road Mr. Greg Davies, Paddock, Ystradfellte Road NEIGHBOUR/THIRD PARTY RESPONSE SUMMARY

Initial neighbour objections to the scheme can be summarised as follows: - 7 entrances directly to a busy main road will cause potential road accidents - headlights from vehicles leaving the site will shine into properties on the opposite side of

the road - the straight line of the development makes it look like a council street development - vehicles would have to reverse out onto the highway - the plot doesn't seem big enough to accommodate 12 dwellings - the site backs onto the Dyffrynnoedd Nedd a Mellte SSSI - the sewerage system cannot accommodate more housing - the school building might contain asbestos - cars might park along the main road - there are problem with water pressure in the area - the scheme is out of keeping with the area - opposed to affordable housing on the site - the layout looks like the cheapest option for the developers - the school is known to house bats - the land to the rear is home to many species - the number of houses is unacceptable - the scheme is not consistent with other developments in the area - the main road (B4242) is in constant use - it is an overdevelopment of the site - there is an issue with water supply in the area - the electricity suffers short interruptions - there is no public transport within the area - the route to the bus stop is not paved - there is no demand for housing in the area - the development, both during construction and subsequently, will attract crime - the site is situated in a picturesque area near to the Glynneath Golf Club - the scheme will dramatically increase local traffic levels - the scheme will have the look and feel of a car park - there is a risk of further development to the rear

- if accepted, the development will have an adverse impact on local housing stock valuation - has relevant testing been carried out on the soil for soakaways? In response to the submission of amended plans, a summary of new, additional comments is as follows: - a cul-de-sac is a safer proposal - the viability of the site has nothing to do with the development of the site - fewer houses with less entrances onto a main road would be more in keeping with the rural village - the village no longer has a shop or post office or any local amenities - the building has been left to deteriorate and is in an extremely dilapidated state - the parking area at the front of the properties does not allow for turning facilities - the housing site would be overcrowded and occupants would need to apply for an access

order to erect scaffolding to carry out maintenance work - the asbestos in the building will be dislodged during demolition works - the new owners have demolished a hedge, dug up the playing field, taken away the top soil,

pulled down the gates and posts and put in two unsightly containers - the development encroaches onto ancient woodland - the proposal is immediately adjacent to a path used by walkers and tourists and changes

the character from open space to high density housing - the office of National Statistics 2011 recorded 27 unoccupied houses in the Ystradfellte

Ward and there are at least 3 houses in the area which have been for sale for over 2 years - how is the volume of heavy works traffic to be catered for? - can you assure us that pollution from fuels and chemicals will not enter a nearby well? - the proposed plans are not to scale - my son is asthmatic - pollution, dust, fumes are all triggers for potential asthma attack RELEVANT POLICIES SP1 National Park Policy Policy 1 Appropriate Development in the National Park SP3 Environmental Protection – Strategic Policy Policy 4 Sites of National Importance Policy 5 Sites of Importance for Nature Conversation Policy 6 Biodiversity and Development Policy 7 Protected and Important Wild Species SP10 Sustainable Distribution of Development SP11 Sustainable Design S LP1 Definition of Settlements S LP2 Settlements Appropriate Development SP5 Housing SP6 Affordable Housing Policy 28 Affordable Housing Contributions Policy 50 Retention of Existing Community Facilities Policy 56 Water and Sewage Supply for New Development Policy 58 Sustainable Drainage Systems Policy 59 Impacts of Traffic Policy 60 Provision for Cycling and Walking SP18 Sustainable Use of Land

Policy 61 Dwelling Density

PLANNING HISTORY App Ref Description Decision Date None relevant OFFICER’S REPORT Introduction Outline planning permission (with all matters apart from access reserved for future approval apart from access) is sought for the demolition of existing vacant school buildings and the provision of up to 12 No. dwellings on the former Ysgol Thomas Stephens School site, Ystradfellte Road, Pontneddfechan. The applicant purchased the site after Powys CC Education Dept. had carried out a major strategic review of Primary Schools in the catchment and closed this school in 2008. Powys County Council also closed the three nearest schools to the site - Coelbren, Caehopkin and Penycae but replaced them with Ysgol y Cribarth School in Abercrave. The nearest alternative school to the site is Maesmarchog School which is within the Neath Port Talbot County Borough Council administrative area. Site Description The application site comprises the former school building(s) and hard and soft play areas. The applicant also owns an area of woodland to the rear of the application site which does not lie within the settlement development boundary of Pontneddfechan under the terms of the LDP. Pontneddfechan is classed as a Level 3 settlement under the LDP i.e. a village that has the environmental capacity to accommodate appropriately scaled development with a focus on enabling residential development, small scale employment opportunities or community facilities which would support the vitality and viability of the area. The site measures approximately 0.36 Ha and lies at the northern edge but within the settlement of Pontneddfechan that fronts onto the B4242 Ystradfellte Road to the west of Glynneath Golf Club. The site is also within 150m of the Afon Nedd (River Neath) and within 60m of the Dyffrynnoedd Nedd a Mellte a Moel Penderyn Site of Special Scientific Interest. It lies immediately to the north-east of a public right of way (RoW Code 41/15/1) although this will not be affected by the development. The proposed development is crossed by two trunk/distribution watermains which will be diverted as part of the scheme under section 185 of the Water Industry Act 1991.

The site is generally flat but is at a lower level than the adjoining highway (B4242). The site is set between the residential properties of Paddock and Forestry House with open countryside to the north. Proposal The planning application is made in outline with all matters apart from access reserved for subsequent approval. The latest illustrative layout identifies that the site will be accessed via a central access leading to an internal estate road off the B4242. The application details the demolition of the existing main school buildings and ancillary outbuildings and the possible provision of six detached 2 storey dwellings to the previously developed western end of the site, a central vehicular access point and four detached and two semi-detached properties (all with direct access onto the highway) to the eastern end of the site (former playing field). It is proposed to extend the existing pavement to the west along the front of the site to provide safe pedestrian access into the site. The internal ground level will be raised to provide a level access from the adjoining highway. A visibility splay of 2.4m x 70m in a westerly direction will be achieved at the centre line of the access point. The illustrative layout suggests that plots 1-6 will be provided with 3 No. parking spaces each and front and rear gardens. Plots 7-12 will be accessed via shared drives off the main road with rear gardens and 2 No. on-site parking spaces. It is envisaged that the dwellings will have ridge heights of between 8m and 10m above ground level with a footprint of between 7m x 8m and 8m x 10m. The Code for Sustainable Homes pre-assessment report demonstrates that the proposed development will achieve the minimum code requirement (COSH Level 3 and 1 credit under Ene1 - Dwelling Emission Rate). Whilst the foul water from the dwellings will be disposed of via the mains sewerage system within the roadway, the scheme will include for a sustainable method of surface water disposal rather than communicating with the public sewer. It is proposed to develop the eastern end of the site first in order to provide bat mitigation and enhancement measures prior to the demolition of the school building under licence. The indicative scheme for 12 No. units equates to around 33 dwellings per hectare although it is anticipated that any subsequent Reserved Matters application or Full Planning application will be centred around a scheme for approximately 8-10 units to avoid overdevelopment of the site and to be consistent with typical densities at this end of the village. Policy Context The Brecon Beacons National Park Authority Local Development Plan (hereafter LDP) has been subject to formal Examination in public. The NPA published the Inspector’s Report into the examination and the report concluded that the LDP provided a sound basis for Planning within the National Park until 2022. The conclusions reached by the Inspector were binding on the Authority and, as the

Authority had to adopt the LDP by resolution of its members within 8 weeks of the receipt of the Inspector’s Report (LDP Regulations 24&25), an EGM of the NPA was arranged to consider formal adoption of the LDP. The LDP was formally adopted on the 17th December, 2013 and became operative from that date. Therefore, this application is considered against relevant policies of the Brecon Beacons National Park Local Development Plan December 2013 (LDP) as listed above. Pontneddfechan is still classified as a settlement that is capable of sustaining development under the LDP and the site is still within the settlement development boundary. In making a recommendation on this application, I have also taken into consideration the relevant policies of the Development Plan and the comments made by statutory consultees and other interested parties and the following national guidance:

• Planning Policy Wales (PPW, 5th Edition November 2012)

• Technical Advice Note 2 Planning and Affordable Housing (2006)

• Technical Advice Note 5 Nature Conservation and Planning (2009)

• Technical Advice Note 12 Design (2009)

• Technical Advice Note 22 Sustainable Buildings (2010) The dual purposes of National Park designation are, as first set out in the National Parks and Access to Countryside Act 1949 and updated by the Environment Act 1995:

• conservation and enhancement of natural beauty, wildlife and cultural heritage; and,

• promotion of opportunities for the understanding and enjoyment of the special qualities of the National Park by the public

Following a review in 1974 of the operation of the 1949 Act, led by Lord Sandford, an important recommendation emerged that became known as the Sandford Principle. This principle was enshrined in the 1995 Act, to the effect that where irreconcilable conflict arises between the two main National Park purposes, then the conservation of natural beauty should prevail over promotion of public enjoyment and understanding. Appraisal Material Planning Considerations This planning application is 'Outline' in nature with all matters reserved for future approval apart from access due to the characteristics of the adjoining highway. It is therefore the principle of development that constitutes the main material consideration for this scheme. In addition, so far as is possible with an Outline application, material considerations also include the: - the loss of a community facility (albeit a vacant property); - the provision of affordable housing; - the potential impact on the character and appearance of this part of the village; - the potential impact on the visual amenities of the area; - highway safety in and around the site; - the potential impact on neighbouring amenity; and,

- the impact of the development on the natural environment (including protected species).

The development will not obstruct the existing public right of way to the west of the site, the risk of contamination can be controlled and the proposal for up to 12 No. dwellings should not overload the public sewerage system which has been upgraded recently as part of the Dwr Cymru/Welsh Water Capital Investment Programme (April 2010 to March 2015). The site is not within Zone C2 of the TAN15 development maps and it is not within zones of influence for any known coal workings. Principle of Residential Development Policy SP1 of the LDP is a general policy which supports developments that conserves and enhances the Natural Beauty, wildlife and cultural heritage of the Park, supports the understanding and enjoyment of the special qualities of the National Park and assists the economic and social wellbeing of local communities. Policy 1 of the LDP identifies the criteria that will be used to assess the appropriateness of developments. Criteria i) requires that the scale, form, design, layout, density, intensity of use and use of materials should be appropriate to the surroundings and maintain or enhance the quality and character of the Park’s Natural Beauty, wildlife, cultural heritage and built environment. Criteria ii) requires the integration of the development into the landscape through planting, appropriate management of native species and through the construction of appropriate boundary features. Criteria iv) seeks the promotion of opportunities for the conservation and enhancement of bio/geodiversity through appropriate design and landscaping and criteria v) recommends that the development should be within 400m of an area of accessible natural green-space. Policy SP10 seeks to ensure that developments take place within sustainable locations near facilities and services to minimise the need to travel. Policy S LP1 defines Pontneddfechan as a Level 3A settlement and policy S LP2 outlines the forms of development that would be appropriate in settlements including ones that strengthen and enhance the mix of dwelling types and tenure options within the Settlement. Policy SP 18 states that new development should make the best possible use of previously developed land within development boundaries in preference to Greenfield sites and dwelling densities should make best use of the available land, achieving minimum dwelling densities relevant to the settlement. Policy 61 suggests a minimum density of 30 dwellings to the hectare, where this is compatible with the existing character of the area. The application site lies at the northern edge of the village of Pontneddfechan. The proposed layout identifies that the scheme for up to twelve residential dwellings will be located within the "white areas" of the settlement of Pontneddfechan as defined by the LDP proposals map. Having regard to the above, it is considered that the residential redevelopment of this site is acceptable in principle and, therefore, the proposal complies with policies SP1, 1, SP10, S LP1, S LP2, SP 18 and 61 of the Brecon Beacons National Park Authority Adopted Local Development Plan (2013).

Loss of Community Facility The site relates to the redevelopment of a former school site. As such the proposal requires assessment against policy 50 of the LDP. This policy states: The development of land which would adversely affect the operation of a community facility or result in its loss will only be allowed where: i) the existing facilities can best be retained or enhanced through redevelopment of the site; or ii) alternative provision of equivalent benefit is made available. Where it can be clearly demonstrated that a community facility is no longer required then alternative uses will be considered where they accord with other policies in the LDP. The school closed in 2008 and Officers are aware that the school modernisation programme has been implemented by Powys County Council and are satisfied that alternative provision has been made in the nearby village of Abercrave in the form of a new English medium primary school (Ysgol y Cribarth) which has capacity for 180+ places. The proposal meets the requirements of policy 50 of the BBNPA Adopted LDP (2013). Impact on Character, Appearance and Visual Amenities of the Area Policy 1 of the LDP states that proposals for the development of land must be appropriate in terms of i) scale, form, design, layout, density, intensity of use and use of materials and maintain or enhance the quality and character of the Park’s Natural Beauty, wildlife, cultural heritage and built environment and must be ii) integrated into the landscape to the satisfaction of the NPA. Policy S LP2 states that proposals for development within settlements will be required to contribute positively to their setting and enhance the quality of the landscape. As the application is made in Outline with all matters reserved for subsequent approval apart from access (i.e. appearance, landscaping, layout and scale) there are no specific details (apart from indicative street scene elevations and minimum and maximum dimensions) available relating to the final number of or appearance of the proposed dwellings, and this will be addressed as part of any future reserved matters application(s). Notwithstanding this it is considered that the submitted illustrative layout plan and street scene views demonstrate that up to twelve two storey dwellings can be erected within the site in a way that will respect the pattern of development in the remainder of the village. Officers are confident that the proposed development can be successfully designed to be sympathetic to the surrounding area and rural fringe in terms of materials and scale. Overall, it is considered that, subject to the applicant adopting a sensitive design approach, the site could be developed in a way that would maintain the character of this part of the National Park and will comply with policies 1 and S LP2 of the LDP. Sustainable Design

In May 2009 the Welsh Assembly Government published an innovative national planning policy expecting most new developments seeking planning permission to meet a minimum sustainable building standard. This is contained in Section 4.11 of Planning Policy Wales and is supplemented by Technical Advice Note 22 Planning for Sustainable Buildings (2010) which provides guidance for local planning authorities and developers in implementing the planning for sustainable buildings policy. Policy SP11 of the LDP advises that developments will be required to address the principles of sustainable design by demonstrating that they a) meet National and where defined local requirements for sustainable design or higher, b) are able to demonstrate consideration of the use and, where appropriate, the application of, renewable energy sources. Applications for 1 or more dwellings are required to meet Code for Sustainable Homes Level 3 and Obtain 1 credit under issue Ene1 - Dwelling Emission Rate. The planning application identifies that the dwellings will achieve Code Level 3 under TAN22 and the Code for Sustainable Homes. Overall, the proposal by achieving Code Level 3 will satisfy the Sustainable Design requirements as set out in Technical Advice Note 22: Planning for Sustainable Buildings (June 2010) and policy SP11 of the LDP. Neighbour Amenity The design details of the scheme are reserved for future approval and, as a result, it is not possible at this stage to fully assess the potential impacts upon neighbouring residents, particularly the existing properties at either end of the application site, by way of loss of privacy, loss of light or overbearing impact. Notwithstanding this, the indicative layout drawings illustrate that the proposed dwellings can be orientated so that they do not overlook any habitable windows. The adjoining properties (Paddock and Forestry House) are separated from the application site by established vegetation and, in the case of Paddock to the west, a public right of way. Officers consider that the scheme can be designed to eradicate any potential overlooking or excessive overshadowing of adjoining properties. These matters will be considered in further detail and ultimately determined at the 'Reserved Matters' stage. Therefore, it is considered that the development is unlikely to have a detrimental impact on the residential amenities of existing residents or future occupiers of the dwellings and can comply with National Planning policy. Access/Highway Safety Policy SP3 of the LDP advises that developments must demonstrate that there is no unacceptable impact on h) the important network of public open space and recreation facilities. Policy 59 suggests that development will be permitted where appropriate access can be achieved and a) traffic will not generate an unacceptable impact on congested areas or at

times of peak traffic flows; b) traffic will not be generated at inappropriate times; c) there is no unacceptable impact on road safety and d) no significant environmental damage would be caused. Policy 60 supports the creation of new pedestrian or cycle routes that will enable the implementation of measures to make walking or cycling safer and more attractive. It is proposed to construct a new central access onto the B4242 with sufficient visibility splays. The internal estate road will be constructed to adoptable standards (including a pedestrian footpath into the site). Officers consider that, although the school closed in 2008, the level of traffic and vehicular movements generated by the development is likely to be comparable to the levels experienced when the school was in use. The proposal is therefore considered to be satisfactory in terms of access and highway safety in compliance with policies SP3, 59 and 60 of the LDP. Impact on the Natural Environment Policy 1 of the LDP states that proposals for development must i) be appropriate to the surroundings and maintain or enhance the quality and character of the Park’s natural beauty and wildlife and iv) promote opportunities for the conservation and enhancement of bio/geodiversity through appropriate design and landscaping. Policy SP3 advises that developments must demonstrate that the proposed development does not have an unacceptable impact on, nor detract from, or prevent the enjoyment of b) ecology and biodiversity assets both within and beyond designated sites and c) the water environment. Policy 4 states that proposals for development which may affect a Site of Special Scientific Interest will only be permitted where i) the proposal contributes to the protection, enhancement or positive management of the site; or ii) the developer proves to the satisfaction of the NPA that the proposal has no unacceptable impacts which would directly or indirectly damage the site, detrimentally affect its conservation interest or its value in terms of its designation; or iii) the need and reasons for the proposed development outweigh the value of the site itself; and there are no alternative means of meeting the need for the development. Where appropriate the NPA will consider the use of Planning Conditions and/or Planning Obligations to provide appropriate mitigation and / or compensatory measures. Policies 5, 6 and 7 of the LDP all support developments where: 5 i) and 7 i) the need outweighs the nature conservation importance of the site; 5 ii) the proposals comply with Policy 6 and Policy 7; 6 1). the developer proves to the satisfaction of the NPA that there is no unacceptable loss or fragmentation or other impact of a habitat or landscape feature; 6 2) the developer provides for the further creation, positive management, restoration, enhancement or compensation for habitats and features and there is no unacceptable loss/breaching of linear features; 7 i) the criteria for derogation under the Habitats Regulations are met; 7 ii) positive measures are provided to contribute to species and

habitat conservation targets; and 7 iii) the developer proves to the satisfaction of the NPA that the disturbance of the species and habitat in terms of the effect on species survival and reproductive potential or habitat function will be kept to a minimum or alternative areas are provided to sustain at least the current levels of populations or size of habitat affected by the proposal. Section 40 of the NERC Act 2006 requires local authorities to have due regard to conserving biodiversity and to discharge its "biodiversity duty". This includes reference to the list of priority species and habitats produced under Section 42 of the Act. The BBNPA Ecologist welcomed the submission of the bat and barn owl survey report and method statements and accepted the conclusion that the former school building is used as a maternity roost for Myotis bats (most likely Whiskered/Brandt's bats). As the scheme will necessitate the demolition of the school buildings and the loss of the maternity roost a Welsh Government European Protected Species (EPS) licence will be necessary. To support the application and subsequent EPS licence, mitigation measures were proposed within two Method Statements with one measure being the provision of a purpose-built bat house installed within the application site. The replacement bat house could have been constructed in advance of the demolition of the building and loss of the existing maternity roost. Whilst the principle of the proposed mitigation measure was accepted issues relating to the detailed design of the proposed structure, the timing of its delivery and the mechanism by which it was to be maintained and monitored post development were raised by the BBNPA Ecologist. As an effective and simplified alternative to the purpose built bat house it is proposed to provide mitigation and additional enhancements in the form of roosting opportunities in the roof structures of the proposed dwellings in order to satisfy the requirements of the Habitats Regulations 2010 in maintaining these species in a favourable conservation status. These enhancements will be incorporated into the scheme at the subsequent Reserved Matters stage and the development can be “phased” so that the provision of two properties prior to the demolition of the former school building roost could constitute mitigation and the delivery of roosting opportunities in a further two buildings post-demolition would represent a biodiversity enhancement. The mitigation will need to be provided in the spring (March/April) and the demolition, under a Welsh Government European Protected Species licence, of the former school building will follow in September/October i.e. after the breeding season but before winter hibernation. The Countryside Council for Wales (now part of Natural Resources Wales) did not object to the application provided that appropriately worded conditions requiring the implementation of the mitigation measures are attached to any planning permission. They also advised that a European Protected Species licence should be obtained from the WG prior to any development commencing. Given the age of the original surveys (2010), updated surveys and reports will also need to be submitted at the Reserved Matters stage.

Therefore, conditions relating to the timing of the delivery of the mitigation and enhancement proposals, external lighting proposals and post development monitoring of the agreed mitigation and enhancement proposals (in the form of summer season evening monitoring visits in years 1 and 3 following the construction of the agreed properties) will be attached to any Outline consent. In addition, standard informative notes to cover cessation of works should bats or other protected species be discovered during the course of the development and the timing of works to avoid conflict with the bird nesting season will also be attached to the consent. Having regard to the above, Officers consider that the development will successfully comply with policies 1, SP3, 4, 5, 6 and 7 of the Brecon Beacons National Park Authority Local Development Plan (Adopted 2013) and Section 40 of the NERC Act 2006. Water Supply and Drainage Policy SP3 of the LDP advises that developments in the National Park must demonstrate that they do not have an unacceptable impact on, nor detract from, or prevent the enjoyment of c) the water environment. Policy 56 (Water and Sewage Supply for New Development) allows schemes if adequate water and mains sewerage infrastructure exists or can be provided without detriment to water quality, nature conservation interests or residential amenity. Where appropriate the NPA will impose a planning condition or obligation to ensure that adequate services are available to serve the development. It is proposed to divert the two water mains that traverse the site in consultation with DC/WW. The cost of this will be borne by the applicant/developer and will be implemented under section 185 of the Water Industry Act 1991. DC/WW originally commented that the development would overload the public sewerage system with improvements planned for completion by 1st April, 2013. Officers received confirmation that the improvement works had been implemented on 29th November 2013 as part of their Capital Investment Programme (April 2010 to March 2015) and the holding objection has been withdrawn. It is also considered that foul flows from the site are likely to be comparable to the original use of the site as a Primary School. DC/WW also confirmed that they do not envisage any problems with the Waste Water Treatment Works for the treatment of domestic discharges from this site. DC/WW also stated that the site is crossed by a public sewer and a trunk/distribution water main. However, upon further investigation, it has been confirmed that the site is only crossed by two water mains with the public sewer being located in the adjoining highway. In terms of surface water, Policy 58 (Sustainable Drainage Systems) requires all proposals to consider the incorporation of appropriate Sustainable Drainage Systems. Where relevant it must be demonstrated that the SuDS proposed within the development and procedures for adoption and maintenance have been approved by the relevant drainage body. DC/WW carried out a site visit on 15th May, 2012 and confirmed that the roof and front yard area of the existing school drains into the public sewerage system. Whilst DC/WW

accept that the public sewerage system can accommodate foul flows from the site, they have stated that no surface water from the proposed development should enter the public sewerage system and flows must be disposed of by other means i.e. by utilising soakaways/SuDS, or draining directly to a watercourse in liaison with the Land Drainage Authority and/or NRW Environment Agency. The Land Drainage Authority have recommended the adoption of surface water control techniques designed and constructed in accordance with BS EN 752-4 or BRE Digest 365 Soakaway design. A soakaway system is proposed and details will be presented for approval at the Reserved Matters stage. Powys County Council Highways Officer has requested that a condition be attached to prevent storm water drainage from discharging onto the county highway. In addition various conditions relating to foul water, surface water and land drainage run-off have been requested by DC/WW. In conclusion, the proposed diversion of the water mains under the site, the communication with the mains sewerage system and the provision of a sustainable drainage system are considered to be acceptable in principle and, therefore, accord with policies SP3, 56 and 58 of the LDP. Affordable Housing Requirement and Other Planning Obligations Policy 28 requires that all proposals that would result in the net creation of new dwellings for sale or rent on the open market to make an affordable housing contribution apart from schemes within Level 3 Settlements in the Heads of the Valleys and Rural South submarket (such as Pontneddfechan). The policy is as follows: Policy 28 Affordable Housing Contributions The NPA require all proposals within the Primary Key Settlement, Key Settlements, Level 3 Settlements (except for those in Heads of the Valleys and Rural South submarket) and the two allocated brownfield sites at the Former Army Camp, Cwrt-y-Gollen and the Former Mid Wales Hospital for development that would results in the net creation of new dwellings for sale or rent on the open market, (including the sub division of existing houses, changes of use, conversion of rural buildings, or new build, where there is a net gain in dwellings), to make an affordable housing contribution. The contribution will be either through on site provision, a commuted sum or a mix of both mechanisms. However, commuted sums will only be acceptable in exceptional circumstances (where it can be demonstrated that on-site provision is not appropriate in order to accord with Technical Advice Note 2). The level of contributions required will be in accordance with the following targets:

• Abergavenny, Hay and Crickhowell submarket: 30% affordable

• Brecon, Carmarthenshire and Rural Hinterland submarket: 20% affordable

• Heads of the Valleys and Rural South submarket: 0% affordable The NPA will adopt a robust but flexible approach to the contribution requested which will be linked to market conditions and their impact on site viability. The nature and level of contribution will be determined in accordance with an assessment process set out in Supplementary Planning Guidance which aids the implementation of this policy. The Head of Strategy, Policy and Heritage has confirmed that the LDP splits the National Park in to three submarket areas and uses averaged residual land values to determine the level of developer contribution towards affordable housing. This proposal lies within the Heads of the Valleys and Rural South submarket area. Through the examination process of the LDP it became apparent that residual land values within the submarket area are at a point which cannot sustainably support the provision of affordable housing through developer contributions. As such Policy 28 of the LDP 'Affordable Housing Contributions' sets out that there is a 0% developer contribution towards affordable housing in Pontneddfechan. As the LDP is based upon more up-to-date viability evidence than the UDP and has been adopted for development control purposes, there is now no requirement for an affordable housing contribution. This will allow the developer to submit a Revised Matters application for a scheme that is consistent with the residential densities around this part of Pontneddfechan without having to overdevelop the site to improve the viability of the scheme. In terms of other potential contributions, Powys County Council Education Dept, has confirmed that Ysgol y Cribarth in Abercrave has surplus places and, therefore, Officers cannot seek a contribution towards Education in this case. Additionally, it is likely that some of the school age children from this site would attend the nearest school to the site at Maesmarchog which is in the Neath Port Talbot County Borough Council administrative area. Conclusion Having regard to the above, the residential redevelopment of this site is considered to be acceptable in principle. The provision of up to 12 No. dwellings can be designed to avoid any significant detriment to the visual amenities of the area, are unlikely to have a detrimental impact on residential amenity or the public sewerage system or have a significant adverse impact on highway safety and the natural environment. The proposal therefore accords with policies SP1, 1, SP3, 4, 5, 6, 7, SP10, SP11, SLP1, SLP2, SP5, SP6, 28, 50, 56, 58, 59, 60, SP18 and 61 of the Brecon Beacons National Park Authority Local Development Plan (Adopted Dec. 2013) and should be granted subject to the imposition of suitable conditions. RECOMMENDATION: Permit Conditions and/or Reasons:

1 Application for approval of the reserved matters shall be made to the Local Planning

Authority before the expiration of three years from the date of this permission. 2 The development hereby permitted shall be begun either before the expiration of

five years from the date of this permission, or before the expiration of two years from the date of approval of the last reserved matters to be approved, whichever is the later.

3 Approval of the details of the layout, scale, appearance and the landscaping of the site (hereinafter called "the reserved matters") shall be obtained from the Local Planning Authority in writing before any development is commenced.

4 The development shall be carried out in all respects strictly in accordance with the access details as indicated on the approved plans (drawing nos. NP1v1 and NP2v1 received on 21st June, 2011 and drawing nos. NP5v2, NP7v2, NP8v1, NP9v1 and NP10v1 received on 20th September, 2013), unless otherwise agreed in writing by the Local Planning Authority.

5 Foul and surface water discharges shall be drained separately from the site. 6 No surface water shall be allowed to connect directly, or indirectly to the public

sewerage system unless otherwise agreed in writing by the National Park Authority. 7 Land drainage shall not be allowed to discharge either directly or indirectly into the

public sewerage system. 8 Prior to the commencement of development, details of any external lighting

proposed to illuminate the development shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The scheme shall avoid conflict with the recommended bat mitigation and enhancement measures. Development shall be carried out in accordance with the approved details and there shall be no other external illumination of the development.

9 The dwellings hereby permitted shall be constructed to achieve a minimum Code for Sustainable Homes Level 3 and achieve a minimum of 1 credit under category 'Ene1 - Dwelling Emission Rate' in accordance with the requirements of the Code for Sustainable Homes: Technical Guide 2010. The development shall be carried out entirely in accordance with the approved assessment and certification.

10 Construction of the dwellings hereby permitted shall not begin until an 'Interim Certificate' has been submitted to the Local Planning Authority, certifying that a minimum Code for Sustainable Homes Level 3 and a minimum of 1 credit under 'Ene1 - Dwelling Emission Rate', has been achieved for that individual dwelling or house type in accordance with the requirements of the Code for Sustainable Homes: Technical Guide 2010.

11 Prior to the occupation of the dwellings hereby permitted, a Code for Sustainable Homes 'Final Certificate'' shall be submitted to the Local Planning Authority certifying that a minimum Code for Sustainable Homes Level 3 and a minimum of 1 credit under 'Ene1 - Dwelling Emission Rate', has been achieved for that dwelling in accordance with the requirements of the Code for Sustainable Homes: Technical Guide 2010.

12 No development shall take place until details or samples of materials to be used externally on walls and roofs have been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. Development shall be carried out in accordance with the approved details.

13 The number of dwellings on the site shall not exceed 12. 14 During the construction phase no machinery shall be operated, no process shall be

carried out and no deliveries taken at or despatched from the site outside the

following times: Monday-Friday 7.00 am-6.00pm, Saturday 8.00 am-1.00 pm nor at any time on Sundays, Bank or Public Holidays.

15 Prior to the commencement of development, a detailed plan, showing the levels of the existing site, the proposed slab level of the dwellings approved and a datum point outside of the site, shall be submitted to and approved by the National Park Authority. Development shall be carried out in accordance with the approved details.

16 Notwithstanding the provisions of Article 3 of the Town and Country Planning (General Permitted Development) Order 1995 (or any Order revoking, amending and re-enacting that Order) no development of the types described in Part 1 Classes A-H; Part 2 Classes A-C and Part 40 Class H of Schedule 2, other than that hereby permitted shall be carried out without the written permission of the National Park Authority.

17 Notwithstanding condition 3 above and the requirement for landscaping details to be submitted with a future reserved matters application, a landscaping scheme to include native species and a planting schedule shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority prior to the commencement of works on site. Development shall be carried out in accordance with the approved details in the first planning season following implementation of the development.

18 No development shall commence until full details of a bat mitigation and enhancement scheme, to include the provision of roosting opportunities for bats within the roof structure of the first 4 new dwellings to be constructed on the site have been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. Prior to the demolition of the former school building(s), details of the specific properties that will contain the required bat mitigation measures and details of the location and number of properties that will contain the enhancement measures post-demolition shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. Details shall include the nature, number and location of access points and roost voids and the design drawings shall incorporate the bat mitigation/enhancement measures described and illustrated in Section 4.3 of the Rob Colley Bat Roost Mitigation/Method Statement 1. The development shall be carried out strictly in accordance with the approved details.

19 The demolition of the former school building shall take place in September/October under the direct supervision of a retained bat specialist in accordance with the methodology stated in Section 4.4 of the Rob Colley Bat Roost Mitigation/Method Statement 1 following receipt of the necessary Welsh Government EPS licence. The agreed properties supporting the bat mitigation measures shall be fully completed in the Spring (March/April) prior to the licensed destruction of the recorded bat roost in accordance with details and a phasing plan to be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The development shall be carried out strictly in accordance with the approved details.

20 To determine the effectiveness of the approved mitigation/enhancement measures, summer seasonal monitoring observations, by means of an evening emergence survey, should be completed in Years 1 and 3 following the completion of the development. A brief written report by a licensed bat specialist confirming the outcome of each annual monitoring event should be submitted to the National Park Authority.

21 No demolition, site clearance or building operations shall commence until tree protection details, relating to all stages of development, for the protection of all trees, hedges and shrubs to be retained on site shall be submitted to and approved in

writing by the Local planning Authority. These shall include the following: (i) A scheme for the protection of retained trees (the tree protection plan) and

the appropriate working methods (the arboricultural method statement) in accordance with Clause 7 of British Standard BS5837 - Trees in relation to construction - Recommendations.

(ii) Details of a no-dig method proposed for the driveway. Details of such protection will be submitted and approved by the Local Planning

Authority prior to its erection. The protection shall be provided before other site works commence and shall be retained in position at all times until completion of construction works, unless otherwise agreed in writing by the Local Planning Authority. These measures shall be carried out as described and approved. No alterations or variations to the approved works or tree protection schemes shall be made without the prior written consent of the Local Planning Authority.

In any event, the following restrictions shall be strictly observed unless otherwise agreed by the Local Planning Authority:

(a) No bonfires shall take place within 6m of the furthest extent of the canopy of any retained tree or hedgerow.

(b) No trenches, drains or service runs shall be sited within the construction exclusion zones (shown on the plan at paragraph (i) above).

(c) No changes in ground levels or excavations shall take place within the construction exclusion zones (shown on the plan at paragraph (i) above).

(d) No mixing of cement or use of other contaminating materials or substances shall take place within, or close enough to, a root protection area, or close enough to a root protection area that seepage or displacement could cause them to enter a root protection area as defined in paragraph 5.2.2 of British Standard BS5837:2012 - Trees in relation to construction - Recommendations.

22 Any entrance gates shall be set back at least 5.5 metres distant from the edge of the adjoining carriageway and shall be constructed so as to be incapable of opening towards the highway.

23 The gradient of each domestic access shall not exceed 1 in 15 for the first 5.5 metres measured from edge of the adjoining carriageway along the centre line of the access.

24 The gradient of the access road shall not exceed 1 in 15 for the first 10.0 metres measured from edge of the adjoining carriageway along the centre line of the access.

25 The centre line of the first 5.5 metres of any access measured from the edge of the adjoining carriageway shall be at right angles to that edge of the said carriageway.

26 Within 5 days from the commencement of the development any access shall be constructed so that there is clear visibility from a point 1.05 metres above ground level at the centre of that access and 2.4 metres distant from the edge of the adjoining carriageway, to points 0.26 metres above ground level at the edge of the adjoining carriageway and 70.0 metres distant in each direction measured from the centre of that access along the edge of the adjoining carriageway. Nothing shall be planted, erected or allowed to grow on the area(s) of land so formed that would obstruct the visibility and the visibility shall be maintained free from obstruction thereafter.

27 Within 5 days from the commencement of the development the area the access road to be used by vehicles is to be constructed to a minimum of 410mm depth, comprising a minimum of 250mm of sub-base material, 100mm of bituminous macadam base course material and 60mm of bituminous macadam binder course material for a distance of 10.0 metres from the edge of the adjoining carriageway. Any use of alternative materials is to be agreed in writing by the Local Planning

Authority prior to the access being constructed. 28 Prior to the occupation of any dwelling, provision shall be made within the curtilage

of the site for the parking of an appropriate number of cars per dwelling excluding any garage space provided together with a turning space such that all vehicles serving the plot may both enter and leave in a forward gear. The parking areas shall be retained thereafter and the turning areas shall be maintained at all times free from obstruction.

29 The gradient from the back of the footway/verge to the vehicle parking areas shall not exceed 1 in 15.

30 Within 5 days from the commencement of the development provision shall be made within the curtilage of the site for the parking of all construction vehicles together with a vehicle turning area. This parking and turning area shall be constructed to a depth of 0.3 metres in crusher run or sub-base and maintained free from obstruction at all times such that all vehicles serving the -site may park within the site and both enter and leave the site in a forward gear.

31 The width of the access road carriageway shall be not less than 6.0 metres for a minimum distance of 30.0 metres along the access measured from the adjoining edge of carriageway of the county highway.

32 A radius of 6.0 metres shall be provided from the carriageway of the county highway on each side of the access road to the development site.

33 Any internal side-road junctions shall have a corner radii of 6.0 metres. 34 A 2.0 metre wide footpath shall be provided on the both sides of the site access

road and along the full frontage of the site onto the existing highway (B4242). 35 No building shall be occupied before the estate road carriageway and one footway

shall be constructed to and including binder course level to an adoptable standard including the provision of any salt bins, surface water drainage and street lighting in front of that building and to the junction with the county highway.

36 The estate road carriageway and all footways shall be fully completed, to a standard to be agreed in writing by the Local Planning Authority, upon the issuing of the Building Regulations Completion Certificate for the last house or within two years from the commencement of the development, whichever is the sooner.

37 The centreline of any new or relocated hedge should be positioned not less than 1.0 metre to the rear of any visibility splay.

38 The area of each private drive and any turning area is to be metalled and surfaced in bituminous macadam, concrete or block paviours, prior to the occupation of that dwelling.

39 No storm water drainage from the site shall be allowed to discharge onto the county highway.

Reasons: 1 Required to be imposed by Section 92 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990. 2 Required to be imposed by Section 92 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990. 3 To enable the Local Planning Authority to exercise proper control over these

aspects of the development. 4 To ensure adherence to the approved plans in the interests of a satisfactory form of

development 5 To protect the integrity of the public sewerage system. 6 To prevent hydraulic overloading of the public sewerage system, to protect the

health and safety of existing residents and ensure no detriment to the environment.

7 To prevent hydraulic overload of the public sewerage system and pollution of the environment.

8 To maintain the character of the neighbouring area and in the interests of enhancing biodiversity.

9 To satisfy the requirements of Technical Advice Note 22: Planning for Sustainable Buildings (June 2010)

10 To satisfy the requirements of Technical Advice Note 22: Planning for Sustainable Buildings (June 2010)

11 To satisfy the requirements of Technical Advice Note 22: Planning for Sustainable Buildings (June 2010)

12 To ensure that the materials harmonise with the surroundings. 13 To allow the Local Planning Authority to retain control over the final scale of

development 14 To protect the amenity of local residents. 17 In order to define the permission and ensure that the development is of a scale and

height appropriate to the site. 18 To comply with the Wildlife & Countryside Act 1981 (as amended), the

Conservation of Habitats and Species Regulations 2010 and the NERC Act 2006. 19 To comply with the Wildlife & Countryside Act 1981 (as amended), the

Conservation of Habitats and Species Regulations 2010 and the NERC Act 2006. 20 To comply with the Wildlife & Countryside Act 1981 (as amended), the

Conservation of Habitats and Species Regulations 2010 and the NERC Act 2006. 21 In the interest of the visual amenities of the area and the protection of valuable trees

and protected species. 22 In the interests of highways safety in and around the site. 23 In the interests of highways safety in and around the site. 24 In the interests of highways safety in and around the site. 25 In the interests of highways safety in and around the site. 26 In the interests of highways safety in and around the site. 27 In the interests of highways safety in and around the site. 28 In the interests of highways safety in and around the site. 29 In the interests of highways safety in and around the site. 30 In the interests of highways safety in and around the site. 31 In the interests of highways safety in and around the site. 32 In the interests of highways safety in and around the site. 33 In the interests of highways safety in and around the site. 34 In the interests of highways safety in and around the site. 35 In the interests of highways safety in and around the site. 36 In the interests of highways safety in and around the site. 37 In the interests of highways safety in and around the site. 38 In the interests of highways safety in and around the site. 39 In the interests of highways safety in and around the site. Informative Notes: 1 Work should halt immediately and Natural Resources Wales (NRW) contacted for

advice in the event that protected species are discovered during the course of the development. To proceed without seeking the advice of NRW may result in an

offence under the Conservation of Habitats and Species Regulations 2010 and/or the Wildlife & Countryside Act 1981 (as amended) being committed. NRW can be contacted at: Cantref Court, Brecon Road, Abergavenny, NP7 7AX Tel: 01873 737000

2 The Welsh Government have introduced new legislation that will make it mandatory for all developers who wish to communicate with the public sewerage system to obtain an adoption agreement for their sewerage with Dwr Cymru Welsh Water (DCWW). The Welsh Minister's Standards for the construction of sewerage apparatus and an agreement under Section 104 of the Water Industry Act (WIA) 1991 will need to be completed in advance of any authorisation to communicate with the public sewerage system under Section 106 WIA 1991 being granted by DCWW. If a connection is required to the public sewerage system, the developer is advised to contact Dwr Cymru Welsh Water's Developer Services on 0800 917 2652.

3 The timing of site clearance/demolition works should be such as to avoid conflict with the bird nesting season.

4 This planning permission is pursuant to condition precedent conditions. Failure to comply with such conditions without obtaining written approval by the National Park Authority prior to the commencement of development works will render this planning permission invalid and formal enforcement action being taken to regularise the unauthorised development works.

5 Based on the information provided, the applicant will need to obtain a European Protected Species licence from Natural Resources Wales before any works on site commence that may impact upon bats. The granting of planning consent does not negate the need to obtain a licence.