Reserved Matters

Reserved Matters Planning Applications P/2021/0110 and P/2021/0111 pursuant to 16 Conditions on original Planning Application P/2018/0560

Planning Inspectors Report APP/H6955/A/19/3231048 (14 Nov 2019)

Schedule of Conditions (Pages 21-24)

1) Details of the, appearance, landscaping, layout, and scale, (hereinafter called “the reserved matters”) for each phase of development shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority before any development begins in that phase. The development shall be carried out as approved. 

Reason: To comply with the provisions of the Town and Country Planning (Development Management Procedure) (Wales) Order 2012. 

2) The first reserved matters application shall include a plan showing the first phase of development and location of all subsequent phases of development (hereinafter called “the Phasing Plan”). The Phasing Plan shall include the percentage of affordable housing within each phase, which across the phases shall consist of no less than 25% of the total number of dwellings to be built on the site. All subsequent reserved matters applications shall be submitted in accordance with the Phasing Plan as approved. 

Reason: In the interests of a co-ordinated approach to the development of the site. 

3) Any application for approval of the Reserved Matters shall be made to the Local Planning Authority not later than three years from the date of this permission. 

Reason: To comply with Section 92 of the Town and Country Planning Act, 1990. 

4) The development shall begin 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 of the reserved matters to be approved, whichever is the later. 

Reason: To comply with Section 92 of the Town and Country Planning Act, 1990. 

5) The development shall be carried out in accordance with the following approved plans and documents: Drawing No. Plnc-100-37-RLP-01; and Drawing No. Plnc 100-37-SMPA-01 in respect of vehicular and pedestrian access. 

Reason: To define the scope of the planning permission and in the interest of pedestrian and highway safety – UDP Policy GDP1(d) 

6) No development shall commence in any phase until a detailed Arboricultural Method Statement has been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority for that particular phase of development. No development or other operations within that phase shall take place except in strict accordance with the approved Method Statement. The Method Statement shall include: 

1) A specification for tree protection fencing and ground protection measures that comply with British Standard 5837:2012; 

2) A Tree Protection Plan showing the location of the trees to be removed and retained with their crown spreads, root protection areas, construction exclusion zones, and location of protective fencing and ground protection measures accurately plotted; 

3) A full specification for any access, driveway, path (to include paths required by Condition Nos.8 and 9), underground services or wall foundations within retained tree root protection areas or construction exclusion zones, including any related sections and method for avoiding damage to retained trees; 

4) Details of general arboricultural matters including proposed practices with regards to cement mixing, material storage and fires; 

5) Details of the frequency of supervisory visits and procedures for notifying the findings of such visits to the Local Planning Authority; 

6) Method for protecting retained trees during demolition works; 

7) Details of all proposed tree works, including felling and pruning. 

Reason: To ensure the work is carried out to accepted arboricultural practices for the long term wellbeing of trees within/adjacent to the site – UDP Policy EC4. 

7) Development shall not commence until a scheme for the comprehensive and integrated drainage of the site indicating provision for foul water, surface water and land drainage has been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. In accordance with the submitted Flood Consequence Assessment & Drainage Strategy, any scheme must demonstrate compliance with the latest Sustainable Drainage Systems (SuDS) Standards for Wales. Where a SuDS scheme is to be implemented, the submitted details shall: 

1) Provide information about the design storm period and intensity, the method employed to delay and control the surface water discharged from the site and the measures taken to prevent pollution of receiving ground water and/or surface waters; 

2) Specify the responsibilities of each party for the implementation of the SuDS scheme, together with a timetable for that implementation; and, 

3) Provide a timescale for implementation, management and maintenance plan for the lifetime of the development which shall include the arrangements for adoption by any public authority or statutory undertaker and any other arrangements to secure the operation of the scheme throughout its lifetime. 

The development shall thereafter be carried out in strict accordance with the approved scheme. 

Reason: To ensure the propose management of surface water in order to avoid on or off-site flooding – UDP Policy GDP1(i). 

8) Development shall not commence on the land to the north of Rossett Road until a scheme detailing the following has been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority: 

1) Speed limit amendments along Rossett Road; 

2) Pedestrian footway links to Holt Road, Darland View, Trevalyn Hall View and Darland High School; 

3) Provision of a pedestrian footway along the south side of Holt Road; 

4) Bus stop provision; and 

5) Street lighting along the Rossett Road frontage of the site. 

No dwelling shall be occupied on that part of the site until the approved scheme has been implemented in full. 

Reason: To secure safe and convenient means of pedestrian access to the site in the interests of promoting sustainable transport choices – UDP Policy GDP1(d) and (e).

9) Development shall not commence on the land to the south of Rossett Road until a scheme detailing the following has been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority: 

1) Speed limit amendments along Rossett Road; 

2) Pedestrian footway links to Holt Road and Trevalyn Way, 

3) Provision of a pedestrian footway along the south side of Holt Road 

4) Bus stop provision 

5) Street lighting along the Rossett Road frontage of the site 

No dwelling shall be occupied on that part of the site until the approved scheme has been implemented in full. 

Reason: To secure safe and convenient means of pedestrian access to the site in the interests of promoting sustainable transport choices – UDP Policy GDP1(d) and (e). 

10) No development shall commence in a phase until a Construction Method Statement has been submitted to, and approved in writing by, the Local Planning Authority in respect of that particular phase of development. The approved statement shall be adhered to throughout the construction period. The statement shall provide for: 

1) the parking of vehicles of site operatives and visitors; 

2) loading and unloading of plant and materials; 

3) storage of plant and materials used in constructing the development; 

4) an earthwork balance in respect of materials arising from excavations carried out on site, including measures to ensure those materials are re-used on-site; 

5) hours of working. 

Reason: In the interests of minimising disruption arising from the development as well as securing a sustainable use of materials excavated during construction – UDP Policy GDP1(f). 

11) Prior to their first use the vehicular accesses shall provide visibility splays of 2.4 metres x 56 metres in both directions measured to the nearside edge of the adjoining highway. Within these splays there shall be no obstruction in excess of 1 metre in height above the level of the nearside edge of the adjoining highway. The splays shall thereafter be permanently retained clear of any such obstruction to visibility. 

Reason: To ensure that adequate visibility is provided at the proposed point of access to the – UDP Policy GDP1. 

12) The Reserved Matters shall include details of a 3 metre wide combined footway and cycleway that shall be provided along the full length of both frontages of the site with Rossett Road. The combined footways and cycleways shall be provided in accordance with the approved details prior to the first occupation of the dwellings in the respective phase of the development that they are situated within. 

Reason: To secure safe and convenient means of pedestrian access to the site in the interests of promoting sustainable transport choices – UDP Policy GDP1(d) and (e).

13) The Reserved Matters shall include an area or areas of public open space to be provided within each phase, together with a scheme that includes the following details: 

1) the siting, size, layout and appearance of formal play equipped play areas; 

2) hard and soft landscaping of the open space area(s); 

3) the timing of the construction and landscaping of the open space area(s); 

Public open space shall be provided on site within each phase in accordance with the approved scheme and permanently retained thereafter. 

Reason: In the interests of the appearance of the development and the standard of amenity afforded to future occupiers – UDP Policies GDP1(a) and CLF5. 

14) No dwellings in a phase shall be occupied until a Final Travel Plan for that phase has been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The Travel Plan(s) shall include measures to encourage occupiers of the development to walk, cycle and to use local facilities and public transport. 

Reason: To assist future occupiers of the development to make sustainable transport choices – UDP Policy GDP1(e). 

15) No street lighting shall be installed on any part of the site until a lighting scheme has been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The scheme shall include details that demonstrate how the street lighting has been sited and designed so as to minimise the potential impact upon bat species. Street lighting shall thereafter only be installed in accordance with the scheme as approved. 

Reason: To ensure the development takes place without harming statutory protected species – UDP Policy EC6. 

16) This development hereby permitted makes provision for a maximum of 132 dwellings. 

Reason: To define the scope of the planning permission. 

OBJECTION to Statement of Common Ground

Image showing restrictive pedestrian access on Holt Road.

Land to the North and South of Lane Farm Rossett Road Rossett LL120DS

Outline Planning Application P2019/0460 

Outline Planning Application For Residential Development Of Two Parcels Of Land (Northern Parcel For Up To 61 No. Dwellings, Southern Parcel For Up To 71 No. Dwellings), Extension to Community Parking Facility (In Association with Northern Parcel). 

OBJECTION to Statement of Common Ground on Proposed Footway Improvements Along Holt Road 

1.0 Introduction 

This Objection is directed against the Statement of Common Ground between the Highways Officer and the Applicants Highways Engineer. The Indicative scheme does not meet the requirements of the Manual for Streets and therefore cannot be deemed as meeting the original grounds for refusal on the 7th January 2019 in relation to Outline Planning Application P/2018/0560. 

2.0 Indicative Proposal

The Indicative scheme does not show properly the verge widths on Holt Road and assumes that 1.5m can be achieved throughout its proposed length. To justify the lack of a proper survey the scheme has the following caveat on Drawing 0807-04 B “Notes This is not a construction drawing and is for indicative purposes only. The drawing will be subject to change following Local Authority Review and confirmation of Public Highway and third party land boundaries.” 

The indicative scheme does not comply with the requirements of the Manual for Streets and if allowed would not meet the footway dimensions shown on that plan and would place the footway users at risk contrary to UDP GDP1 requirements especially (d) which states “Ensure safe and convenient pedestrian and vehicular access to and from development sites, both on site and in the nearby locality”. The actual footway at its maximum width is 1500mm for a very short length, the remainder is less than this dimension. The roadway verge was surveyed on the 22nd July 2019 and the results of that survey are shown in Appendix 1. 

3.0 Manual for Streets 

The starting point for a footway for any new development is the adopted Manual for Streets. This Manual requires that footways should be a minimum of 2.0m in accordance with Design 

Code Page 34. This is re-iterated on page 69 Paragraph 6.3.22 which states “the minimum unobstructed width for pedestrians should generally be 2.0m. The manual gives guidance on the width of footway requirements for different categories of user. The Statement of Common Ground makes reference to these standards but nowhere does it state that the indicative proposal meets these standards. It is very silent on this point. The guidelines for users is shown in the diagram that follows. It has been drawn to my attention that the reference standards do not recognise the problems faced by a single adult with pushchair and two small children making their way to or from St Peters Primary School. This category of pedestrian is particularly vulnerable on this stretch of roadway and needs as much care and protection as any other special group especially as the 20mph speed limit is not generally observed by users on the way into the village from Holt.  

In summary the Manual for Streets Footway diagram requirements above for classes of pedestrian is: 

  1. Ambulant disability 0.75m  
  2. Wheelchair User 0.9m 
  3. 2 persons with pushchair 1.5m 
  4. 1 person & child 1.2m 

The critical part of the manual is that the route should be un-obstructed throughout its lengthThe indicative proposal cannot deliver these standards or an adequate width throughout and therefore cannot be regarded as satisfactory, neither is the Statement of Common Ground acceptable as it does not promote a safe proposal and can therefore carry no weight in the re-submission process. The fact must not be overlooked that all users at the pinch point at Green Farm Mews have to step into the roadway as the footway is only 600mm wide at this point and cannot be overcome. See Appendix 1.At present all road users and pedestrians on Holt Road are treated similarly and the road has basically remained unaltered for about 100 years, so that no individual is discriminated against. Under these proposals a vulnerable group of pedestrians will be especially at risk along with all pedestrians at the pinch point adjacent to Green Farm Mews. 

4.0 Legislation 

The Planning Authority attention is drawn to the Equality Act 2010 which places a duty on all Public Bodies not to discriminate against any section of the community or disability. The Case Officer in blatantly pushing forward this indicative proposal, places the Local Authority in a position whereby it is actually discriminating against the group it claims it sets out to protect. Such discrimination is unlawful and will place the Local Authority in a position whereby it is likely to be challenged by the Disability Rights Commission. The Local Authority will also place itself wide open to litigation in the event any accident occurring through this ill thought through indicative proposal by promoting a scheme with such road safety implications. The Manual for Streets even highlights this risk of Litigation where a scheme falls short of the required standards. 

5.0 Conclusions 

In summary it is considered that indicative proposal by the Planning Case Officer and the Applicant’s Highways Engineer and reluctantly agreed by WCBC Highways Officer is not a satisfactory solution and totally ignores the requirements of the Manual for Streets and WCBC Policy GDP1. It does not improve the safety of pedestrians on Holt Road. All pedestrians by this proposal need to step into the roadway in contravention of the guidance in the Manual for Streets.  

The scheme has not been properly surveyed and if it was to be accepted as part of the Outline Planning Re-submission then it could not be delivered and rescinding of any Planning Approval would not be possible without costs being incurred for an inappropriate scheme being approved. This indicative scheme is seen as an attempt to undermine the Lawful Decision made by the Planning Committee on the 7th January 2019 and goes beyond any reasonable measure of mitigation.

The proposal places all pedestrians at risk on this section of roadway and the scheme itself would not be approved as a minimum standard for development on a housing estate let alone on the main roadway from Rossett to Holt.  

The resubmission scheme has no more merit than the original scheme and it should be refused on exactly the same grounds as the refusal in January 2019. Namely the Outline Planning Application P/2019/0460 still contravenes the same WCBC Policies as before: 

Footnote 

In making this objection we wish to advise that, amongst other responsibilities an RFG member once worked as a Disability Access Auditor for a number of years all over the UK and at one time acted as an adviser to WCBC on disabled access matters. This unsound and unsafe proposal would invariably attract today the same disapproval comments from any Disability Access Auditor.  

NB In the event of an accident occurring as a result of approval for an unsound indicative proposal we will forward this document to any potential litigant to show negligence on the part of the LPA and Highways Authority. 

Appendix 1