Community-Council.org.ukGwernymynydd Community Council | sitemap | log in

Siglen Ucha

Planning Appeal

The Appeal for the development at Siglen Uchaf has gone to a Public Inquiry. The Appeal will be determined by an Inspector appointed by the Welsh Ministers.

The Hearing will be held in the Village Centre, Gwernymynydd on Tuesday 29th October 2013 starting at 10.00 AM

Comments about the proposed development must be given before 11th September and sent to:

Planning Directorate

Crown Buildings,

Cathays Park,

Cardiff, CF10 3NQ,

telephone number 029 2082 3866. 

You will need to send 3 copies and must quote Appeal Reference: APP/A6835/A/13/2195313.

Note that even if you have already submitted comments when the application was being considered locally, it is advisable still to write to the Planning Directorate, either with a new letter or with a covering note attached to copies of your earlier letter to the County Council. 

Members of the public are free to attend the Hearing and submit comments on the day at the discretion of the Inspector


This is the most recent letter sent by Community Council to the Planning Inspectorate.

Planning Inspectorate
Crown Buildings
Cathays Park
Cardiff
CF10 3NQ

Planning Reference 048850, Appeal Reference APP/A6835/A/13/2195313

Erection of 18 in number of dwellings with associated roads, sewers and open spaces located on Land adjacent to Siglen Ucha, Ruthin Road, Gwernymynydd, Mold, CH7 5LG

2nd September 2013

Dear Sir

As in the previous submitted application to Flintshire County Council, this application in its present form is not appropriate and it does not agree with what is required or needed in Gwernymynydd. Therefore the Members of this Council at its recent meeting emphatically resolved to object to this proposal.

1. This application proposes a residential development on a site which was previously located outside of what was the designated Gwernymynydd Village Envelope; this therefore constituted building in open countryside and breached the concept of a green belt. However the Flintshire County Council’s UDP has now been adopted and therefore the site may be developed but this needs to be done appropriately by design and sympathetically. Comments received from Flintshire County Council’s Planning Services Department in relation to a previous proposed development stated that ‘it is not envisaged that built development would take place in the upper part of the site which would be better utilised as private amenity space. Development would therefore take the form of a block of infill development and sit within the lower slopes of the valley, thereby retaining the character and form of the village’. This proposal by Wainhomes does not take into account the above statement, the Gwernymynydd Community Council respectfully requests that consideration shall be given to those comments given by the Planning Services Department.

2. Access/egress to and from the site is on the busy A 494 Trunk Road and the road is well used by heavy goods vehicles carrying stone from the nearby quarries. The access/egress point is opposite to the Twmpath Lane/Paddock Way, which houses 12 dwellings; it is near to the brow of the hill and a bend resulting in poor vision in both directions along the Trunk Road. The Council is of the opinion that the Welsh Government, Trunk Road Agency would need to be consulted on this proposed development as the amount of traffic seeking access/egress to/from the site would require acceleration/deceleration lanes with respect to the A 494.
3. The proposal is for 18 houses on a small site; this development would result in overcrowding and would be detrimental to the rural character of Gwernymynydd village; the planned development in this location could be viewed as a village in its own right. Also your attention is drawn to the Local Planning Note Number 2, Space Around Dwellings; this guidance was adopted by Flintshire County Council in 2006 and the Council’s approach is set out in the UDP Policy HSG 8e.

4. The contour levels outlined in the development dictate a 6 metre plus height differential between the houses at the east end of the site and the haulage yard and its neighbouring properties. This will result in an unacceptable overlook and lack of privacy situation to those properties. The application proposes that a large retaining wall is to be built at one end of the site; the wall the size of which with a house built on top will completely overshadow the neighbouring property and alter the topography of the village. This proposed design is deemed to be unacceptable. Also the proposed wall would be clearly visible in an AONB and additionally would act as a retaining ‘dam’ and drastically alter the site’s surface water run-off putting neighbouring properties at risk of flooding. A simulated drawing is attached to outline the effect of such a high obtrusive wall will have to the vista to people approaching Gwernymynydd which lies in an AONB and to neighbouring residents and communities.

5. There would be a problem of surface water run-off to neighbouring properties, particularly to the Haulage Yard which already suffers from flooding. The building of 18 houses on the site would exacerbate the problem. The development proposes a controlled surface water
run-off system utilising storage tanks, the application drawings do not show such a system.

6. It is anticipated that there would be a problem with the foul water system, to service an additional 18 houses on an already overstretched main would inevitably cause problems on the existing sewerage system. Proposed sewerage improvements in the Mold area are not scheduled until 2014, the development does not take this into account nor does it allow for a re-alignment of the sewers in Gwernymynydd.

7. The site is near to the AONB, the proposed development would be visually intrusive on the landscape. In this application the developer completely alters the existing landscape to crowd in the 18 houses. The dwellings would tower above Ruthin Road (A 494) and would be completely out of character with the locality.

8. The development does not accommodate an open space/play area facility which is contrary to Flintshire County Council’s planning policy.

9. This Council draws reference to the General Development Consideration of GEN 1, this states that development should not prejudice land or buildings safeguarded for uses or impair the development or use of adjoining land. The proposed development would have a detrimental impact on the neighbouring properties and the existing profitable haulage business. GEN 1 also states that any such development should harmonise with the respective site and its surroundings in terms of the siting, scale, design, layout, use of space, materials to be used, external appearance and landscaping. The Wainhomes proposal ignores this GEN 1 Statement.


The Community Council and residents in the village of Gwernymynydd wish refusal and dismissal of the appeal to develop Siglan Ucha.

Yours faithfully

T. M. Richardson,

Clerk to the Council

Enc.


This is the original letter of objection sent by the Community Council. 

Ref: LEJ/048850, erection of 18 in number of dwellings with associated roads, sewers and open spaces located on land adjacent to Siglen Ucha, Ruthin Road, Gwernymynydd.


With reference to the above application the Council held a public meeting to gain observations and comments from the community, following on from the meeting the Members discussed the proposal and as such resolved to object to the submission.

Councillors Mrs. H. Roberts and K. Hughes offered their apologies for absence to the meeting.

The Members of the Council emphatically resolved to object to this proposal for the following reasons.

1. The application proposes a residential development on a site which lies outside the present designated Gwernymynydd Village Envelope; this constitutes building in open countryside and breaches the concept of a green belt. The Flintshire County Council’s UDP has not yet been adopted and therefore the former statement is still valid. Also comments received from the Planning Services Department in relation to the previous Persimmon proposed development stated that ‘it is not envisaged that built development would take place in the upper part of the site which would be better utilised as private amenity space. Development would therefore take the form of a block of infill development and sit within the lower slopes of the valley, thereby retaining the character and form of the village’. This proposal by Wainhomes does not take into account the Gwernymynydd Village Envelope nor does it consider the comments given by the Planning Services Department.

2. Access/egress to and from the site is on the busy A 494 Trunk Road, there is the hazard of speeding vehicles ignoring the 40 mph limit, the road is well used by heavy goods vehicles carrying stone from the nearby quarries and there have been numerous accidents at this location. The Council again emphasizes this statement that there have been numerous road traffic incidents in this location. The access/egress point is opposite to the Twmpath Lane/Paddock Way, which houses 12 dwellings; it is near to the brow of the hill and a bend resulting in poor vision in both directions along the Trunk Road. The additional vehicle movements that would be caused by the development with its proposed two access/egress points would exacerbate an already hazardous traffic situation. The Council is of the opinion that the Welsh Government, Trunk Road Agency would need to be consulted on this proposed development as the amount of traffic seeking access/egress to/from the site would require acceleration/deceleration lanes with respect to the A 494.

3. The proposal is for 18 houses on a small site; this development would result in overcrowding and would be detrimental to the rural character of Gwernymynydd village; the planned development in this location could be viewed as a village in its own right. The proposed houses are too close together and would result in insufficient space to accommodate the parking of 2 or more cars per household.

Visitors to the proposed houses would only be able to park on the busy A 494 Trunk Road. In addition to this by calculation each of the 18 plots would measure 300 square metres; this is too small a footprint to accommodate the designed houses plus utilities.

4. There would be a problem of surface water run-off to neighbouring properties, particularly to the Haulage Yard which already suffers from flooding. The building of 18 houses would exacerbate the problem.

5. It is anticipated that there would be a problem with the foul water system, to service an additional 18 houses on an already overstretched main would inevitably cause problems on the existing sewers.

6. Concerns are expressed with regard to underlying mine shafts and the stability of the ground area to accommodate the proposed number of houses.

7. The site is near to the AONB, the proposed development would be visually intrusive on the landscape. In this application the developer completely alters the existing landscape to crowd in the 18 houses. The dwellings would tower above Ruthin Road (A 494) and would be completely out of character with the locality.

8. The contour levels outlined in the development dictate a 6 metre plus height differential between the houses at the east end of the site and the haulage yard and its neighbouring properties. This will result in an unacceptable overlook and lack of privacy situation to those properties. The application proposes that a large retaining wall is to be built at one end of the site; the wall the size of which with a house built on top will completely overshadow the neighbouring property and alter the topography of the village. This proposed design is deemed to be unacceptable. Also the proposed wall would be clearly visible in an AONB and additionally would act as a retaining ‘dam’ and drastically alter the site’s surface water run-off putting neighbouring properties at risk of flooding.

9. The application suggests that the proposed development site is a brownfield site, the Council contests this statement, Siglen Ucha is a small holding.

10. The neighbouring Haulage Yard is a flourishing well respected business; the developer’s proposal ignores this statement. The development as such would seriously jeopardize this business.

11. The development does not accommodate an open space/play area facility which is contrary to Flintshire County Council’s planning policy.

12. This Council draws reference to the General Development Consideration of GEN 1, this states that development should not prejudice land or buildings safeguarded for uses or impair the development or use of adjoining land. The proposed development would have a detrimental impact on the neighbouring properties and the existing profitable haulage business. GEN 1 also states that any such development should harmonise with the respective site and its surroundings in terms of the siting, scale, design, layout, use of space, materials to be used, external appearance and landscaping. The Wainhomes proposal ignores this GEN 1 Statement.

13. With reference to Flintshire County Council’s Policy for affordable housing to be included in development proposals, this submission does not take this statement into consideration, the Wainhomes proposed development only outlines executive type houses.
2011;

14. The Council respectfully requests that its observations on the proposal be earnestly considered, that the decision process is not undertaken by delegated powers and that a site visit by the respective committee is undertaken to view the proposed development taking into account the objections of this Council. This application needs to be fully examined with the views of the local community taken to heart as this Council is voicing what the village is saying.

 

Further correspondence and letters from other residents can be found on the guestbook pages




Page Last Updated - 02/09/2013
Click for Map