Carmarthenshire LDP
Site Assessment Proforma
1. Site Details
Ref:
GA3/h1
Site Ref (where applicable):
Location:
North End Garage, Bonllwyn, Ammanford
Site Area (Ha):
Existing Use*
Residential under
construction
Potential Use*
Residential
*if candidate site as proposed by respondent
2. Land Use/ Planning History
UDP allocation?
Relevant Planning History
E/14873 – Full Planning for 15 units granted on 1/04/2010.
3. Phase 1 – Identification of Strategic Sites
Is the Site Strategic?
Yes (Site proceeds to Phase 2b)
No
x
(Site proceeds to Phase 2a as a Non-Strategic Site)
The site is not considered to be strategic in nature for the following reasons:
not located in a settlement defined as a Growth Area
x
not of an appropriate size
not situated at a key location in terms of transport and accessibility
x
the site is not critical to the delivery of the strategy
This does not preclude the site’s consideration as a Non-Strategic Site.
Expanded reasons for non identification of the site as strategic are available.
4. Phase 2a – Initial Analysis
Q.1
x
Land use allocation specific or non allocation related?
Allocation (proceeds to Q.2)
Non allocation (Considered through LDP policy)
Q.2
x
Within or immediately adjoining an identified settlement in the Preferred Strategy?
Yes (Site proceeds to Q.3)
No (Site is dismissed)
Q.3
x
If residential, can the site accommodate 5 or more houses (i.e. is >0.16ha in size)?
Yes (Site proceeds to Phase 2b)
No Considered under the review of Development Limits)
Comments
5. Phase 2b – Further Analysis
Q.4 Is the site located within or adjacent to any of the following?
(If yes, site does not proceed except where potential for mitigation can be demonstrated)
No
Yes
Partly
Adjacent
KEY DETERMINANTS
Nature and Landscape Conservation
Ramsar Site
x
Special Protection Area (SPA)
x
Special Area of Conservation (SAC)
x
National Nature Reserve (NNR)
x
Site of Special Scientific Interest (SSSI)
x
Common Land or Registered Village Green
x
Cultural Heritage
Scheduled Ancient Monument or remains of
national importance
Flooding
TAN 15 Development Advice Maps
x
x
EA Flood Map - nat_floodzone3
Minerals
Mineral buffer zone
x
x
Q.5 Would development of the site represent or result in:
Tandem development
No
x
Ribbon development
x
Coalescence
x
Development unrelated to the existing urban form
x
Sporadic & fragmented pattern of development (either constitute or contribute to)
x
An illogical extension to the settlement
x
Conflicts with existing land use or known plans and strategies
x
A Detrimental Impact on the Character and Setting of the settlement or its features
(including views and glimpses both into and out of the settlement)
A loss of areas of open space and amenity value
x
General Planning Principles
Yes
x
Comments
Q.6 Additional considerations:
No
General
Yes
?
No
Does the site have an available access point with adequate visibility?
Would development at the site impact upon the highway network and
increase the risk to highway safety?
Is it Previously Developed Land?
Yes
x
?
x
x
Soil / Agricultural Land Quality
Does the site contain high carbon soil e.g. peat?
x
Does the site contain high quality agricultural land?
x
Q.7 Is the site located within or related to any of the following?:
No
Nature and Landscape Conservation
Local Nature Reserves (LNR)
Regionally
Important
Geological
Geomorphological Sites (RIGS)
Cultural Heritage
Conservation Area
Yes
Partly
Adjacent
x
/
x
x
Q.8 Would development at the site impact upon species/habitats of high importance? (refer
to Biodiversity/Connectivity Study)
Yes
x
No
Unknown
Q.9 Accessibility - Is the site within a settlement with access to, or within easy reach of, the
following:
No
Yes
Rail network
x
Highway network (A or B roads)
x
Public transport
x
Cycle ways and/or footpaths
x
Q.10 Site Deliverability - Are there any infrastructure or other issues on the site that would affect
its deliverability during the Plan period.
Yes
x
No
Unknown
Comments
6. Additional Comments
Comments
National Planning Policy is statutorily underpinned by the principle of sustainable development and
accordingly the underlying ethos of the emerging Carmarthenshire Local Development Plan has
been to promote a settlement pattern that is in compliance with the principles of sustainability.
The Local Planning Authority consider that the designation of the subject site is appropriate to
ensure that sufficient land has been allocated within the LDP for residential development purposes
in accordance with Planning Policy Wales.
The site has a number of advantages in terms of retention as a residential allocation – close to the
local amenities and services of the settlement, integrated to the existing residential built form and
with good access and highway links. In planning terms the site offers an appropriate option in
terms of location and lack of harm to the amenity and character of the settlement.
Furthermore, the site has full planning permission for 15 residential units.
available land can be put forward as a residential allocation within the LDP.
In conclusion this
The site has been subject to the SA process, details of which are highlighted in Section 7, below.
Note: Reference should be made to the guidance notes accompanying this proforma when
interpreting its contents.
7. Sustainability Appraisal
Score:
166
Score Summary Count
Threats
Issues
Low
5
Medium
0
High
4
None of note. See relevant score card.
No. Prospective Opportunities
6
1
20
Opportunities:
Further
Comments
Site has a good, positive score. See score card for further detail. No notable
Issues. Site represents a consented commitment.
Carmarthenshire LDP
Site Assessment Proforma
1. Site Details
Ref:
GA3/h2
Site Ref (where applicable):
Location:
Park Henri Lane, Ammanford
Site Area (Ha):
Existing Use*
Vacant, former caravan site
Potential Use*
Residential
*if candidate site as proposed by respondent
2. Land Use/ Planning History
UDP allocation?
Part of Residential Allocation (GR3/12)
Relevant Planning History
E/15940 – Planning Permission for 9 Dwellings – Granted 28/6/07
E/17297 – Planning Permission Substitution of house types – Granted 24/10/07
3. Phase 1 – Identification of Strategic Sites
Is the Site Strategic?
Yes (Site proceeds to Phase 2b)
No
x
(Site proceeds to Phase 2a as a Non-Strategic Site)
The site is not considered to be strategic in nature for the following reasons:
not located in a settlement defined as a Growth Area
x
not of an appropriate size
x
not situated at a key location in terms of transport and accessibility
x
the site is not critical to the delivery of the strategy
This does not preclude the site’s consideration as a Non-Strategic Site.
Expanded reasons for non identification of the site as strategic are available.
4. Phase 2a – Initial Analysis
Q.1
x
Land use allocation specific or non allocation related?
Allocation (proceeds to Q.2)
Non allocation (Considered through LDP policy)
Q.2
x
Within or immediately adjoining an identified settlement in the Preferred Strategy?
Yes (Site proceeds to Q.3)
No (Site is dismissed)
Q.3
x
If residential, can the site accommodate 5 or more houses (i.e. is >0.16ha in size)?
Yes (Site proceeds to Phase 2b)
No Considered under the review of Development Limits)
Comments
5. Phase 2b – Further Analysis
Q.4 Is the site located within or adjacent to any of the following?
(If yes, site does not proceed except where potential for mitigation can be demonstrated)
No
Yes
Partly
Adjacent
KEY DETERMINANTS
Nature and Landscape Conservation
Ramsar Site
x
Special Protection Area (SPA)
x
Special Area of Conservation (SAC)
x
National Nature Reserve (NNR)
x
Site of Special Scientific Interest (SSSI)
x
Common Land or Registered Village Green
x
Cultural Heritage
Scheduled Ancient Monument or remains of
national importance
Flooding
TAN 15 Development Advice Maps
x
x
EA Flood Map - nat_floodzone3
Minerals
Mineral buffer zone
x
x
Q.5 Would development of the site represent or result in:
Tandem development
No
x
Ribbon development
x
Coalescence
x
Development unrelated to the existing urban form
x
Sporadic & fragmented pattern of development (either constitute or contribute to)
x
An illogical extension to the settlement
x
Conflicts with existing land use or known plans and strategies
x
A Detrimental Impact on the Character and Setting of the settlement or its features
(including views and glimpses both into and out of the settlement)
A loss of areas of open space and amenity value
x
General Planning Principles
Yes
x
Comments
Q.6 Additional considerations:
No
General
Yes
?
No
Does the site have an available access point with adequate visibility?
Would development at the site impact upon the highway network and
increase the risk to highway safety?
Is it Previously Developed Land?
Yes
x
?
x
x
Soil / Agricultural Land Quality
Does the site contain high carbon soil e.g. peat?
x
Does the site contain high quality agricultural land?
x
Q.7 Is the site located within or related to any of the following?:
No
Nature and Landscape Conservation
Local Nature Reserves (LNR)
Regionally
Important
Geological
Geomorphological Sites (RIGS)
Cultural Heritage
Conservation Area
Yes
Partly
Adjacent
x
/
x
x
Q.8 Would development at the site impact upon species/habitats of high importance? (refer
to Biodiversity/Connectivity Study)
Yes
x
No
Unknown
Q.9 Accessibility - Is the site within a settlement with access to, or within easy reach of, the
following:
No
Yes
Rail network
x
Highway network (A or B roads)
x
Public transport
x
Cycle ways and/or footpaths
x
Q.10 Site Deliverability - Are there any infrastructure or other issues on the site that would affect
its deliverability during the Plan period.
Yes
x
No
Unknown
Comments
6. Additional Comments
Comments
National Planning Policy is statutorily underpinned by the principle of sustainable development and
accordingly the underlying ethos of the emerging Carmarthenshire Local Development Plan has
been to promote a settlement pattern that is in compliance with the principles of sustainability.
The site is located in Ammanford in close proximity to the amenities and services available. The
site represents a sustainable location.
The site, which was formerly used as caravan park, represents a logical extension to the current
urban form in a manner which would not negatively impact upon the character and amenity of the
area.
In the interests of continuity and consistency it is considered prudent given the current valid
permission to allocate the site for residential development.
It is noted that part of the site is located within a C2 flood risk area. Matters relating to flood risk
were considered at application stage and the extent of the site has been amended accordingly.
Much of the flood risk area (which was included as part of the allocation in the UDP) has now been
excluded from allocation.
Note: Reference should be made to the guidance notes accompanying this proforma when
interpreting its contents.
7. Sustainability Appraisal
Score:
121
Score Summary Count
Threats
Issues
Low
5
Medium
1
High
4
None of note. See relevant score card.
No. Prospective Opportunities
1
8
13
Opportunities:
Further
Comments
Site has a good, positive score. See score card for further detail. No notable
Issues. The site has a current valid planning permission.
Carmarthenshire LDP
Site Assessment Proforma
1. Site Details
Ref:
GA3/h3
Location:
Myddynfych Farm
Site Ref (where applicable):
Site Area (Ha):
Existing Use*
Agricultural
Potential Use*
Residential
*if candidate site as proposed by respondent
2. Land Use/ Planning History
UDP allocation?
Residential Allocation (GR3/1)
Relevant Planning History
E/16691 – PROPOSED RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT COMPRISING 93 NO DWELLINGS AND
ASSOCIATED INFRASTRUCTURE WORKS (RESERVED MATTERS TO AM/02824) – Granted
31/1/08
E/16693 – RESERVED MATTERS APPLICATION – RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT (ORIGINAL
OUTLINE PERMISSION AM/02824 AS AMENDED BY E/13004). WITHDRAWN 16/7/07
E/18661 – FULL PLANNING APPLICATION – AMENDMENT TO PREVIOUS APPLICATION
(E/16691 APPROVED 31.01.08) TO CHANGE TO HOUSE TYPES OF 45 UNITS OF THE 93
PREVIOUSLY APPROVED – FULL GRANTED 19/6/08
E/21055 – FULL PLANNING APPLICATION – SUBSTITUTION OF 13 NO OPEN MARKET
DWELLINGS WITH 14 NO SOCIAL RENTED BUNGALOWS – FULL GRANTED 17/7/09
E/21668 – FULL PLANNING APPLICATION FOR 28 DWELLINGS – PENDING AT TIME OF LDP
DEPOSIT.
3. Phase 1 – Identification of Strategic Sites
Is the Site Strategic?
Yes (Site proceeds to Phase 2b)
x
No
(Site proceeds to Phase 2a as a Non-Strategic Site)
The site is not considered to be strategic in nature for the following reasons:
not located in a settlement defined as a Growth Area
x
not of an appropriate size
x
not situated at a key location in terms of transport and accessibility
x
the site is not critical to the delivery of the strategy
This does not preclude the site’s consideration as a Non-Strategic Site.
Expanded reasons for non identification of the site as strategic are available.
4. Phase 2a – Initial Analysis
Q.1
x
Land use allocation specific or non allocation related?
Allocation (proceeds to Q.2)
Non allocation (Considered through LDP policy)
Q.2
x
Within or immediately adjoining an identified settlement in the Preferred Strategy?
Yes (Site proceeds to Q.3)
No (Site is dismissed)
Q.3
x
If residential, can the site accommodate 5 or more houses (i.e. is >0.16ha in size)?
Yes (Site proceeds to Phase 2b)
No Considered under the review of Development Limits)
Comments
5. Phase 2b – Further Analysis
Q.4 Is the site located within or adjacent to any of the following?
(If yes, site does not proceed except where potential for mitigation can be demonstrated)
No
Yes
Partly
Adjacent
KEY DETERMINANTS
Nature and Landscape Conservation
Ramsar Site
x
Special Protection Area (SPA)
x
Special Area of Conservation (SAC)
x
National Nature Reserve (NNR)
x
Site of Special Scientific Interest (SSSI)
x
Common Land or Registered Village Green
x
Cultural Heritage
Scheduled Ancient Monument or remains of
national importance
Flooding
TAN 15 Development Advice Maps
x
x
EA Flood Map - nat_floodzone3
Minerals
Mineral buffer zone
x
x
Q.5 Would development of the site represent or result in:
Tandem development
No
x
Ribbon development
x
Coalescence
x
Development unrelated to the existing urban form
x
Sporadic & fragmented pattern of development (either constitute or contribute to)
x
An illogical extension to the settlement
x
Conflicts with existing land use or known plans and strategies
x
A Detrimental Impact on the Character and Setting of the settlement or its features
(including views and glimpses both into and out of the settlement)
A loss of areas of open space and amenity value
x
General Planning Principles
x
Yes
Comments
A very small part is located within a C2 flood risk area.
Q.6 Additional considerations:
No
Yes
?
General
x
Does the site have an available access point with adequate visibility?
Would development at the site impact upon the highway network and
increase the risk to highway safety?
Is it Previously Developed Land?
x
x
Soil / Agricultural Land Quality
Does the site contain high carbon soil e.g. peat?
x
Does the site contain high quality agricultural land?
x
Q.7 Is the site located within or related to any of the following?:
No
Nature and Landscape Conservation
Local Nature Reserves (LNR)
Regionally
Important
Geological
Geomorphological Sites (RIGS)
Cultural Heritage
Conservation Area
Yes
Partly
Adjacent
x
/
x
x
Q.8 Would development at the site impact upon species/habitats of high importance? (refer
to Biodiversity/Connectivity Study)
Yes
x
No
Unknown
Q.9 Accessibility - Is the site within a settlement with access to, or within easy reach of, the
following:
No
Yes
Rail network
x
Highway network (A or B roads)
x
Public transport
x
Cycle ways and/or footpaths
x
Q.10 Site Deliverability - Are there any infrastructure or other issues on the site that would affect
its deliverability during the Plan period.
Yes
x
No
Unknown
Comments
The treatment works are unlikely to be able to cope with an additional 600+ properties and there are no
improvements planned within AMP5. There are currently no significant water body issues. However, your
Authority must ensure that this development will not cause deterioration of the water environment thus
impacting on the Water Framework Directive classification.
The EA recommends consultation with DCWW regarding possible feasibility studies at the works to ensure
hydraulic and biological capacity and possible phasing of development.
6. Additional Comments
Comments
The site is located on the outskirts of Ammanford with its location within the growth area and its
relatively close proximity to amenities and services available enhances the site sustainability
credentials.
It represents a Greenfield site with a consent for 93 dwellings which is currently under construction
with the housing land availability study indicating that 13 units have been completed by the 1st April
2009. These contribute to the overall land supply. It is noted that the southern edge of this site is
affected by flood risk however the site has been approved and has commenced.
The northern portion of the site does not form part of the consented area with an application for 28
units pending. This represents a logical conclusion to development within this area and an
appropriate extension to the existing consented site.
The site has been subject to the SA process, details of which are highlighted in Section 7, below.
Respnse to EA comments:
It is noted that part of the northern portion of the site is located within a C2 flood risk area. Matters
pertaining to flood risk and hydrology are subject to detailed consideration as part of the current
planning application for 28 units. However, it might be necessary to trim back the allocation to
exclude all the area affected by C2 as part of the focussed changes.
The potential for capacity issues at the Garnswllt WWTW is noted however
discussions/consultations remain on going with Dwr Cymru which together with appropriate
phasing etc does not preclude deliverability during the plan period. It is also noted that there is
currently potential capacity and that the issue relates to the level of any future development.
There are currently no significant water body issues. Policy EP1 provides for the consideration of
proposals where they relate to impact on water quality and in relation to matters of environmental
capacity. Consequently any proposals will be required to satisfy its provisions.
Reference will need to be made to policy EP3 and the requirement for SuDS.
Note: Reference should be made to the guidance notes accompanying this proforma when
interpreting its contents.
7. Sustainability Appraisal
Score:
181
Score Summary Count
Threats
Issues
Opportunities:
Low
5
Medium
1
High
1
None of note. See relevant score card.
No. Prospective Opportunities
6
3
18
Further
Comments
Site has a good, positive score. See score card for further detail. No notable
Issues. Part of the site represents a consented commitment.
Carmarthenshire LDP
Site Assessment Proforma
1. Site Details
Ref:
GA3/h4
Location:
N. Church Street
Site Ref (where applicable):
Site Area (Ha):
Existing Use*
Vacant – greenfield & scrub
Potential Use*
Residential
*if candidate site as proposed by respondent
2. Land Use/ Planning History
UDP allocation?
Part of Residential Allocation (GR3/2)
Relevant Planning History
No recent planning history, however, planning permission is extant by virtue of permission
2675/76.
3. Phase 1 – Identification of Strategic Sites
Is the Site Strategic?
Yes (Site proceeds to Phase 2b)
No
x
(Site proceeds to Phase 2a as a Non-Strategic Site)
The site is not considered to be strategic in nature for the following reasons:
not located in a settlement defined as a Growth Area
x
not of an appropriate size
x
not situated at a key location in terms of transport and accessibility
x
the site is not critical to the delivery of the strategy
This does not preclude the site’s consideration as a Non-Strategic Site.
Expanded reasons for non identification of the site as strategic are available.
4. Phase 2a – Initial Analysis
Q.1
x
Land use allocation specific or non allocation related?
Allocation (proceeds to Q.2)
Non allocation (Considered through LDP policy)
Q.2
x
Within or immediately adjoining an identified settlement in the Preferred Strategy?
Yes (Site proceeds to Q.3)
No (Site is dismissed)
Q.3
x
If residential, can the site accommodate 5 or more houses (i.e. is >0.16ha in size)?
Yes (Site proceeds to Phase 2b)
No Considered under the review of Development Limits)
Comments
5. Phase 2b – Further Analysis
Q.4 Is the site located within or adjacent to any of the following?
(If yes, site does not proceed except where potential for mitigation can be demonstrated)
No
Yes
Partly
Adjacent
KEY DETERMINANTS
Nature and Landscape Conservation
Ramsar Site
x
Special Protection Area (SPA)
x
Special Area of Conservation (SAC)
x
National Nature Reserve (NNR)
x
Site of Special Scientific Interest (SSSI)
x
Common Land or Registered Village Green
x
Cultural Heritage
Scheduled Ancient Monument or remains of
national importance
Flooding
TAN 15 Development Advice Maps
x
x
EA Flood Map - nat_floodzone3
x
Minerals
Mineral buffer zone
x
Q.5 Would development of the site represent or result in:
Tandem development
No
x
Ribbon development
x
Coalescence
x
Development unrelated to the existing urban form
x
Sporadic & fragmented pattern of development (either constitute or contribute to)
x
An illogical extension to the settlement
x
Conflicts with existing land use or known plans and strategies
x
A Detrimental Impact on the Character and Setting of the settlement or its features
(including views and glimpses both into and out of the settlement)
A loss of areas of open space and amenity value
x
General Planning Principles
Yes
x
Comments
Q.6 Additional considerations:
No
General
Yes
?
No
Does the site have an available access point with adequate visibility?
Would development at the site impact upon the highway network and
increase the risk to highway safety?
Is it Previously Developed Land?
Yes
x
?
x
x
Soil / Agricultural Land Quality
Does the site contain high carbon soil e.g. peat?
x
Does the site contain high quality agricultural land?
x
Q.7 Is the site located within or related to any of the following?:
No
Nature and Landscape Conservation
Local Nature Reserves (LNR)
Regionally
Important
Geological
Geomorphological Sites (RIGS)
Cultural Heritage
Conservation Area
Yes
Partly
Adjacent
x
/
x
x
Q.8 Would development at the site impact upon species/habitats of high importance? (refer
to Biodiversity/Connectivity Study)
Yes
No
x
Unknown
Q.9 Accessibility - Is the site within a settlement with access to, or within easy reach of, the
following:
No
Yes
Rail network
x
Highway network (A or B roads)
x
Public transport
x
Cycle ways and/or footpaths
x
Q.10 Site Deliverability - Are there any infrastructure or other issues on the site that would affect
its deliverability during the Plan period.
Yes
x
No
Unknown
Comments
The County Ecologist highlights that the site has potential ecological interest.
6. Additional Comments
Comments
The site is located in Ammanford in close proximity to the amenities and services available. The
site represents a sustainable location.
The site represents a logical extension to the current developments and would be wholly
compatible with the current urban form in a manner which would not negatively impact upon the
character and amenity of the area.
The site has been subject to the SA process, details of which are highlighted in Section 7, below.
Response to TOG comments:
The comments of the County ecologist on the potential qualities of the site as well as that of
neighbouring sites are noted. The delivery of the site will need to have due regard to any
biodiversity value both in terms of its design and extent with due regard needing to be paid to
policy EQ4 and habitat areas incorporated as necessary.
It is considered prudent given the relationship of the site to the urban form to retain its allocation,
however it is accepted that the extent of any development would need to have regard to its
potential in nature conservation terms.
The potential for capacity issues at the Garnswllt WWTW is noted however
discussions/consultations remain on going with Dwr Cymru which together with appropriate
phasing etc does not preclude deliverability during the plan period. It is also noted that there is
currently potential capacity and that the issue relates to the level of any future development.
There are currently no significant water body issues. Policy EP1 provides for the consideration of
proposals where they relate to impact on water quality and in relation to matters of environmental
capacity. Consequently any proposals will be required to satisfy its provisions.
Reference will need to be made to policy EP3 and the requirement for SuDS.
The EA highlights that the site is close to a 1 in 1000 fluvial flood plain and state that a FCA may
be required at the time of a planning application.
Note: Reference should be made to the guidance notes accompanying this proforma when
interpreting its contents.
7. Sustainability Appraisal
Score:
261
Score Summary Count
Threats
Low
Medium
High
Issues
7
2
1
No. Prospective Opportunities
18
16
19
None of note.
Opportunities:
Further
Comments
Site has a good, positive score. See score card for further detail. No notable
Issues. Site has an extant planning consent.
Carmarthenshire LDP
Site Assessment Proforma
1. Site Details
Ref:
GA3/h5
Site Ref (where applicable):
Location:
46-50 College Street
Site Area (Ha):
Existing Use*
Vacant
Potential Use*
Residential
*if candidate site as proposed by respondent
2. Land Use/ Planning History
UDP allocation?
Relevant Planning History
E/12424 – full planning for 18 flats refused, upheld on appeal 7/1/08 (APP 702).
E/17907 – full planning for 9 residential units and associated management unit withdrawn 15/1/08.
3. Phase 1 – Identification of Strategic Sites
Is the Site Strategic?
Yes (Site proceeds to Phase 2b)
No
x
(Site proceeds to Phase 2a as a Non-Strategic Site)
The site is not considered to be strategic in nature for the following reasons:
not located in a settlement defined as a Growth Area
x
not of an appropriate size
not situated at a key location in terms of transport and accessibility
x
the site is not critical to the delivery of the strategy
This does not preclude the site’s consideration as a Non-Strategic Site.
Expanded reasons for non identification of the site as strategic are available.
4. Phase 2a – Initial Analysis
Q.1
x
Land use allocation specific or non allocation related?
Allocation (proceeds to Q.2)
Non allocation (Considered through LDP policy)
Q.2
x
Within or immediately adjoining an identified settlement in the Preferred Strategy?
Yes (Site proceeds to Q.3)
No (Site is dismissed)
Q.3
x
If residential, can the site accommodate 5 or more houses (i.e. is >0.16ha in size)?
Yes (Site proceeds to Phase 2b)
No Considered under the review of Development Limits)
Comments
5. Phase 2b – Further Analysis
Q.4 Is the site located within or adjacent to any of the following?
(If yes, site does not proceed except where potential for mitigation can be demonstrated)
No
Yes
Partly
Adjacent
KEY DETERMINANTS
Nature and Landscape Conservation
Ramsar Site
x
Special Protection Area (SPA)
x
Special Area of Conservation (SAC)
x
National Nature Reserve (NNR)
x
Site of Special Scientific Interest (SSSI)
x
Common Land or Registered Village Green
x
Cultural Heritage
Scheduled Ancient Monument or remains of
national importance
Flooding
TAN 15 Development Advice Maps
x
x
EA Flood Map - nat_floodzone3
x
Minerals
Mineral buffer zone
x
Q.5 Would development of the site represent or result in:
Tandem development
No
x
Ribbon development
x
Coalescence
x
Development unrelated to the existing urban form
x
Sporadic & fragmented pattern of development (either constitute or contribute to)
x
An illogical extension to the settlement
x
Conflicts with existing land use or known plans and strategies
x
A Detrimental Impact on the Character and Setting of the settlement or its features
(including views and glimpses both into and out of the settlement)
A loss of areas of open space and amenity value
x
General Planning Principles
Yes
x
Comments
Q.6 Additional considerations:
No
General
Yes
?
No
Does the site have an available access point with adequate visibility?
Would development at the site impact upon the highway network and
increase the risk to highway safety?
Is it Previously Developed Land?
Yes
x
?
x
x
Soil / Agricultural Land Quality
Does the site contain high carbon soil e.g. peat?
x
Does the site contain high quality agricultural land?
x
Q.7 Is the site located within or related to any of the following?:
No
Nature and Landscape Conservation
Local Nature Reserves (LNR)
Regionally
Important
Geological
Geomorphological Sites (RIGS)
Cultural Heritage
Conservation Area
Yes
Partly
Adjacent
x
/
x
x
Q.8 Would development at the site impact upon species/habitats of high importance? (refer
to Biodiversity/Connectivity Study)
Yes
x
No
Unknown
Q.9 Accessibility - Is the site within a settlement with access to, or within easy reach of, the
following:
No
Yes
Rail network
x
Highway network (A or B roads)
x
Public transport
x
Cycle ways and/or footpaths
x
Q.10 Site Deliverability - Are there any infrastructure or other issues on the site that would affect
its deliverability during the Plan period.
Yes
x
No
Unknown
Comments
6. Additional Comments
Comments
National Planning Policy is statutorily underpinned by the principle of sustainable development and
accordingly the underlying ethos of the emerging Carmarthenshire Local Development Plan has
been to promote a settlement pattern that is in compliance with the principles of sustainability.
The Local Planning Authority consider that the designation of the subject site is appropriate to
ensure that sufficient land has been allocated within the LDP for residential development purposes
in accordance with Planning Policy Wales.
The site has a number of advantages in terms of retention as a residential allocation – close to the
local amenities and services of the settlement, integrated to the existing residential built form and
with good access and highway links. In planning terms the site offers an appropriate option in
terms of location and lack of harm to the amenity and character of the settlement.
Furthermore, the site has full planning permission for 18 flats. In conclusion this available land can
be put forward as a residential allocation within the LDP.
The site has been subject to the SA process, details of which are highlighted in Section 7, below.
Note: Reference should be made to the guidance notes accompanying this proforma when
interpreting its contents.
7. Sustainability Appraisal
Score:
276
Score Summary Count
Threats
Issues
Low
6
Medium
1
High
1
None of note. See relevant score card.
No. Prospective Opportunities
17
20
18
Opportunities:
Further
Comments
Site has a good, positive score. See score card for further detail. No notable
Issues. Site represents a consented commitment.
Carmarthenshire LDP
Site Assessment Proforma
1. Site Details
Ref:
GA3/h6
Site Ref (where applicable):
Location:
Former Police Station
Site Area (Ha):
Existing Use*
Vacant
Potential Use*
Residential
*if candidate site as proposed by respondent
2. Land Use/ Planning History
UDP allocation?
Part of Planning and Development Brief (PDB26)
Relevant Planning History
E/08582 – Planning application for redevelopment of vacant site to provide hotel, restaurant and
function space with ancillary accommodation. – Withdrawn
E/10762 – Full Planning Permission Granted 22/2/07 - CONSTRUCTION OF 12 SELF
CONTAINED FLATS OVER 4 OFFICES
3. Phase 1 – Identification of Strategic Sites
Is the Site Strategic?
Yes (Site proceeds to Phase 2b)
No
x
(Site proceeds to Phase 2a as a Non-Strategic Site)
The site is not considered to be strategic in nature for the following reasons:
not located in a settlement defined as a Growth Area
x
not of an appropriate size
not situated at a key location in terms of transport and accessibility
x
the site is not critical to the delivery of the strategy
This does not preclude the site’s consideration as a Non-Strategic Site.
Expanded reasons for non identification of the site as strategic are available.
4. Phase 2a – Initial Analysis
Q.1
x
Land use allocation specific or non allocation related?
Allocation (proceeds to Q.2)
Non allocation (Considered through LDP policy)
Q.2
x
Within or immediately adjoining an identified settlement in the Preferred Strategy?
Yes (Site proceeds to Q.3)
No (Site is dismissed)
Q.3
x
If residential, can the site accommodate 5 or more houses (i.e. is >0.16ha in size)?
Yes (Site proceeds to Phase 2b)
No Considered under the review of Development Limits)
Comments
5. Phase 2b – Further Analysis
Q.4 Is the site located within or adjacent to any of the following?
(If yes, site does not proceed except where potential for mitigation can be demonstrated)
No
Yes
Partly
Adjacent
KEY DETERMINANTS
Nature and Landscape Conservation
Ramsar Site
x
Special Protection Area (SPA)
x
Special Area of Conservation (SAC)
x
National Nature Reserve (NNR)
x
Site of Special Scientific Interest (SSSI)
x
Common Land or Registered Village Green
x
Cultural Heritage
Scheduled Ancient Monument or remains of
national importance
Flooding
TAN 15 Development Advice Maps
x
x
EA Flood Map - nat_floodzone3
x
Minerals
Mineral buffer zone
x
Q.5 Would development of the site represent or result in:
Tandem development
No
x
Ribbon development
x
Coalescence
x
Development unrelated to the existing urban form
x
Sporadic & fragmented pattern of development (either constitute or contribute to)
x
An illogical extension to the settlement
x
Conflicts with existing land use or known plans and strategies
x
A Detrimental Impact on the Character and Setting of the settlement or its features
(including views and glimpses both into and out of the settlement)
A loss of areas of open space and amenity value
x
General Planning Principles
Yes
x
Comments
Q.6 Additional considerations:
No
General
Yes
?
No
Does the site have an available access point with adequate visibility?
Would development at the site impact upon the highway network and
increase the risk to highway safety?
Is it Previously Developed Land?
Yes
x
?
x
x
Soil / Agricultural Land Quality
Does the site contain high carbon soil e.g. peat?
x
Does the site contain high quality agricultural land?
x
Q.7 Is the site located within or related to any of the following?:
No
Nature and Landscape Conservation
Local Nature Reserves (LNR)
Regionally
Important
Geological
Geomorphological Sites (RIGS)
Cultural Heritage
Conservation Area
Yes
Partly
Adjacent
x
/
x
x
Q.8 Would development at the site impact upon species/habitats of high importance? (refer
to Biodiversity/Connectivity Study)
Yes
x
No
Unknown
Q.9 Accessibility - Is the site within a settlement with access to, or within easy reach of, the
following:
No
Yes
Rail network
x
Highway network (A or B roads)
x
Public transport
x
Cycle ways and/or footpaths
x
Q.10 Site Deliverability - Are there any infrastructure or other issues on the site that would affect
its deliverability during the Plan period.
Yes
x
No
Unknown
Comments
6. Additional Comments
Comments
This town centre site has remained vacant and derelict since the demolition of the former Police
Station with no development proposals having proceeded beyond that of a planning application.
Anecdotally this has largely been attributed to the site ownership difficulties which at the time of
writing the site is believed to be in the hands of receivers. Its town centre location and its
previously developed status presents for numerous opportunities and as such is an important
regeneration scheme for Ammanford Town Centre. This potential, coupled with the opportunity for
further flexibility following the decision to close the adjacent Ammanford Court House, enhances its
developability by providing additional scope in terms of the extent of the site.
The most recent consent for the site was focused primarily around its potential for residential
development albeit with an element of office use. In proposing the site for allocation within the
LDP it is anticipated that residential will be the principle activity and that it represents the most
appropriate use given the increasing peripherality of the site in terms of the towns retail centre.
As stated the site is located in the centre of Ammanford with excellent sustainable credentials and
its regeneration would provide for the development of a site at the heart of the settlements urban
form. It is well related to all key facilities and services and represents an appropriate site for a
residential allocation and inclusion within the LDP.
Subject to matters of ownership being resolved there are no fundamental obstacles to the sites
deliverability.
Response to TOG comments:
Only comments from the EA were received in respect of this site.
The potential for capacity issues at the Garnswllt WWTW is noted however
discussions/consultations remain on going with Dwr Cymru which together with appropriate
phasing etc does not preclude deliverability during the plan period. It is also noted that there is
currently potential capacity and that the issue relates to the level of any future development.
There are currently no significant water body issues. Policy EP1 provides for the consideration of
proposals where they relate to impact on water quality and in relation to matters of environmental
capacity. Consequently any proposals will be required to satisfy its provisions.
Reference will need to be made to policy EP3 and the requirement for SuDS.
Note: Reference should be made to the guidance notes accompanying this proforma when
interpreting its contents.
7. Sustainability Appraisal
Score:
293
Score Summary Count
Threats
Issues
Low
5
Medium
2
High
1
None of note. See relevant score card.
No. Prospective Opportunities
13
23
19
Opportunities:
Further
Comments
The sites sustainability offer is reflected in the high overall score together with the
level of opportunities over threats.
Carmarthenshire LDP
Site Assessment Proforma
1. Site Details
Ref:
GA3/h7
Site Ref (where applicable):
Location:
Viji Garage, High Street Ammanford
Site Area (Ha):
Existing Use*
Vacant
Potential Use*
Residential
*if candidate site as proposed by respondent
2. Land Use/ Planning History
UDP allocation?
Existing Use within development limits
Relevant Planning History
Full Planning for 20 flats – E/13193 granted 10/12/08.
3. Phase 1 – Identification of Strategic Sites
Is the Site Strategic?
Yes (Site proceeds to Phase 2b)
No
x
(Site proceeds to Phase 2a as a Non-Strategic Site)
The site is not considered to be strategic in nature for the following reasons:
not located in a settlement defined as a Growth Area
x
not of an appropriate size
not situated at a key location in terms of transport and accessibility
x
the site is not critical to the delivery of the strategy
This does not preclude the site’s consideration as a Non-Strategic Site.
Expanded reasons for non identification of the site as strategic are available.
4. Phase 2a – Initial Analysis
Q.1
x
Land use allocation specific or non allocation related?
Allocation (proceeds to Q.2)
Non allocation (Considered through LDP policy)
Q.2
x
Within or immediately adjoining an identified settlement in the Preferred Strategy?
Yes (Site proceeds to Q.3)
No (Site is dismissed)
Q.3
x
If residential, can the site accommodate 5 or more houses (i.e. is >0.16ha in size)?
Yes (Site proceeds to Phase 2b)
No Considered under the review of Development Limits)
Comments
5. Phase 2b – Further Analysis
Q.4 Is the site located within or adjacent to any of the following?
(If yes, site does not proceed except where potential for mitigation can be demonstrated)
No
Yes
Partly
Adjacent
KEY DETERMINANTS
Nature and Landscape Conservation
Ramsar Site
x
Special Protection Area (SPA)
x
Special Area of Conservation (SAC)
x
National Nature Reserve (NNR)
x
Site of Special Scientific Interest (SSSI)
x
Common Land or Registered Village Green
x
Cultural Heritage
Scheduled Ancient Monument or remains of
national importance
Flooding
TAN 15 Development Advice Maps
x
x
EA Flood Map - nat_floodzone3
x
Minerals
Mineral buffer zone
x
Q.5 Would development of the site represent or result in:
Tandem development
No
x
Ribbon development
x
Coalescence
x
Development unrelated to the existing urban form
x
Sporadic & fragmented pattern of development (either constitute or contribute to)
x
An illogical extension to the settlement
x
Conflicts with existing land use or known plans and strategies
x
A Detrimental Impact on the Character and Setting of the settlement or its features
(including views and glimpses both into and out of the settlement)
A loss of areas of open space and amenity value
x
General Planning Principles
Yes
x
Comments
Q.6 Additional considerations:
No
Yes
General
Does the site have an available access point with adequate visibility?
x
?
Would development at the site impact upon the highway network and
increase the risk to highway safety?
Is it Previously Developed Land?
No
x
Yes
?
x
Soil / Agricultural Land Quality
Does the site contain high carbon soil e.g. peat?
x
Does the site contain high quality agricultural land?
x
Q.7 Is the site located within or related to any of the following?:
No
Nature and Landscape Conservation
Local Nature Reserves (LNR)
Regionally
Important
Geological
Geomorphological Sites (RIGS)
Cultural Heritage
Conservation Area
Yes
Partly
Adjacent
x
/
x
x
Q.8 Would development at the site impact upon species/habitats of high importance? (refer
to Biodiversity/Connectivity Study)
Yes
x
No
Unknown
Q.9 Accessibility - Is the site within a settlement with access to, or within easy reach of, the
following:
No
Yes
Rail network
x
Highway network (A or B roads)
x
Public transport
x
Cycle ways and/or footpaths
x
Q.10 Site Deliverability - Are there any infrastructure or other issues on the site that would affect
its deliverability during the Plan period.
Yes
x
No
Unknown
Comments
6. Additional Comments
Comments
The site comprises brownfield land located at a central location within the town of Ammanford.
The site has a number of advantages in terms of retention as a residential allocation – close to the
local amenities and services of the settlement, integrated to the existing residential built form and
with good access and highway links. In planning terms the site offers an appropriate option in
terms of location and lack of harm to the amenity and character of the settlement.
Furthermore, the site has full planning permission for 20 flats. In conclusion this available land can
be put forward as a residential allocation within the LDP.
The site has been subject to the SA process, details of which are highlighted in Section 7, below.
Note: Reference should be made to the guidance notes accompanying this proforma when
interpreting its contents.
7. Sustainability Appraisal
Score:
348
Score Summary Count
Threats
Issues
Low
4
Medium
1
High
1
None of note. See relevant score card.
No. Prospective Opportunities
22
5
32
Opportunities:
Further
Comments
Site has a good, positive score. See score card for further detail. No notable
Issues. Site represents a consented commitment.
Carmarthenshire LDP
Site Assessment Proforma
1. Site Details
Ref:
GA3/h8
Site Ref (where applicable):
Location:
Lon Ger Y Coed/Wernoleu Road
Site Area (Ha):
Existing Use*
Vacant
Potential Use*
Residential
*if candidate site as proposed by respondent
2. Land Use/ Planning History
UDP allocation?
Residential Allocation (GR3/10)
Relevant Planning History
No recent planning history, however the site is surrounded by residential development and
planning permission has been granted for one dwelling on part of the site allocated in the UDP
(E19753, granted 30/10/08). The remainder forms the allocation GA3/h8 in the Deposit LDP.
3. Phase 1 – Identification of Strategic Sites
Is the Site Strategic?
Yes (Site proceeds to Phase 2b)
No
x
(Site proceeds to Phase 2a as a Non-Strategic Site)
The site is not considered to be strategic in nature for the following reasons:
not located in a settlement defined as a Growth Area
x
not of an appropriate size
not situated at a key location in terms of transport and accessibility
x
the site is not critical to the delivery of the strategy
This does not preclude the site’s consideration as a Non-Strategic Site.
Expanded reasons for non identification of the site as strategic are available.
4. Phase 2a – Initial Analysis
Q.1
x
Land use allocation specific or non allocation related?
Allocation (proceeds to Q.2)
Non allocation (Considered through LDP policy)
Q.2
x
Within or immediately adjoining an identified settlement in the Preferred Strategy?
Yes (Site proceeds to Q.3)
No (Site is dismissed)
Q.3
x
If residential, can the site accommodate 5 or more houses (i.e. is >0.16ha in size)?
Yes (Site proceeds to Phase 2b)
No Considered under the review of Development Limits)
Comments
5. Phase 2b – Further Analysis
Q.4 Is the site located within or adjacent to any of the following?
(If yes, site does not proceed except where potential for mitigation can be demonstrated)
No
Yes
Partly
Adjacent
KEY DETERMINANTS
Nature and Landscape Conservation
Ramsar Site
x
Special Protection Area (SPA)
x
Special Area of Conservation (SAC)
x
National Nature Reserve (NNR)
x
Site of Special Scientific Interest (SSSI)
x
Common Land or Registered Village Green
x
Cultural Heritage
Scheduled Ancient Monument or remains of
national importance
Flooding
TAN 15 Development Advice Maps
x
x
EA Flood Map - nat_floodzone3
x
Minerals
Mineral buffer zone
x
Q.5 Would development of the site represent or result in:
Tandem development
No
x
Ribbon development
x
Coalescence
x
Development unrelated to the existing urban form
x
Sporadic & fragmented pattern of development (either constitute or contribute to)
x
An illogical extension to the settlement
x
Conflicts with existing land use or known plans and strategies
x
A Detrimental Impact on the Character and Setting of the settlement or its features
(including views and glimpses both into and out of the settlement)
A loss of areas of open space and amenity value
x
General Planning Principles
Yes
x
Comments
Q.6 Additional considerations:
No
General
Yes
?
No
Does the site have an available access point with adequate visibility?
Would development at the site impact upon the highway network and
increase the risk to highway safety?
Is it Previously Developed Land?
Yes
x
?
x
x
Soil / Agricultural Land Quality
Does the site contain high carbon soil e.g. peat?
x
Does the site contain high quality agricultural land?
x
Q.7 Is the site located within or related to any of the following?:
No
Nature and Landscape Conservation
Local Nature Reserves (LNR)
Regionally
Important
Geological
Geomorphological Sites (RIGS)
Cultural Heritage
Conservation Area
Yes
Partly
Adjacent
x
/
x
x
Q.8 Would development at the site impact upon species/habitats of high importance? (refer
to Biodiversity/Connectivity Study)
Yes
No
x
Unknown
Q.9 Accessibility - Is the site within a settlement with access to, or within easy reach of, the
following:
No
Yes
Rail network
x
Highway network (A or B roads)
x
Public transport
x
Cycle ways and/or footpaths
x
Q.10 Site Deliverability - Are there any infrastructure or other issues on the site that would affect
its deliverability during the Plan period.
Yes
x
No
Unknown
Comments
6. Additional Comments
Comments
The site is located in close proximity to a range of services and facilities. The site in terms of
location represents a sustainable location.
The site represents a logical extension to the current developments and would be wholly
compatible with the current urban form in a manner which would not negatively impact upon the
character and amenity of the area. It would be a consolidation of the current with development on
all boundaries of the site.
A single plot has been built on part of the site.
Response to TOG comments:
The potential for biodiversity on site is noted however the comments from the EA in this regard are
not reflected within the Biodiversity/Connectivity Study. The delivery of the site, will consequently,
need to have due regard to any potential for biodiversity value both in terms of its design and
extent with due regard needing to be paid to policy EQ4.
It is considered prudent given the relationship of the site to the urban form to retain its allocation.
The potential for capacity issues at the WWTW is noted however discussions/consultations remain
on going with Dwr Cymru which together with appropriate phasing etc does not preclude
deliverability during the plan period. It is also noted that there is currently potential capacity and
that the issue relates to the level of any future development.
There are currently no significant water body issues. Policy EP1 provides for the consideration of
proposals where they relate to impact on water quality and in relation to matters of environmental
capacity. Consequently any proposals will be required to satisfy its provisions.
Reference will need to be made to policy EP3 and the requirement for SuDS.
Note: Reference should be made to the guidance notes accompanying this proforma when
interpreting its contents.
7. Sustainability Appraisal
Score:
173
Score Summary Count
Threats
Low
Medium
High
Issues
Opportunities:
Further
Comments
No notable issues.
5
1
1
No. Prospective Opportunities
3
14
12
Carmarthenshire LDP
Site Assessment Proforma
1. Site Details
Ref:
GA3/h9
Site Ref (where applicable):
Location:
Former Betws Colliery
Part of Candidate Site
004-022
Site Area (Ha):
Existing Use*
Vacant
Potential Use*
Residential
*if candidate site as proposed by respondent
2. Land Use/ Planning History
UDP allocation?
Planning and Development Brief (PDB27)
Relevant Planning History
E/09584 –Outline Planning Permission for Residential Development– Granted 15/5/06
E/14701 – Reserved Matters Residential Development – Granted 24/10/07
E/24742 – Reserved Matters Residential Development (Phase 2) – pending at time of Deposit.
3. Phase 1 – Identification of Strategic Sites
Is the Site Strategic?
Yes (Site proceeds to Phase 2b)
No
x
(Site proceeds to Phase 2a as a Non-Strategic Site)
The site is not considered to be strategic in nature for the following reasons:
not located in a settlement defined as a Growth Area
not of an appropriate size
not situated at a key location in terms of transport and accessibility
x
the site is not critical to the delivery of the strategy
This does not preclude the site’s consideration as a Non-Strategic Site.
Expanded reasons for non identification of the site as strategic are available.
4. Phase 2a – Initial Analysis
Q.1
x
Land use allocation specific or non allocation related? -+
Allocation (proceeds to Q.2)
Non allocation (Considered through LDP policy)
Q.2
x
Within or immediately adjoining an identified settlement in the Preferred Strategy?
Yes (Site proceeds to Q.3)
No (Site is dismissed)
Q.3
If residential, can the site accommodate 5 or more houses (i.e. is >0.16ha in size)?
x
Yes (Site proceeds to Phase 2b)
No Considered under the review of Development Limits)
Comments
5. Phase 2b – Further Analysis
Q.4 Is the site located within or adjacent to any of the following?
(If yes, site does not proceed except where potential for mitigation can be demonstrated)
No
Yes
Partly
Adjacent
KEY DETERMINANTS
Nature and Landscape Conservation
Ramsar Site
x
Special Protection Area (SPA)
x
Special Area of Conservation (SAC)
x
National Nature Reserve (NNR)
x
Site of Special Scientific Interest (SSSI)
x
Common Land or Registered Village Green
x
Cultural Heritage
Scheduled Ancient Monument or remains of
national importance
Flooding
TAN 15 Development Advice Maps
x
x
EA Flood Map - nat_floodzone3
x
Minerals
Mineral buffer zone
x
Q.5 Would development of the site represent or result in:
Tandem development
No
x
Ribbon development
x
Coalescence
x
Development unrelated to the existing urban form
x
Sporadic & fragmented pattern of development (either constitute or contribute to)
x
An illogical extension to the settlement
x
Conflicts with existing land use or known plans and strategies
x
A Detrimental Impact on the Character and Setting of the settlement or its features
(including views and glimpses both into and out of the settlement)
A loss of areas of open space and amenity value
x
General Planning Principles
Yes
x
Comments
Q.6 Additional considerations:
No
General
Yes
?
No
Does the site have an available access point with adequate visibility?
Would development at the site impact upon the highway network and
increase the risk to highway safety?
Is it Previously Developed Land?
Yes
x
?
x
x
Soil / Agricultural Land Quality
Does the site contain high carbon soil e.g. peat?
x
Does the site contain high quality agricultural land?
x
Q.7 Is the site located within or related to any of the following?:
No
Nature and Landscape Conservation
Local Nature Reserves (LNR)
Regionally
Important
Geological
Geomorphological Sites (RIGS)
Cultural Heritage
Conservation Area
Yes
Partly
Adjacent
x
/
x
x
Q.8 Would development at the site impact upon species/habitats of high importance? (refer
to Biodiversity/Connectivity Study)
Yes
x
No
Unknown
Q.9 Accessibility - Is the site within a settlement with access to, or within easy reach of, the
following:
No
Yes
Rail network
x
Highway network (A or B roads)
x
Public transport
x
Cycle ways and/or footpaths
x
Q.10 Site Deliverability - Are there any infrastructure or other issues on the site that would affect
its deliverability during the Plan period.
Yes
x
No
Unknown
Comments
6. Additional Comments
Comments
This represents a notable regeneration site the development of which is ongoing. The site formerly
that of Betws Drift Mine provided an opportunity to regenerate a derelict site offering both
residential and employments uses whilst also affording restoration benefits. It represents a site
which is consisitent with and supports the strategic objectives of the plan and in a location which
whilst meeting sustainability aspirations also provides for broader regeneration aspirations.
The site is located in relatively close proximity to the town of Ammanford and the amenities and
services available. It occupies land on a long standing regeneration orientated development and
its continuation through to completion represents a prudent and appropriate approach. The site
has no detrimental effect on the character or amenity of the area.
It is consequently proposed to continue to allocate the site reflecting the proposals as outlined
within the master plan and supported through subsequent reserved matters applications. It is
noted that phase 2 is subject to a pending Reserved Matters application but that this appears to be
reflective of the original masterplan proposal and as such is retained as part of the overall
allocation.
The Housing Land Availability Study indicates that during the plan period (up until 1st April 2009)
some 36 units had been completed which will consequently contribute to meeting the overall
housing land requirement for the LDP.
The site has been subject to the SA process, details of which are highlighted in Section 7, below.
Note: Reference should be made to the guidance notes accompanying this proforma when
interpreting its contents.
7. Sustainability Appraisal
Score:
198
Score Summary Count
Threats
Low
Medium
High
7
4
1
No. Prospective Opportunities
15
12
16
Issues
Opportunities:
Further
Comments
There are no notable issues. Part of the site has a current valid consent.
Carmarthenshire LDP
Site Assessment Proforma
1. Site Details
Ref:
GA3/h10
Site Ref (where applicable):
Location:
Land at Colonel Road
Site Area (Ha):
Existing Use*
Vacant
Potential Use*
Residential
*if candidate site as proposed by respondent
2. Land Use/ Planning History
UDP allocation?
Relevant Planning History
E/17619 – Outline for 6 dwellings granted 27/11/07
3. Phase 1 – Identification of Strategic Sites
Is the Site Strategic?
Yes (Site proceeds to Phase 2b)
No
x
(Site proceeds to Phase 2a as a Non-Strategic Site)
The site is not considered to be strategic in nature for the following reasons:
not located in a settlement defined as a Growth Area
x
not of an appropriate size
not situated at a key location in terms of transport and accessibility
x
the site is not critical to the delivery of the strategy
This does not preclude the site’s consideration as a Non-Strategic Site.
Expanded reasons for non identification of the site as strategic are available.
4. Phase 2a – Initial Analysis
Q.1
x
Land use allocation specific or non allocation related?
Allocation (proceeds to Q.2)
Non allocation (Considered through LDP policy)
Q.2
x
Within or immediately adjoining an identified settlement in the Preferred Strategy?
Yes (Site proceeds to Q.3)
No (Site is dismissed)
Q.3
x
If residential, can the site accommodate 5 or more houses (i.e. is >0.16ha in size)?
Yes (Site proceeds to Phase 2b)
No Considered under the review of Development Limits)
Comments
5. Phase 2b – Further Analysis
Q.4 Is the site located within or adjacent to any of the following?
(If yes, site does not proceed except where potential for mitigation can be demonstrated)
No
Yes
Partly
Adjacent
KEY DETERMINANTS
Nature and Landscape Conservation
Ramsar Site
x
Special Protection Area (SPA)
x
Special Area of Conservation (SAC)
x
National Nature Reserve (NNR)
x
Site of Special Scientific Interest (SSSI)
x
Common Land or Registered Village Green
x
Cultural Heritage
Scheduled Ancient Monument or remains of
national importance
Flooding
TAN 15 Development Advice Maps
x
x
EA Flood Map - nat_floodzone3
x
Minerals
Mineral buffer zone
x
Q.5 Would development of the site represent or result in:
Tandem development
No
x
Ribbon development
x
Coalescence
x
Development unrelated to the existing urban form
x
Sporadic & fragmented pattern of development (either constitute or contribute to)
x
An illogical extension to the settlement
x
Conflicts with existing land use or known plans and strategies
x
A Detrimental Impact on the Character and Setting of the settlement or its features
(including views and glimpses both into and out of the settlement)
A loss of areas of open space and amenity value
x
General Planning Principles
Yes
x
Comments
Q.6 Additional considerations:
No
General
Yes
?
No
Does the site have an available access point with adequate visibility?
Would development at the site impact upon the highway network and
increase the risk to highway safety?
Is it Previously Developed Land?
Yes
x
?
x
x
Soil / Agricultural Land Quality
Does the site contain high carbon soil e.g. peat?
x
Does the site contain high quality agricultural land?
x
Q.7 Is the site located within or related to any of the following?:
No
Nature and Landscape Conservation
Local Nature Reserves (LNR)
Regionally
Important
Geological
Geomorphological Sites (RIGS)
Cultural Heritage
Conservation Area
Yes
Partly
Adjacent
x
/
x
x
Q.8 Would development at the site impact upon species/habitats of high importance? (refer
to Biodiversity/Connectivity Study)
Yes
x
No
Unknown
Q.9 Accessibility - Is the site within a settlement with access to, or within easy reach of, the
following:
No
Yes
Rail network
x
Highway network (A or B roads)
x
Public transport
x
Cycle ways and/or footpaths
x
Q.10 Site Deliverability - Are there any infrastructure or other issues on the site that would affect
its deliverability during the Plan period.
Yes
x
No
Unknown
Comments
6. Additional Comments
Comments
National Planning Policy is statutorily underpinned by the principle of sustainable development and
accordingly the underlying ethos of the emerging Carmarthenshire Local Development Plan has
been to promote a settlement pattern that is in compliance with the principles of sustainability.
The Local Planning Authority consider that the designation of the subject site is appropriate to
ensure that sufficient land has been allocated within the LDP for residential development purposes
in accordance with Planning Policy Wales.
The site has a number of advantages in terms of retention as a residential allocation – close to the
local amenities and services of the settlement, integrated to the existing residential built form and
with good access and highway links. In planning terms the site offers an appropriate option in
terms of location and lack of harm to the amenity and character of the settlement.
Furthermore the site benefits from outline planning permission, therefore the scale and nature of
the development has been deemed to be acceptable by the Local Planning Authority. In
conclusion this available land can be put forward as a residential allocation within the LDP.
The site has been subject to the SA process, details of which are highlighted in Section 7, below.
Note: Reference should be made to the guidance notes accompanying this proforma when
interpreting its contents.
7. Sustainability Appraisal
Score:
126
Score Summary Count
Threats
Issues
Low
3
Medium
4
High
0
None of note. See relevant score card.
No. Prospective Opportunities
34
5
9
Opportunities:
Further
Comments
Site has a positive score. See score card for further detail. No notable Issues.
Site represents a consented commitment.
Carmarthenshire LDP
Site Assessment Proforma
1. Site Details
Ref:
GA3/h11
Location:
Woodlands park
Site Ref (where applicable):
Site Area (Ha):
Existing Use*
Potential Use*
Residential
*if candidate site as proposed by respondent
2. Land Use/ Planning History
UDP allocation?
Part of Residential Allocation (GR3/6)
Relevant Planning History
E/10763 –Planning Permission for residential development – Granted 14/9/05
3. Phase 1 – Identification of Strategic Sites
Is the Site Strategic?
Yes (Site proceeds to Phase 2b)
No
x
(Site proceeds to Phase 2a as a Non-Strategic Site)
The site is not considered to be strategic in nature for the following reasons:
not located in a settlement defined as a Growth Area
x
not of an appropriate size
not situated at a key location in terms of transport and accessibility
x
the site is not critical to the delivery of the strategy
This does not preclude the site’s consideration as a Non-Strategic Site.
Expanded reasons for non identification of the site as strategic are available.
4. Phase 2a – Initial Analysis
Q.1
x
Land use allocation specific or non allocation related?
Allocation (proceeds to Q.2)
Non allocation (Considered through LDP policy)
Q.2
x
Within or immediately adjoining an identified settlement in the Preferred Strategy?
Yes (Site proceeds to Q.3)
No (Site is dismissed)
Q.3
x
If residential, can the site accommodate 5 or more houses (i.e. is >0.16ha in size)?
Yes (Site proceeds to Phase 2b)
No Considered under the review of Development Limits)
Comments
5. Phase 2b – Further Analysis
Q.4 Is the site located within or adjacent to any of the following?
(If yes, site does not proceed except where potential for mitigation can be demonstrated)
No
Yes
Partly
Adjacent
KEY DETERMINANTS
Nature and Landscape Conservation
Ramsar Site
x
Special Protection Area (SPA)
x
Special Area of Conservation (SAC)
x
National Nature Reserve (NNR)
x
Site of Special Scientific Interest (SSSI)
x
Common Land or Registered Village Green
x
Cultural Heritage
Scheduled Ancient Monument or remains of
national importance
Flooding
TAN 15 Development Advice Maps
x
x
EA Flood Map - nat_floodzone3
x
Minerals
Mineral buffer zone
x
Q.5 Would development of the site represent or result in:
Tandem development
No
x
Ribbon development
x
Coalescence
x
Development unrelated to the existing urban form
x
Sporadic & fragmented pattern of development (either constitute or contribute to)
x
An illogical extension to the settlement
x
Conflicts with existing land use or known plans and strategies
x
A Detrimental Impact on the Character and Setting of the settlement or its features
(including views and glimpses both into and out of the settlement)
A loss of areas of open space and amenity value
x
General Planning Principles
Yes
x
Comments
Q.6 Additional considerations:
No
General
Yes
?
No
Does the site have an available access point with adequate visibility?
Would development at the site impact upon the highway network and
increase the risk to highway safety?
Is it Previously Developed Land?
Yes
x
?
x
x
Soil / Agricultural Land Quality
Does the site contain high carbon soil e.g. peat?
x
Does the site contain high quality agricultural land?
x
Q.7 Is the site located within or related to any of the following?:
No
Nature and Landscape Conservation
Local Nature Reserves (LNR)
Regionally
Important
Geological
Geomorphological Sites (RIGS)
Cultural Heritage
Conservation Area
Yes
Partly
Adjacent
x
/
x
x
Q.8 Would development at the site impact upon species/habitats of high importance? (refer
to Biodiversity/Connectivity Study)
Yes
x
No
Unknown
Q.9 Accessibility - Is the site within a settlement with access to, or within easy reach of, the
following:
No
Yes
Rail network
x
Highway network (A or B roads)
x
Public transport
x
Cycle ways and/or footpaths
x
Q.10 Site Deliverability - Are there any infrastructure or other issues on the site that would affect
its deliverability during the Plan period.
Yes
x
No
Unknown
Comments
6. Additional Comments
Comments
The site has been completed with the land availability study indicating that 8 units were built during
the plan period. These units will contribute to meeting the LDP housing land requirement.
Note: Reference should be made to the guidance notes accompanying this proforma when
interpreting its contents.
7. Sustainability Appraisal
Score:
240
Score Summary Count
Threats
Low
Medium
High
Issues
Opportunities:
Further
Comments
Site complete.
5
4
0
No. Prospective Opportunities
25
20
14
Carmarthenshire LDP
Site Assessment Proforma
1. Site Details
Ref:
GA3/h12
Site Ref (where applicable):
Location:
Land at r/o No 16-20 & No 24-30 Betws Road
Site Area (Ha):
Existing Use*
Vacant
Potential Use*
Residential
*if candidate site as proposed by respondent
2. Land Use/ Planning History
UDP allocation?
Relevant Planning History
E/19261 – Outline Planning Permission for Residential Development– Granted 14/8/08
E/25170 – proposed private cul-de-sac of 11 dwellings with garages - current
3. Phase 1 – Identification of Strategic Sites
Is the Site Strategic?
Yes (Site proceeds to Phase 2b)
No
x
(Site proceeds to Phase 2a as a Non-Strategic Site)
The site is not considered to be strategic in nature for the following reasons:
not located in a settlement defined as a Growth Area
x
not of an appropriate size
not situated at a key location in terms of transport and accessibility
x
the site is not critical to the delivery of the strategy
This does not preclude the site’s consideration as a Non-Strategic Site.
Expanded reasons for non identification of the site as strategic are available.
4. Phase 2a – Initial Analysis
Q.1
x
Land use allocation specific or non allocation related? -+
Allocation (proceeds to Q.2)
Non allocation (Considered through LDP policy)
Q.2
x
Within or immediately adjoining an identified settlement in the Preferred Strategy?
Yes (Site proceeds to Q.3)
No (Site is dismissed)
Q.3
x
If residential, can the site accommodate 5 or more houses (i.e. is >0.16ha in size)?
Yes (Site proceeds to Phase 2b)
No Considered under the review of Development Limits)
Comments
5. Phase 2b – Further Analysis
Q.4 Is the site located within or adjacent to any of the following?
(If yes, site does not proceed except where potential for mitigation can be demonstrated)
No
Yes
Partly
Adjacent
KEY DETERMINANTS
Nature and Landscape Conservation
Ramsar Site
x
Special Protection Area (SPA)
x
Special Area of Conservation (SAC)
x
National Nature Reserve (NNR)
x
Site of Special Scientific Interest (SSSI)
x
Common Land or Registered Village Green
x
Cultural Heritage
Scheduled Ancient Monument or remains of
national importance
Flooding
TAN 15 Development Advice Maps
x
x
EA Flood Map - nat_floodzone3
x
Minerals
Mineral buffer zone
x
Q.5 Would development of the site represent or result in:
Tandem development
No
x
Ribbon development
x
Coalescence
x
Development unrelated to the existing urban form
x
Sporadic & fragmented pattern of development (either constitute or contribute to)
x
An illogical extension to the settlement
x
Conflicts with existing land use or known plans and strategies
x
A Detrimental Impact on the Character and Setting of the settlement or its features
(including views and glimpses both into and out of the settlement)
A loss of areas of open space and amenity value
x
General Planning Principles
Yes
x
Comments
Q.6 Additional considerations:
No
Yes
General
Does the site have an available access point with adequate visibility?
x
?
Would development at the site impact upon the highway network and
increase the risk to highway safety?
Is it Previously Developed Land?
No
x
Yes
?
x
Soil / Agricultural Land Quality
Does the site contain high carbon soil e.g. peat?
x
Does the site contain high quality agricultural land?
x
Q.7 Is the site located within or related to any of the following?:
No
Nature and Landscape Conservation
Local Nature Reserves (LNR)
Regionally
Important
Geological
Geomorphological Sites (RIGS)
Cultural Heritage
Conservation Area
Yes
Partly
Adjacent
x
/
x
x
Q.8 Would development at the site impact upon species/habitats of high importance? (refer
to Biodiversity/Connectivity Study)
Yes
x
No
Unknown
Q.9 Accessibility - Is the site within a settlement with access to, or within easy reach of, the
following:
No
Yes
Rail network
x
Highway network (A or B roads)
x
Public transport
x
Cycle ways and/or footpaths
x
Q.10 Site Deliverability - Are there any infrastructure or other issues on the site that would affect
its deliverability during the Plan period.
Yes
x
No
Unknown
Comments
6. Additional Comments
Comments
The site is located in Betws in close proximity to the town of Ammanford and the amenities and
services available. The site represents a sustainable location.
The site occupies land to the rear of existing properties and constitutes a previously developed
site. It is reflective of and consistent with the current urban form and would not negatively impact
upon the character and amenity of the area.
It is noted that the site is currently the subject of a valid consent for residential development. It is
therefore in the interests of continuity, the current consent and as a reflection of its sustainability
credentials considered prudent to allocate the site for residential development.
Note: Reference should be made to the guidance notes accompanying this proforma when
interpreting its contents.
7. Sustainability Appraisal
Score:
289
Score Summary Count
Threats
Low
Medium
High
6
3
1
No. Prospective Opportunities
15
19
21
Issues
Opportunities:
Further
Comments
There are no notable issues. The site has a current valid consent.
Carmarthenshire LDP
Site Assessment Proforma
1. Site Details
Ref:
GA3/h13
Site Ref (where applicable):
Location:
Former Petrol Station, Wind Street
Site Area (Ha):
Existing Use*
Vacant
Potential Use*
Residential
*if candidate site as proposed by respondent
2. Land Use/ Planning History
UDP allocation?
Relevant Planning History
E/10477 – full planning for 11 residential units, granted 6/10/05
E/17997 – variation of planning condition 1 of E/10477 to amend front porch design and to comply
with current building regs and window detail, granted 4/2/08.
3. Phase 1 – Identification of Strategic Sites
Is the Site Strategic?
Yes (Site proceeds to Phase 2b)
No
x
(Site proceeds to Phase 2a as a Non-Strategic Site)
The site is not considered to be strategic in nature for the following reasons:
not located in a settlement defined as a Growth Area
x
not of an appropriate size
not situated at a key location in terms of transport and accessibility
x
the site is not critical to the delivery of the strategy
This does not preclude the site’s consideration as a Non-Strategic Site.
Expanded reasons for non identification of the site as strategic are available.
4. Phase 2a – Initial Analysis
Q.1
x
Land use allocation specific or non allocation related?
Allocation (proceeds to Q.2)
Non allocation (Considered through LDP policy)
Q.2
x
Within or immediately adjoining an identified settlement in the Preferred Strategy?
Yes (Site proceeds to Q.3)
No (Site is dismissed)
Q.3
x
If residential, can the site accommodate 5 or more houses (i.e. is >0.16ha in size)?
Yes (Site proceeds to Phase 2b)
No Considered under the review of Development Limits)
Comments
5. Phase 2b – Further Analysis
Q.4 Is the site located within or adjacent to any of the following?
(If yes, site does not proceed except where potential for mitigation can be demonstrated)
No
Yes
Partly
Adjacent
KEY DETERMINANTS
Nature and Landscape Conservation
Ramsar Site
x
Special Protection Area (SPA)
x
Special Area of Conservation (SAC)
x
National Nature Reserve (NNR)
x
Site of Special Scientific Interest (SSSI)
x
Common Land or Registered Village Green
x
Cultural Heritage
Scheduled Ancient Monument or remains of
national importance
Flooding
TAN 15 Development Advice Maps
x
x
EA Flood Map - nat_floodzone3
x
Minerals
Mineral buffer zone
x
Q.5 Would development of the site represent or result in:
Tandem development
No
x
Ribbon development
x
Coalescence
x
Development unrelated to the existing urban form
x
Sporadic & fragmented pattern of development (either constitute or contribute to)
x
An illogical extension to the settlement
x
Conflicts with existing land use or known plans and strategies
x
A Detrimental Impact on the Character and Setting of the settlement or its features
(including views and glimpses both into and out of the settlement)
A loss of areas of open space and amenity value
x
General Planning Principles
Yes
x
Comments
Q.6 Additional considerations:
No
General
Yes
?
No
Does the site have an available access point with adequate visibility?
Would development at the site impact upon the highway network and
increase the risk to highway safety?
Is it Previously Developed Land?
Yes
x
?
x
x
Soil / Agricultural Land Quality
Does the site contain high carbon soil e.g. peat?
x
Does the site contain high quality agricultural land?
x
Q.7 Is the site located within or related to any of the following?:
No
Nature and Landscape Conservation
Local Nature Reserves (LNR)
Regionally
Important
Geological
Geomorphological Sites (RIGS)
Cultural Heritage
Conservation Area
Yes
Partly
Adjacent
x
/
x
x
Q.8 Would development at the site impact upon species/habitats of high importance? (refer
to Biodiversity/Connectivity Study)
Yes
x
No
Unknown
Q.9 Accessibility - Is the site within a settlement with access to, or within easy reach of, the
following:
No
Yes
Rail network
x
Highway network (A or B roads)
x
Public transport
x
Cycle ways and/or footpaths
x
Q.10 Site Deliverability - Are there any infrastructure or other issues on the site that would affect
its deliverability during the Plan period.
Yes
x
No
Unknown
Comments
6. Additional Comments
Comments
National Planning Policy is statutorily underpinned by the principle of sustainable development and
accordingly the underlying ethos of the emerging Carmarthenshire Local Development Plan has
been to promote a settlement pattern that is in compliance with the principles of sustainability.
The Local Planning Authority consider that the designation of the subject site is appropriate to
ensure that sufficient land has been allocated within the LDP for residential development purposes
in accordance with Planning Policy Wales.
The site has a number of advantages in terms of its appropriateness for residential purposes –
close to the local amenities and services of the settlement, integrated to the existing residential
built form and with good access and highway links. In planning terms the site offers an appropriate
option in terms of location and lack of harm to the amenity and character of the settlement.
Furthermore, the site has full planning permission for 11 residential units.
available land can be put forward as a residential allocation within the LDP.
In conclusion this
The site has been subject to the SA process, details of which are highlighted in Section 7, below.
Note: Reference should be made to the guidance notes accompanying this proforma when
interpreting its contents.
7. Sustainability Appraisal
Score:
316
Score Summary Count
Threats
Issues
Low
4
Medium
1
High
1
None of note. See relevant score card.
No. Prospective Opportunities
20
15
24
Opportunities:
Further
Comments
Site has a good, positive score. See score card for further detail. No notable
Issues. Site represents a consented commitment.
Carmarthenshire LDP
Site Assessment Proforma
1. Site Details
Ref:
GA3/h14
Site Ref (where applicable):
Location:
Former British Legion Site, Ffordd Y Faenor
Site Area (Ha):
Existing Use*
Vacant
Potential Use*
Residential
*if candidate site as proposed by respondent
2. Land Use/ Planning History
UDP allocation?
Relevant Planning History
E/18822 – Outline Planning Permission – Granted 19/6/08
E/20337 – Outline Planning Permission residential Nursing Home – Granted 24/3/09
E/24993 – variation of condition number 1 on application E/18822 to extend the period of
submission of reserved matters and commencement of development – granted 16/8/11.
3. Phase 1 – Identification of Strategic Sites
Is the Site Strategic?
Yes (Site proceeds to Phase 2b)
No
x
(Site proceeds to Phase 2a as a Non-Strategic Site)
The site is not considered to be strategic in nature for the following reasons:
not located in a settlement defined as a Growth Area
x
not of an appropriate size
not situated at a key location in terms of transport and accessibility
x
the site is not critical to the delivery of the strategy
This does not preclude the site’s consideration as a Non-Strategic Site.
Expanded reasons for non identification of the site as strategic are available.
4. Phase 2a – Initial Analysis
Q.1
x
Land use allocation specific or non allocation related? -+
Allocation (proceeds to Q.2)
Non allocation (Considered through LDP policy)
Q.2
x
Within or immediately adjoining an identified settlement in the Preferred Strategy?
Yes (Site proceeds to Q.3)
No (Site is dismissed)
Q.3
x
If residential, can the site accommodate 5 or more houses (i.e. is >0.16ha in size)?
Yes (Site proceeds to Phase 2b)
No Considered under the review of Development Limits)
Comments
5. Phase 2b – Further Analysis
Q.4 Is the site located within or adjacent to any of the following?
(If yes, site does not proceed except where potential for mitigation can be demonstrated)
No
Yes
Partly
Adjacent
KEY DETERMINANTS
Nature and Landscape Conservation
Ramsar Site
x
Special Protection Area (SPA)
x
Special Area of Conservation (SAC)
x
National Nature Reserve (NNR)
x
Site of Special Scientific Interest (SSSI)
x
Common Land or Registered Village Green
x
Cultural Heritage
Scheduled Ancient Monument or remains of
national importance
Flooding
TAN 15 Development Advice Maps
x
x
EA Flood Map - nat_floodzone3
x
Minerals
Mineral buffer zone
x
Q.5 Would development of the site represent or result in:
Tandem development
No
x
Ribbon development
x
Coalescence
x
Development unrelated to the existing urban form
x
Sporadic & fragmented pattern of development (either constitute or contribute to)
x
An illogical extension to the settlement
x
Conflicts with existing land use or known plans and strategies
x
A Detrimental Impact on the Character and Setting of the settlement or its features
(including views and glimpses both into and out of the settlement)
A loss of areas of open space and amenity value
x
General Planning Principles
Yes
x
Comments
Refer to May 2013 update (below) with regard to revised TAN 15 DAMs.
Q.6 Additional considerations:
No
General
Yes
?
No
Does the site have an available access point with adequate visibility?
Would development at the site impact upon the highway network and
increase the risk to highway safety?
Is it Previously Developed Land?
Yes
x
?
x
x
Soil / Agricultural Land Quality
Does the site contain high carbon soil e.g. peat?
x
Does the site contain high quality agricultural land?
x
Q.7 Is the site located within or related to any of the following?:
No
Nature and Landscape Conservation
Local Nature Reserves (LNR)
Regionally
Important
Geological
Geomorphological Sites (RIGS)
Cultural Heritage
Conservation Area
Yes
Partly
Adjacent
x
/
x
x
Q.8 Would development at the site impact upon species/habitats of high importance? (refer
to Biodiversity/Connectivity Study)
Yes
x
No
Unknown
Q.9 Accessibility - Is the site within a settlement with access to, or within easy reach of, the
following:
No
Yes
Rail network
x
Highway network (A or B roads)
x
Public transport
x
Cycle ways and/or footpaths
x
Q.10 Site Deliverability - Are there any infrastructure or other issues on the site that would affect
its deliverability during the Plan period.
Yes
x
No
Unknown
Comments
6. Additional Comments
Comments
The site is located in Ammanford in close proximity to the amenities and services available. The
site represents a sustainable location.
The site was formerly used as a Club for the British legion and constitutes a previously developed
site at a location which is reflective of and consistent with the current urban. The development of
the site would not negatively impact upon the character and amenity of the area.
It is noted that the site is currently the subject of two valid consents one for residential development
and the other for the construction of a residential nursing home. Whilst this raises issues in terms
of the identification of the site in strict land use terms it is considered appropriate to consider the
potential for either application to be enacted. In so allocating the site for residential it is considered
that in line with the original consent this would in land use terms represent an appropriate use for
the site. This does not however prevent the inaction of the nursing home proposal. However in
the absence of this proposal being taken forward the Council, in the interests of providing some
ongoing certainty for the future use of the site considers its identification for residential as prudent.
The site has been subject to the SA process, details of which are highlighted in Section 7, below.
Update May 2013:
Note the consideration of flooding in this proforma is primarily based on evidence available at the
time of Deposit LDP publication. Detailed consideration of updated evidence with regards to flood
risk issues on allocated sites e.g. updated TAN 15 Development Advice Maps (March 2013) is
provided in the Council’s Strategic Flood Consequence Assessment (SFCA). The SFCA also
contains recommendations for post Deposit/focused changes as a means to ensure accordance
with national policy. The removal of this allocation has consequently been suggested as a focused
change to comply with national policy.
Note: Reference should be made to the guidance notes accompanying this proforma when
interpreting its contents.
7. Sustainability Appraisal
Score:
240
Score Summary Count
Threats
Low
Medium
High
4
2
1
No. Prospective Opportunities
24
22
13
Issues
Opportunities:
Further
Comments
Site has a good, positive score. See score card for further detail. No notable
Issues. Site represents a consented commitment.
Carmarthenshire LDP
Site Assessment Proforma
1. Site Details
Ref:
GA3/h15
Site Ref (where applicable):
Location:
Rear 1,3,5 Station Road
Site Area (Ha):
Existing Use*
Vacant
Potential Use*
Residential
*if candidate site as proposed by respondent
2. Land Use/ Planning History
UDP allocation?
Relevant Planning History
E/18055 – Outline planning permission granted for 6 residential flats on 2/6/08
3. Phase 1 – Identification of Strategic Sites
Is the Site Strategic?
Yes (Site proceeds to Phase 2b)
No
x
(Site proceeds to Phase 2a as a Non-Strategic Site)
The site is not considered to be strategic in nature for the following reasons:
not located in a settlement defined as a Growth Area
x
not of an appropriate size
not situated at a key location in terms of transport and accessibility
x
the site is not critical to the delivery of the strategy
This does not preclude the site’s consideration as a Non-Strategic Site.
Expanded reasons for non identification of the site as strategic are available.
4. Phase 2a – Initial Analysis
Q.1
x
Land use allocation specific or non allocation related?
Allocation (proceeds to Q.2)
Non allocation (Considered through LDP policy)
Q.2
x
Within or immediately adjoining an identified settlement in the Preferred Strategy?
Yes (Site proceeds to Q.3)
No (Site is dismissed)
Q.3
x
If residential, can the site accommodate 5 or more houses (i.e. is >0.16ha in size)?
Yes (Site proceeds to Phase 2b)
No Considered under the review of Development Limits)
Comments
5. Phase 2b – Further Analysis
Q.4 Is the site located within or adjacent to any of the following?
(If yes, site does not proceed except where potential for mitigation can be demonstrated)
No
Yes
Partly
Adjacent
KEY DETERMINANTS
Nature and Landscape Conservation
Ramsar Site
x
Special Protection Area (SPA)
x
Special Area of Conservation (SAC)
x
National Nature Reserve (NNR)
x
Site of Special Scientific Interest (SSSI)
x
Common Land or Registered Village Green
x
Cultural Heritage
Scheduled Ancient Monument or remains of
national importance
Flooding
TAN 15 Development Advice Maps
x
x
EA Flood Map - nat_floodzone3
x
Minerals
Mineral buffer zone
x
Q.5 Would development of the site represent or result in:
Tandem development
No
x
Ribbon development
x
Coalescence
x
Development unrelated to the existing urban form
x
Sporadic & fragmented pattern of development (either constitute or contribute to)
x
An illogical extension to the settlement
x
Conflicts with existing land use or known plans and strategies
x
A Detrimental Impact on the Character and Setting of the settlement or its features
(including views and glimpses both into and out of the settlement)
A loss of areas of open space and amenity value
x
General Planning Principles
Yes
x
Comments
Refer to May 2013 update (below) with regard to revised TAN 15 DAMs.
Q.6 Additional considerations:
No
General
Yes
?
No
Does the site have an available access point with adequate visibility?
Would development at the site impact upon the highway network and
increase the risk to highway safety?
Is it Previously Developed Land?
Yes
x
?
x
x
Soil / Agricultural Land Quality
Does the site contain high carbon soil e.g. peat?
x
Does the site contain high quality agricultural land?
x
Q.7 Is the site located within or related to any of the following?:
No
Nature and Landscape Conservation
Local Nature Reserves (LNR)
Regionally
Important
Geological
Geomorphological Sites (RIGS)
Cultural Heritage
Conservation Area
Yes
Partly
Adjacent
x
/
x
x
Q.8 Would development at the site impact upon species/habitats of high importance? (refer
to Biodiversity/Connectivity Study)
Yes
x
No
Unknown
Q.9 Accessibility - Is the site within a settlement with access to, or within easy reach of, the
following:
No
Yes
Rail network
x
Highway network (A or B roads)
x
Public transport
x
Cycle ways and/or footpaths
x
Q.10 Site Deliverability - Are there any infrastructure or other issues on the site that would affect
its deliverability during the Plan period.
Yes
x
No
Unknown
Comments
6. Additional Comments
Comments
The site comprises brownfield land located within the existing built form along College Street,
Ammanford.
The site has a number of advantages in terms of retention as a residential allocation – close to the
local amenities and services of the settlement, integrated to the existing residential built form and
with good access and highway links. In planning terms the site offers an appropriate option in
terms of location and lack of harm to the amenity and character of the settlement.
Furthermore, the site has outline planning permission for 6 flats. In conclusion this available land
can be put forward as a residential allocation within the LDP.
The site has been subject to the SA process, details of which are highlighted in Section 7, below.
May 2013 update:
Note the consideration of flooding in this proforma is primarily based on evidence available at the
time of Deposit LDP publication. Detailed consideration of updated evidence with regards to flood
risk issues on allocated sites e.g. updated TAN 15 Development Advice Maps (March 2013) is
provided in the Council’s Strategic Flood Consequence Assessment (SFCA). The SFCA also
contains recommendations for post Deposit/focused changes as a means to ensure accordance
with national policy. The removal of this allocation has consequently been suggested as a focused
change to comply with national policy.
Note: Reference should be made to the guidance notes accompanying this proforma when
interpreting its contents.
7. Sustainability Appraisal
Score:
241
Score Summary Count
Threats
Issues
Low
6
Medium
0
High
1
None of note. See relevant score card.
No. Prospective Opportunities
22
3
22
Opportunities:
Further
Comments
Site has a good, positive score. See score card for further detail. No notable
Issues. Site represents a consented commitment.
Carmarthenshire LDP
Site Assessment Proforma
1. Site Details
Ref:
GA3/h16
Site Ref (where applicable):
Location:
Land at Gwynfryn Fawr
Candidate Sites 004-058
and 004-059
Site Area (Ha):
Existing Use*
Agricultural
Potential Use*
Residential
*if candidate site as proposed by respondent
2. Land Use/ Planning History
UDP allocation?
Residential Allocation (GR3/9)
Relevant Planning History
E/17790 – Pending Planning Application for 88 Houses and 18 Flats
3. Phase 1 – Identification of Strategic Sites
Is the Site Strategic?
Yes (Site proceeds to Phase 2b)
No
x
(Site proceeds to Phase 2a as a Non-Strategic Site)
The site is not considered to be strategic in nature for the following reasons:
not located in a settlement defined as a Growth Area
x
not of an appropriate size
not situated at a key location in terms of transport and accessibility
x
the site is not critical to the delivery of the strategy
This does not preclude the site’s consideration as a Non-Strategic Site.
Expanded reasons for non identification of the site as strategic are available.
4. Phase 2a – Initial Analysis
Q.1
x
Land use allocation specific or non allocation related?
Allocation (proceeds to Q.2)
Non allocation (Considered through LDP policy)
Q.2
x
Within or immediately adjoining an identified settlement in the Preferred Strategy?
Yes (Site proceeds to Q.3)
No (Site is dismissed)
Q.3
x
If residential, can the site accommodate 5 or more houses (i.e. is >0.16ha in size)?
Yes (Site proceeds to Phase 2b)
No Considered under the review of Development Limits)
Comments
5. Phase 2b – Further Analysis
Q.4 Is the site located within or adjacent to any of the following?
(If yes, site does not proceed except where potential for mitigation can be demonstrated)
No
Yes
Partly
Adjacent
KEY DETERMINANTS
Nature and Landscape Conservation
Ramsar Site
x
Special Protection Area (SPA)
x
Special Area of Conservation (SAC)
x
National Nature Reserve (NNR)
x
Site of Special Scientific Interest (SSSI)
x
Common Land or Registered Village Green
x
Cultural Heritage
Scheduled Ancient Monument or remains of
national importance
Flooding
TAN 15 Development Advice Maps
x
x
EA Flood Map - nat_floodzone3
Minerals
Mineral buffer zone
x
x
Q.5 Would development of the site represent or result in:
Tandem development
No
x
Ribbon development
x
Coalescence
x
Development unrelated to the existing urban form
x
Sporadic & fragmented pattern of development (either constitute or contribute to)
x
An illogical extension to the settlement
x
Conflicts with existing land use or known plans and strategies
x
A Detrimental Impact on the Character and Setting of the settlement or its features
(including views and glimpses both into and out of the settlement)
A loss of areas of open space and amenity value
x
General Planning Principles
Yes
x
Comments
Part of the eastern edge of the site is located within a C2 flood risk area.
Q.6 Additional considerations:
No
General
Yes
?
No
Does the site have an available access point with adequate visibility?
Would development at the site impact upon the highway network and
increase the risk to highway safety?
Is it Previously Developed Land?
Yes
x
?
x
x
Soil / Agricultural Land Quality
Does the site contain high carbon soil e.g. peat?
x
Does the site contain high quality agricultural land?
x
Q.7 Is the site located within or related to any of the following?:
No
Nature and Landscape Conservation
Local Nature Reserves (LNR)
Regionally
Important
Geological
Geomorphological Sites (RIGS)
Cultural Heritage
Conservation Area
Yes
Partly
Adjacent
x
/
x
x
Q.8 Would development at the site impact upon species/habitats of high importance? (refer
to Biodiversity/Connectivity Study)
Yes
No
x
Unknown
Q.9 Accessibility - Is the site within a settlement with access to, or within easy reach of, the
following:
No
Yes
Rail network
x
Highway network (A or B roads)
x
Public transport
x
Cycle ways and/or footpaths
x
Q.10 Site Deliverability - Are there any infrastructure or other issues on the site that would affect
its deliverability during the Plan period.
Yes
x
No
Unknown
Comments
6. Additional Comments
Comments
The site is located on the outskirts of Ammanford, within the growth area, and its close proximity to
amenities and services available enhances the site’s sustainability credentials.
It represents a Greenfield site with a pending application for some 106 affordable residential units.
The site having been allocated previously for residential development has a history of consents
and is within the ownership of the County Council. In this respect matters pertaining to ownership
do not impact upon deliverability.
Extending on from the existing development at Rhodfa Frank, the proposed site represents a
logical extension of the built form to the rear of the development with no impact on the amenity or
character of the area. It provides the potential to contribute significantly to housing need
particularly in relation to affordable housing provision in a location well placed to provide the
necessary facilities and services.
The comments of the County ecologist in terms of the potential for habitat interest on the site and
the proximity to the river and the potential for biodiversity value is recognised. The
Biodiversity/Connectivity Study indicates the river bank area offers potential value and would in
itself represent and important connectivity or corridor for wildlife and as such should be duly
protected as part of any development. In relation to the proximity of the watercourse, reference
should be made policy EP1 in relation to the protection of watercourses and riparian zones.
It is noted that the flood risk area impinges slightly on the site and potentially affects the access
into the site. Whilst the area impinging on the site can be accounted for through design and other
siting considerations, the matters pertaining to the access are important considerations of the
application process.
Whilst being mindful of the potential impact of flood risk on the deliverability of the site, it is
considered appropriate to identify the site as a residential allocation on the basis of the current
pending application, its location in terms of siting within the growth area and availability of key
services, and its potential contribution in meeting affordable housing requirements. The outcome
of the pending application and matters relating to the potential impact of flood risk will continue to
be monitored.
The site has been subject to the SA process, details of which are highlighted in Section 7, below.
Note: Reference should be made to the guidance notes accompanying this proforma when
interpreting its contents.
7. Sustainability Appraisal
Score:
171
Score Summary Count
Threats
Issues
No. Prospective Opportunities
Low
8
24
Medium
2
15
High
3
12
Noted that health and wellbeing highlights two high outputs however considerations
such as the distance from recreation does not reflect the proximity of such facilities
to the site
Opportunities:
Further
Comments
No notable issues. The sites sustainability offer is reflected in the high overall
score together with the level of opportunities over threats.
Carmarthenshire LDP
Site Assessment Proforma
1. Site Details
Ref:
GA3/h17
Location:
Tirychen Farm
Site Ref (where applicable):
Part of Candidate Site
171-002
Site Area (Ha):
Existing Use*
Agricultural
Potential Use*
Residential
*if candidate site as proposed by respondent
2. Land Use/ Planning History
UDP allocation?
Residential Allocation (GR3/4)
Relevant Planning History
P6/16/305/95 – Full Planning Permission – Residential Development 141 dwellings Section 106 Approved 5 February 2008.
E/00341 - Amended application to 305/95 - residential development (150 units) - Refused 4
December 1997
Update May 2013:
E/21663 – Outline Planning Permission granted for 289 Dwellings on 13/3/13, pending signing of
Section 106 Agreement.
3. Phase 1 – Identification of Strategic Sites
Is the Site Strategic?
Yes (Site proceeds to Phase 2b)
No
x
(Site proceeds to Phase 2a as a Non-Strategic Site)
The site is not considered to be strategic in nature for the following reasons:
not located in a settlement defined as a Growth Area
x
not of an appropriate size
not situated at a key location in terms of transport and accessibility
x
the site is not critical to the delivery of the strategy
This does not preclude the site’s consideration as a Non-Strategic Site.
Expanded reasons for non identification of the site as strategic are available.
4. Phase 2a – Initial Analysis
Q.1
x
Land use allocation specific or non allocation related?
Allocation (proceeds to Q.2)
Non allocation (Considered through LDP policy)
Q.2
x
Within or immediately adjoining an identified settlement in the Preferred Strategy?
Yes (Site proceeds to Q.3)
No (Site is dismissed)
Q.3
x
If residential, can the site accommodate 5 or more houses (i.e. is >0.16ha in size)?
Yes (Site proceeds to Phase 2b)
No Considered under the review of Development Limits)
Comments
5. Phase 2b – Further Analysis
Q.4 Is the site located within or adjacent to any of the following?
(If yes, site does not proceed except where potential for mitigation can be demonstrated)
No
Yes
Partly
Adjacent
KEY DETERMINANTS
Nature and Landscape Conservation
Ramsar Site
x
Special Protection Area (SPA)
x
Special Area of Conservation (SAC)
x
National Nature Reserve (NNR)
x
Site of Special Scientific Interest (SSSI)
x
Common Land or Registered Village Green
x
Cultural Heritage
Scheduled Ancient Monument or remains of
national importance
Flooding
TAN 15 Development Advice Maps
x
x
EA Flood Map - nat_floodzone3
x
Minerals
Mineral buffer zone
x
Q.5 Would development of the site represent or result in:
Tandem development
No
x
Ribbon development
x
Coalescence
x
Development unrelated to the existing urban form
x
Sporadic & fragmented pattern of development (either constitute or contribute to)
x
An illogical extension to the settlement
x
Conflicts with existing land use or known plans and strategies
x
A Detrimental Impact on the Character and Setting of the settlement or its features
(including views and glimpses both into and out of the settlement)
A loss of areas of open space and amenity value
x
General Planning Principles
Comments
x
Yes
Q.6 Additional considerations:
No
Yes
?
General
x
Does the site have an available access point with adequate visibility?
Would development at the site impact upon the highway network and
increase the risk to highway safety?
Is it Previously Developed Land?
x
x
Soil / Agricultural Land Quality
Does the site contain high carbon soil e.g. peat?
x
Does the site contain high quality agricultural land?
x
Q.7 Is the site located within or related to any of the following?:
No
Nature and Landscape Conservation
Local Nature Reserves (LNR)
Regionally
Important
Geological
Geomorphological Sites (RIGS)
Cultural Heritage
Conservation Area
Yes
Partly
Adjacent
x
/
x
x
Q.8 Would development at the site impact upon species/habitats of high importance? (refer
to Biodiversity/Connectivity Study)
Yes
x
No
Unknown
Q.9 Accessibility - Is the site within a settlement with access to, or within easy reach of, the
following:
No
Yes
Rail network
x
Highway network (A or B roads)
x
Public transport
x
Cycle ways and/or footpaths
x
Q.10 Site Deliverability - Are there any infrastructure or other issues on the site that would affect
its deliverability during the Plan period.
Yes
Comments
6. Additional Comments
x
No
Unknown
Comments
The site is located on the outskirts of Ammanford in Penybanc and represents a long standing
allocation with a history of planning consents. Having been consented for 141 dwellings (as
reflected in the UDP) the current application seeks to increase this to some 336 units.
Its location within the growth area and its close proximity to the centre of Ammanford and the
relatively high levels of amenities and services available enhances the site sustainability
credentials.
In site specific terms it represents a green field location with its eastern boundaries clearly defined
and delinated by woodland and a cemetery. In this respect the sites’ defined nature provides a
clear distinction between the developable area and the open countryside beyond. The extent of
the allocation is reflective of a growth area site particularly one with the locational benefits as
exhibited here. The proximity to services and the relative lack of on site constraints highlights its
deliverability. It is however noted that the site has remained an allocation since the Dinefwr Local
Plan without being taken forward. It is possible to speculate over the reasons for its non delivery to
date however the pending planning application signals a renewed interest in the site. It is however
noted that the density proposed is significantly higher than that previously granted and set out
within the UDP, the LDP its self proposes a density which is more consistent with that adopted
across the plan and reflective of the area. It should be noted that this density is indicative and may
vary and that negotiations and discussions in determining the application may also result in a lower
number if approved.
Contributions may be required in relation to provision on sections of Dyffryn Road to address some
highway safety concerns.
Response to TOG comments:
The EA’s comment concerning the potential for capacity issues at the Garnswllt WWTW is noted
however discussions/consultations remain on going with Dwr Cymru which together with
appropriate phasing etc does not preclude deliverability during the plan period. It is also noted that
there is currently potential capacity and that the issue relates to the level of any future
development.
There are currently no significant water body issues. Policy EP1 provides for the consideration of
proposals where they relate to impact on water quality and in relation to matters of environmental
capacity. Consequently any proposals will be required to satisfy its provisions.
Reference will need to be made to policy EP3 and the requirement for SuDS.
The site has been subject to the SA process, details of which are highlighted in Section 7, below.
Note: Reference should be made to the guidance notes accompanying this proforma when
interpreting its contents.
7. Sustainability Appraisal
Score:
79
Score Summary Count
Threats
Issues
No. Prospective Opportunities
Low
8
22
Medium
2
3
High
4
19
The relative scoring is noted and particularly the level of high issues and their
impact upon that score. In this respect the proximity of the site to ancient
woodland is noted. The disparity in score is somewhat explained by this with a
minus100 automatically being given as a result. This proximity is noted however
the exclusion of this woodland from the LDP (as opposed to the UDP) provides it
with an added protection beyond its status and its TPO.
Opportunities: The sites location whilst presenting some issues from an SA prespective also
provides for a number of opportunities with its score (taking into account the
Ancient woodland) a reflection of this.
Further
Comments
Carmarthenshire LDP
Site Assessment Proforma
1. Site Details
Ref:
GA3/h18
Site Ref (where applicable):
Location:
Land at Maes yr Haf
Site Area (Ha):
Existing Use*
Vacant
Potential Use*
Residential
*if candidate site as proposed by respondent
2. Land Use/ Planning History
UDP allocation?
White land within development limits.
Relevant Planning History
E/21226 –Planning Permission for Residential Development – Granted 9/7/09
E/21119 – Full Planning Permission for 6 Dwellings – Granted 16/7/09
3. Phase 1 – Identification of Strategic Sites
Is the Site Strategic?
Yes (Site proceeds to Phase 2b)
No
x
(Site proceeds to Phase 2a as a Non-Strategic Site)
The site is not considered to be strategic in nature for the following reasons:
not located in a settlement defined as a Growth Area
x
not of an appropriate size
not situated at a key location in terms of transport and accessibility
x
the site is not critical to the delivery of the strategy
This does not preclude the site’s consideration as a Non-Strategic Site.
Expanded reasons for non identification of the site as strategic are available.
4. Phase 2a – Initial Analysis
Q.1
x
Land use allocation specific or non allocation related? -+
Allocation (proceeds to Q.2)
Non allocation (Considered through LDP policy)
Q.2
x
Within or immediately adjoining an identified settlement in the Preferred Strategy?
Yes (Site proceeds to Q.3)
No (Site is dismissed)
Q.3
x
If residential, can the site accommodate 5 or more houses (i.e. is >0.16ha in size)?
Yes (Site proceeds to Phase 2b)
No Considered under the review of Development Limits)
Comments
5. Phase 2b – Further Analysis
Q.4 Is the site located within or adjacent to any of the following?
(If yes, site does not proceed except where potential for mitigation can be demonstrated)
No
Yes
Partly
Adjacent
KEY DETERMINANTS
Nature and Landscape Conservation
Ramsar Site
x
Special Protection Area (SPA)
x
Special Area of Conservation (SAC)
x
National Nature Reserve (NNR)
x
Site of Special Scientific Interest (SSSI)
x
Common Land or Registered Village Green
x
Cultural Heritage
Scheduled Ancient Monument or remains of
national importance
Flooding
TAN 15 Development Advice Maps
x
x
EA Flood Map - nat_floodzone3
x
Minerals
Mineral buffer zone
x
Q.5 Would development of the site represent or result in:
Tandem development
No
x
Ribbon development
x
Coalescence
x
Development unrelated to the existing urban form
x
Sporadic & fragmented pattern of development (either constitute or contribute to)
x
An illogical extension to the settlement
x
Conflicts with existing land use or known plans and strategies
x
A Detrimental Impact on the Character and Setting of the settlement or its features
(including views and glimpses both into and out of the settlement)
A loss of areas of open space and amenity value
x
General Planning Principles
Yes
x
Comments
Q.6 Additional considerations:
No
Yes
General
Does the site have an available access point with adequate visibility?
x
?
Would development at the site impact upon the highway network and
increase the risk to highway safety?
Is it Previously Developed Land?
No
x
Yes
?
x
Soil / Agricultural Land Quality
Does the site contain high carbon soil e.g. peat?
x
Does the site contain high quality agricultural land?
x
Q.7 Is the site located within or related to any of the following?:
No
Nature and Landscape Conservation
Local Nature Reserves (LNR)
Regionally
Important
Geological
Geomorphological Sites (RIGS)
Cultural Heritage
Conservation Area
Yes
Partly
Adjacent
x
/
x
x
Q.8 Would development at the site impact upon species/habitats of high importance? (refer
to Biodiversity/Connectivity Study)
Yes
x
No
Unknown
Q.9 Accessibility - Is the site within a settlement with access to, or within easy reach of, the
following:
No
Yes
Rail network
x
Highway network (A or B roads)
x
Public transport
x
Cycle ways and/or footpaths
x
Q.10 Site Deliverability - Are there any infrastructure or other issues on the site that would affect
its deliverability during the Plan period.
Yes
x
No
Unknown
Comments
6. Additional Comments
Comments
The site is located in relatively close proximity to the town of Ammanford and the amenities and
services available. The site represents a sustainable location.
The site occupies land to side of an existing long standing estate development and represents an
appropriate and logical extension to allow for the culmination of growth at this location.
It is noted that the site is currently the subject of two valid consents for residential development.
These consents represent two components of the proposed allocation with that too the west
currently being developed. It is therefore in the interests of continuity and as a reflection of the
consented and its sustainability credentials considered prudent to allocate the site for residential
development.
The site has been subject to the SA process, details of which are highlighted in Section 7, below.
Note: Reference should be made to the guidance notes accompanying this proforma when
interpreting its contents.
7. Sustainability Appraisal
Score:
171
Score Summary Count
Threats
Low
Medium
High
8
3
2
No. Prospective Opportunities
14
4
18
Issues
Opportunities:
Further
Comments
There are no notable issues. The site has current valid consents.
Carmarthenshire LDP
Site Assessment Proforma
1. Site Details
Ref:
GA3/h19
Site Ref (where applicable):
Location:
Land adj. Parc Fferws
Part of Candidate Site
004-043
Site Area (Ha):
Existing Use*
Vacant
Potential Use*
Residential
*if candidate site as proposed by respondent
2. Land Use/ Planning History
UDP allocation?
Relevant Planning History
Full planning (E/16274) for 19 dwellings was granted on 22/8/08 – a large number of these have
already been completed.
An additional area has been allocated in the Deposit LDP which could accommodate
approximately 8 dwellings. Whilst this area does not have planning permission, it lies immediately
to the rear of a nearly completed residential estate (the 19 dwellings with full planning E/16274)
from which it could be accessed.
3. Phase 1 – Identification of Strategic Sites
Is the Site Strategic?
Yes (Site proceeds to Phase 2b)
No
x
(Site proceeds to Phase 2a as a Non-Strategic Site)
The site is not considered to be strategic in nature for the following reasons:
not located in a settlement defined as a Growth Area
x
not of an appropriate size
not situated at a key location in terms of transport and accessibility
x
the site is not critical to the delivery of the strategy
This does not preclude the site’s consideration as a Non-Strategic Site.
Expanded reasons for non identification of the site as strategic are available.
4. Phase 2a – Initial Analysis
Q.1
x
Land use allocation specific or non allocation related?
Allocation (proceeds to Q.2)
Non allocation (Considered through LDP policy)
Q.2
x
Within or immediately adjoining an identified settlement in the Preferred Strategy?
Yes (Site proceeds to Q.3)
No (Site is dismissed)
Q.3
x
If residential, can the site accommodate 5 or more houses (i.e. is >0.16ha in size)?
Yes (Site proceeds to Phase 2b)
No Considered under the review of Development Limits)
Comments
5. Phase 2b – Further Analysis
Q.4 Is the site located within or adjacent to any of the following?
(If yes, site does not proceed except where potential for mitigation can be demonstrated)
No
Yes
Partly
Adjacent
KEY DETERMINANTS
Nature and Landscape Conservation
Ramsar Site
x
Special Protection Area (SPA)
x
Special Area of Conservation (SAC)
x
National Nature Reserve (NNR)
x
Site of Special Scientific Interest (SSSI)
x
Common Land or Registered Village Green
x
Cultural Heritage
Scheduled Ancient Monument or remains of
national importance
Flooding
TAN 15 Development Advice Maps
x
x
EA Flood Map - nat_floodzone3
x
Minerals
Mineral buffer zone
x
Q.5 Would development of the site represent or result in:
Tandem development
No
x
Ribbon development
x
Coalescence
x
Development unrelated to the existing urban form
x
Sporadic & fragmented pattern of development (either constitute or contribute to)
x
An illogical extension to the settlement
x
Conflicts with existing land use or known plans and strategies
x
A Detrimental Impact on the Character and Setting of the settlement or its features
(including views and glimpses both into and out of the settlement)
A loss of areas of open space and amenity value
x
General Planning Principles
Comments
x
Yes
Q.6 Additional considerations:
No
Yes
?
General
x
Does the site have an available access point with adequate visibility?
Would development at the site impact upon the highway network and
increase the risk to highway safety?
Is it Previously Developed Land?
x
x
Soil / Agricultural Land Quality
Does the site contain high carbon soil e.g. peat?
x
Does the site contain high quality agricultural land?
x
Q.7 Is the site located within or related to any of the following?:
No
Nature and Landscape Conservation
Local Nature Reserves (LNR)
Regionally
Important
Geological
Geomorphological Sites (RIGS)
Cultural Heritage
Conservation Area
Yes
Partly
Adjacent
x
/
x
x
Q.8 Would development at the site impact upon species/habitats of high importance? (refer
to Biodiversity/Connectivity Study)
Yes
x
No
Unknown
Q.9 Accessibility - Is the site within a settlement with access to, or within easy reach of, the
following:
No
Yes
Rail network
x
Highway network (A or B roads)
x
Public transport
x
Cycle ways and/or footpaths
x
Q.10 Site Deliverability - Are there any infrastructure or other issues on the site that would affect
its deliverability during the Plan period.
Yes
x
No
Unknown
Comments
6. Additional Comments
Comments
National Planning Policy is statutorily underpinned by the principle of sustainable development and
accordingly the underlying ethos of the emerging Carmarthenshire Local Development Plan has
been to promote a settlement pattern that is in compliance with the principles of sustainability.
The Local Planning Authority consider that the designation of the subject site is appropriate to
ensure that sufficient land has been allocated within the LDP for residential development purposes
in accordance with Planning Policy Wales.
The site has a number of advantages in terms of retention as a residential allocation – close to the
local amenities and services of the settlement, integrated to the existing residential built form and
with good access and highway links. In planning terms the site offers an appropriate option in
terms of location and lack of harm to the amenity and character of the settlement.
A large part of the site has already been completed during the Plan period. Whilst the additional
area does not have planning permission, it lies immediately to the rear of a newly completed
residential estate from which it could be accessed.
The site has been subject to the SA process, details of which are highlighted in Section 7, below.
Comments were received from the Environment Agency as part of their remit as being on the LDP
Technical Officer’s Group (TOG). However, it must be emphasised that only a part of the overall
site that was sent to TOG for comment forms this housing allocation. Nevertheless, in respect of
the EA’s TOG comments, the potential for capacity issues at the WWTW is noted however
discussions/consultations remain on going with Dwr Cymru which together with appropriate
phasing etc does not preclude deliverability during the plan period.
Furthermore, there are currently no significant water body issues. LDP Policy EP1 provides for the
consideration of proposals where they relate to impact on water quality and in relation to matters of
environmental capacity. Consequently any proposals will be required to satisfy its provisions.
Reference will also need to be made to policy EP3 and the requirement for SuDS.
A preliminary risk assessment would be required at the planning application stage to ascertain any
potential land contamination from historical land use .
The site has been subject to the SA process, details of which are highlighted in Section 7, below.
Note: Reference should be made to the guidance notes accompanying this proforma when
interpreting its contents.
7. Sustainability Appraisal
Score:
126
Score Summary Count
Threats
Issues
Opportunities:
Low
9
Medium
0
High
3
None of note. See relevant score card.
No. Prospective Opportunities
20
9
10
Further
Comments
Site has a positive score. See score card for further detail. No notable Issues.
Carmarthenshire LDP
Site Assessment Proforma
1. Site Details
Ref:
GA3/h20
Site Ref (where applicable):
Location:
Land at Hafod Road, Tycroes
Site Area (Ha):
Existing Use*
Vacant
Potential Use*
Residential
*if candidate site as proposed by respondent
2. Land Use/ Planning History
UDP allocation?
Residential (GR3/64)
Relevant Planning History
Full Planning Permission - S/17524 – Granted 7/3/2008 – Development of 9 Residential units and
an access road.
Update May 2013:
S/25733 – full planning approved for 24 dwellings on 13/3/12, subject to the signing of a Section
106 Agreement.
3. Phase 1 – Identification of Strategic Sites
Is the Site Strategic?
Yes (Site proceeds to Phase 2b)
No
x
(Site proceeds to Phase 2a as a Non-Strategic Site)
The site is not considered to be strategic in nature for the following reasons:
not located in a settlement defined as a Growth Area
x
not of an appropriate size
not situated at a key location in terms of transport and accessibility
x
the site is not critical to the delivery of the strategy
This does not preclude the site’s consideration as a Non-Strategic Site.
Expanded reasons for non identification of the site as strategic are available.
4. Phase 2a – Initial Analysis
Q.1
x
Land use allocation specific or non allocation related?
Allocation (proceeds to Q.2)
Non allocation (Considered through LDP policy)
Q.2
x
Within or immediately adjoining an identified settlement in the Preferred Strategy?
Yes (Site proceeds to Q.3)
No (Site is dismissed)
Q.3
If residential, can the site accommodate 5 or more houses (i.e. is >0.16ha in size)?
x
Yes (Site proceeds to Phase 2b)
No Considered under the review of Development Limits)
Comments
5. Phase 2b – Further Analysis
Q.4 Is the site located within or adjacent to any of the following?
(If yes, site does not proceed except where potential for mitigation can be demonstrated)
No
Yes
Partly
Adjacent
KEY DETERMINANTS
Nature and Landscape Conservation
Ramsar Site
x
Special Protection Area (SPA)
x
Special Area of Conservation (SAC)
x
National Nature Reserve (NNR)
x
Site of Special Scientific Interest (SSSI)
x
Common Land or Registered Village Green
x
Cultural Heritage
Scheduled Ancient Monument or remains of
national importance
Flooding
TAN 15 Development Advice Maps
x
x
EA Flood Map - nat_floodzone3
x
Minerals
Mineral buffer zone
x
Q.5 Would development of the site represent or result in:
Tandem development
No
x
Ribbon development
x
Coalescence
x
Development unrelated to the existing urban form
x
Sporadic & fragmented pattern of development (either constitute or contribute to)
x
An illogical extension to the settlement
x
Conflicts with existing land use or known plans and strategies
x
A Detrimental Impact on the Character and Setting of the settlement or its features
(including views and glimpses both into and out of the settlement)
A loss of areas of open space and amenity value
x
General Planning Principles
Yes
x
Comments
A very small part is located within a C2 flood risk area.
Q.6 Additional considerations:
No
General
Yes
?
No
Does the site have an available access point with adequate visibility?
Would development at the site impact upon the highway network and
increase the risk to highway safety?
Is it Previously Developed Land?
Yes
x
?
x
x
Soil / Agricultural Land Quality
Does the site contain high carbon soil e.g. peat?
x
Does the site contain high quality agricultural land?
x
Q.7 Is the site located within or related to any of the following?:
No
Nature and Landscape Conservation
Local Nature Reserves (LNR)
Regionally
Important
Geological
Geomorphological Sites (RIGS)
Cultural Heritage
Conservation Area
Yes
Partly
Adjacent
x
/
x
x
Q.8 Would development at the site impact upon species/habitats of high importance? (refer
to Biodiversity/Connectivity Study)
Yes
x
No
Unknown
Q.9 Accessibility - Is the site within a settlement with access to, or within easy reach of, the
following:
No
Yes
Rail network
x
Highway network (A or B roads)
x
Public transport
x
Cycle ways and/or footpaths
x
Q.10 Site Deliverability - Are there any infrastructure or other issues on the site that would affect
its deliverability during the Plan period.
Yes
x
No
Unknown
Comments
6. Additional Comments
Comments
The site represents an existing residential allocation which at the time of writing and production of
the Deposit LDP enjoys a valid permission for 9 dwellings and an access road. The inclusion and
allocation of this site would represent a reasonable and logical extension of the urban form on the
A489(T) and immediately adjoining the built form of the settlement of Tycroes. The site is currently
characterised by the on going site works in preparation for its development and as such offers no
identified on site biodiversity benefits. Reference is however made to the connectivity study in
relation to the marsh Fritillary Butterfly and identification of this site as on part of a potential flight
path. This should however be viewed in the context with the area offering a number of gaps in
development which may provide any species movement. In addition the study identifies the
connectivity route as through the built form which may not be impacted upon through the
development of the site.
The settlement enjoys a number of key services and facilities and is well related to other key
service provisions in terms of retail, recreation, health care etc to which the site enjoys ready and
easy access.
The site has been subject to the SA process, details of which are highlighted in Section 7, below.
Note: Reference should be made to the guidance notes accompanying this proforma when
interpreting its contents.
7. Sustainability Appraisal
Score:
158
Score Summary Count
Threats
Low
Medium
High
11
1
1
No. Prospective Opportunities
14
10
12
Issues
Opportunities:
Further
Comments
No notable Issues. The site represents a consented commitment.
Carmarthenshire LDP
Site Assessment Proforma
1. Site Details
Ref:
GA3/h21
Site Ref (where applicable):
Location:
D. Coaches Depot, Tycroes Road
Site Area (Ha):
Existing Use*
Potential Use*
Residential
*if candidate site as proposed by respondent
2. Land Use/ Planning History
UDP allocation?
Residential (GR3/63)
Relevant Planning History
Historic residential consent with resultant development complete.
3. Phase 1 – Identification of Strategic Sites
Is the Site Strategic?
Yes (Site proceeds to Phase 2b)
No
x
(Site proceeds to Phase 2a as a Non-Strategic Site)
The site is not considered to be strategic in nature for the following reasons:
not located in a settlement defined as a Growth Area
x
not of an appropriate size
not situated at a key location in terms of transport and accessibility
x
the site is not critical to the delivery of the strategy
This does not preclude the site’s consideration as a Non-Strategic Site.
Expanded reasons for non identification of the site as strategic are available.
4. Phase 2a – Initial Analysis
Q.1
x
Land use allocation specific or non allocation related?
Allocation (proceeds to Q.2)
Non allocation (Considered through LDP policy)
Q.2
x
Within or immediately adjoining an identified settlement in the Preferred Strategy?
Yes (Site proceeds to Q.3)
No (Site is dismissed)
Q.3
x
If residential, can the site accommodate 5 or more houses (i.e. is >0.16ha in size)?
Yes (Site proceeds to Phase 2b)
No Considered under the review of Development Limits)
Comments
5. Phase 2b – Further Analysis
Q.4 Is the site located within or adjacent to any of the following?
(If yes, site does not proceed except where potential for mitigation can be demonstrated)
No
Yes
Partly
Adjacent
KEY DETERMINANTS
Nature and Landscape Conservation
Ramsar Site
x
Special Protection Area (SPA)
x
Special Area of Conservation (SAC)
x
National Nature Reserve (NNR)
x
Site of Special Scientific Interest (SSSI)
x
Common Land or Registered Village Green
x
Cultural Heritage
Scheduled Ancient Monument or remains of
national importance
Flooding
TAN 15 Development Advice Maps
x
x
EA Flood Map - nat_floodzone3
x
Minerals
Mineral buffer zone
x
Q.5 Would development of the site represent or result in:
Tandem development
No
x
Ribbon development
x
Coalescence
x
Development unrelated to the existing urban form
x
Sporadic & fragmented pattern of development (either constitute or contribute to)
x
An illogical extension to the settlement
x
Conflicts with existing land use or known plans and strategies
x
A Detrimental Impact on the Character and Setting of the settlement or its features
(including views and glimpses both into and out of the settlement)
A loss of areas of open space and amenity value
x
General Planning Principles
Yes
x
Comments
Q.6 Additional considerations:
No
General
Yes
?
No
Does the site have an available access point with adequate visibility?
Would development at the site impact upon the highway network and
increase the risk to highway safety?
Is it Previously Developed Land?
Yes
x
?
x
x
Soil / Agricultural Land Quality
Does the site contain high carbon soil e.g. peat?
x
Does the site contain high quality agricultural land?
x
Q.7 Is the site located within or related to any of the following?:
No
Nature and Landscape Conservation
Local Nature Reserves (LNR)
Regionally
Important
Geological
Geomorphological Sites (RIGS)
Cultural Heritage
Conservation Area
Yes
Partly
Adjacent
x
/
x
x
Q.8 Would development at the site impact upon species/habitats of high importance? (refer
to Biodiversity/Connectivity Study)
Yes
x
No
Unknown
Q.9 Accessibility - Is the site within a settlement with access to, or within easy reach of, the
following:
No
Yes
Rail network
x
Highway network (A or B roads)
x
Public transport
x
Cycle ways and/or footpaths
x
Q.10 Site Deliverability - Are there any infrastructure or other issues on the site that would affect
its deliverability during the Plan period.
Yes
x
No
Unknown
Comments
6. Additional Comments
Comments
The site is complete. The land availability study identifies that the 9 dwellings were completed post
2007 and consequently contribute to the land supply figure for the LDP.
Note: Reference should be made to the guidance notes accompanying this proforma when
interpreting its contents.
7. Sustainability Appraisal
Score:
N/A
Score Summary Count
Threats
Low
Medium
High
Issues
Opportunities:
Further
Comments
Not applicable
No. Prospective Opportunities
Carmarthenshire LDP
Site Assessment Proforma
1. Site Details
Ref:
GA3/h22
Site Ref (where applicable):
Location:
Land at Fforest Fach, Tycroes
Site Area (Ha):
Existing Use*
Vacant
Potential Use*
Residential
*if candidate site as proposed by respondent
2. Land Use/ Planning History
UDP allocation?
Residential Allocation (GR3/62)
Relevant Planning History
No recent planning history.
3. Phase 1 – Identification of Strategic Sites
Is the Site Strategic?
Yes (Site proceeds to Phase 2b)
No
x
(Site proceeds to Phase 2a as a Non-Strategic Site)
The site is not considered to be strategic in nature for the following reasons:
not located in a settlement defined as a Growth Area
x
not of an appropriate size
not situated at a key location in terms of transport and accessibility
x
the site is not critical to the delivery of the strategy
This does not preclude the site’s consideration as a Non-Strategic Site.
Expanded reasons for non identification of the site as strategic are available.
4. Phase 2a – Initial Analysis
Q.1
x
Land use allocation specific or non allocation related?
Allocation (proceeds to Q.2)
Non allocation (Considered through LDP policy)
Q.2
x
Within or immediately adjoining an identified settlement in the Preferred Strategy?
Yes (Site proceeds to Q.3)
No (Site is dismissed)
Q.3
x
If residential, can the site accommodate 5 or more houses (i.e. is >0.16ha in size)?
Yes (Site proceeds to Phase 2b)
No Considered under the review of Development Limits)
Comments
5. Phase 2b – Further Analysis
Q.4 Is the site located within or adjacent to any of the following?
(If yes, site does not proceed except where potential for mitigation can be demonstrated)
No
Yes
Partly
Adjacent
KEY DETERMINANTS
Nature and Landscape Conservation
Ramsar Site
x
Special Protection Area (SPA)
x
Special Area of Conservation (SAC)
x
National Nature Reserve (NNR)
x
Site of Special Scientific Interest (SSSI)
x
Common Land or Registered Village Green
x
Cultural Heritage
Scheduled Ancient Monument or remains of
national importance
Flooding
TAN 15 Development Advice Maps
x
x
EA Flood Map - nat_floodzone3
x
Minerals
Mineral buffer zone
x
Q.5 Would development of the site represent or result in:
Tandem development
No
x
Ribbon development
x
Coalescence
x
Development unrelated to the existing urban form
x
Sporadic & fragmented pattern of development (either constitute or contribute to)
x
An illogical extension to the settlement
x
Conflicts with existing land use or known plans and strategies
x
A Detrimental Impact on the Character and Setting of the settlement or its features
(including views and glimpses both into and out of the settlement)
A loss of areas of open space and amenity value
x
General Planning Principles
Yes
x
Comments
Q.6 Additional considerations:
No
General
Yes
?
No
Does the site have an available access point with adequate visibility?
Would development at the site impact upon the highway network and
increase the risk to highway safety?
Is it Previously Developed Land?
Yes
x
?
x
x
Soil / Agricultural Land Quality
Does the site contain high carbon soil e.g. peat?
x
Does the site contain high quality agricultural land?
x
Q.7 Is the site located within or related to any of the following?:
No
Nature and Landscape Conservation
Local Nature Reserves (LNR)
Regionally
Important
Geological
Geomorphological Sites (RIGS)
Cultural Heritage
Conservation Area
Yes
Partly
Adjacent
x
/
x
x
Q.8 Would development at the site impact upon species/habitats of high importance? (refer
to Biodiversity/Connectivity Study)
Yes
x
No
Unknown
Q.9 Accessibility - Is the site within a settlement with access to, or within easy reach of, the
following:
No
Yes
Rail network
x
Highway network (A or B roads)
x
Public transport
x
Cycle ways and/or footpaths
x
Q.10 Site Deliverability - Are there any infrastructure or other issues on the site that would affect
its deliverability during the Plan period.
Yes
x
No
Unknown
Comments
6. Additional Comments
Comments
The site represents an extension to the existing housing estate in line with that proposed within the
existing UDP. The deliverability of the site has been demonstrated over recent years through the
continued development of the elements of the estate and the inclusion and allocation of this site
would represent a reasonable and logical extension of that development. It represents a well
defined and enclosed site with two sides bordered by the existing development with minimal
agricultural land quality and can be characterised as an area of scrub. It offers no identified
biodiversity benefits.
The settlement enjoys a number of key services and facilities and is well related to other key
service provisions in terms of retail, recreation, health care etc.
The site has been subject to the SA process, details of which are highlighted in Section 7, below.
Response to TOG comments:
The EA’s comment relating to the potential for capacity issues at the Garnswllt WWTW is noted
however discussions/consultations remain ongoing with Dwr Cymru which together with
appropriate phasing etc does not preclude deliverability during the plan period. It is also noted that
there is currently potential capacity and that the issue relates to the level of any future
development.
There are currently no significant water body issues. Policy EP1 provides for the consideration of
proposals where they relate to impact on water quality and in relation to matters of environmental
capacity. Consequently any proposals will be required to satisfy its provisions.
Reference will need to be made to policy EP3 and the requirement for SuDS.
Note: Reference should be made to the guidance notes accompanying this proforma when
interpreting its contents.
7. Sustainability Appraisal
Score:
138
Score Summary Count
Threats
Low
Medium
High
Issues
Opportunities:
Further
Comments
No notable Issues
9
2
0
No. Prospective Opportunities
27
2
12
Carmarthenshire LDP
Site Assessment Proforma
1. Site Details
Ref:
GA3/h23
Location:
Land at Heol Ddu, Tycroes
Site Area (Ha):
Existing Use*
Site Ref (where applicable):
Candidate Site 183-002
5.14
Employment
Potential Use*
Residential
*if candidate site as proposed by respondent
2. Land Use/ Planning History
UDP allocation?
Existing Employment
Relevant Planning History
Pending outline application for mixed use of residential and employment (application
number S/13960)
3. Phase 1 – Identification of Strategic Sites
Is the Site Strategic?
Yes (Site proceeds to Phase 2b)
No
x
(Site proceeds to Phase 2a as a Non-Strategic Site)
The site is not considered to be strategic in nature for the following reasons:
not located in a settlement defined as a Growth Area
x
not of an appropriate size
not situated at a key location in terms of transport and accessibility
x
the site is not critical to the delivery of the strategy
This does not preclude the site’s consideration as a Non-Strategic Site.
Expanded reasons for non identification of the site as strategic are available.
4. Phase 2a – Initial Analysis
Q.1
x
Land use allocation specific or non allocation related?
Allocation (proceeds to Q.2)
Non allocation (Considered through LDP policy)
Q.2
x
Within or immediately adjoining an identified settlement in the Preferred Strategy?
Yes (Site proceeds to Q.3)
No (Site is dismissed)
Q.3
x
If residential, can the site accommodate 5 or more houses (i.e. is >0.16ha in size)?
Yes (Site proceeds to Phase 2b)
No Considered under the review of Development Limits)
Comments
5. Phase 2b – Further Analysis
Q.4 Is the site located within or adjacent to any of the following?
(If yes, site does not proceed except where potential for mitigation can be demonstrated)
No
Yes
Partly
Adjacent
KEY DETERMINANTS
Nature and Landscape Conservation
Ramsar Site
x
Special Protection Area (SPA)
x
Special Area of Conservation (SAC)
x
National Nature Reserve (NNR)
x
Site of Special Scientific Interest (SSSI)
x
Common Land or Registered Village Green
x
Cultural Heritage
Scheduled Ancient Monument or remains of
national importance
Flooding
TAN 15 Development Advice Maps
x
x
EA Flood Map - nat_floodzone3
x
Minerals
Mineral buffer zone
x
Q.5 Would development of the site represent or result in:
Tandem development
No
x
Ribbon development
x
Coalescence
x
Development unrelated to the existing urban form
x
Sporadic & fragmented pattern of development (either constitute or contribute to)
x
An illogical extension to the settlement
x
Conflicts with existing land use or known plans and strategies
x
A Detrimental Impact on the Character and Setting of the settlement or its features
(including views and glimpses both into and out of the settlement)
A loss of areas of open space and amenity value
x
General Planning Principles
Yes
x
Comments
Q.6 Additional considerations:
No
General
Yes
?
No
Does the site have an available access point with adequate visibility?
Would development at the site impact upon the highway network and
increase the risk to highway safety?
Is it Previously Developed Land?
Yes
x
?
x
x
Soil / Agricultural Land Quality
Does the site contain high carbon soil e.g. peat?
x
Does the site contain high quality agricultural land?
x
Q.7 Is the site located within or related to any of the following?:
No
Nature and Landscape Conservation
Local Nature Reserves (LNR)
Regionally
Important
Geological
Geomorphological Sites (RIGS)
Cultural Heritage
Conservation Area
Yes
Partly
Adjacent
x
/
x
x
Q.8 Would development at the site impact upon species/habitats of high importance? (refer
to Biodiversity/Connectivity Study)
Yes
x
No
Unknown
Q.9 Accessibility - Is the site within a settlement with access to, or within easy reach of, the
following:
No
Yes
Rail network
x
Highway network (A or B roads)
x
Public transport
x
Cycle ways and/or footpaths
x
Q.10 Site Deliverability - Are there any infrastructure or other issues on the site that would affect
its deliverability during the Plan period.
Yes
x
No
Unknown
Comments
Matters relating to access and highway safety are subject to further consideration as part of the
pending application.
6. Additional Comments
Comments
The site is currently the subject of an outline application for 127 residential units of which some
25% (32 units) are affordable together with a gross floor area of 782 sq m for employment use
spread over 4 units. It should be noted that there has been a Council resolution to approve the
application subject to the signing of a Section 106 agreement.
In this respect the principle of use on site has already been accepted subject to the necessary
agreements being put in place. It should however be noted that further information is being sought
in relation to access as part of the continued consideration of the application.
The site represents the re-development of an existing employment site (previously developed land)
on land at the edge of the settlement of Tycroes albeit very close to the A489(T) and its
accessibility benefits. The settlement enjoys a number of key services and facilities and well
related to other key service provisions in terms of retail, recreation etc.
The provision of employment land allows for the continuation of a mixed economy in the area and
for small scale employment provision which supplements that on offer elsewhere in the area.
The content of the employment land study is noted in that it recommends the safeguarding of this
site for employment use, however the current application and the provision of employment within
the proposal is considered sufficient to warrant its allocation within the LDP.
The site has been subject to the SA process, details of which are highlighted in Section 7, below.
Response to TOG comments:
The EA’s comment relating to the potential for capacity issues at the Garnswllt WWTW is noted,
however discussions/consultations remain on going with Dwr Cymru which together with
appropriate phasing etc does not preclude deliverability during the plan period. It is also noted that
there is currently potential capacity and that the issue relates to the level of any future
development.
There are currently no significant water body issues. Policy EP1 provides for the consideration of
proposals where they relate to impact on water quality and in relation to matters of environmental
capacity. Consequently any proposals will be required to satisfy its provisions.
It is noted that the proposed allocation and development of this site may impact adversely on an
important heritage asset, which is unlikely to be of such importance that allocation cannot proceed.
However, prior to the determination of a planning application this site should be
assessed/evaluated to determine more precisely the character and extent of the heritage asset.
Similarly, a preliminary risk assessment would need to be carried out to ascertain the potential for
land contamination as historical maps indicate mine workings.
Ordinary watercourse and potential culvert runs along the eastern boundary of the site. The EA
indicates that no further culverting will be permitted unless for necessary access purposes.
Reference will need to be made to policy EP3 and the requirement for SuDS.
Note: Reference should be made to the guidance notes accompanying this proforma when
interpreting its contents.
7. Sustainability Appraisal
Score:
133
Score Summary Count
Threats
Low
Medium
High
Issues
7
1
1
No. Prospective Opportunities
15
0
14
Opportunities:
Further
Comments
No notable Issues
Carmarthenshire LDP
Site Assessment Proforma
1. Site Details
Ref:
GA3/h24
Site Ref (where applicable):
Location:
Hendre Road, Coopers
Site Area (Ha):
Existing Use*
Residential
Potential Use*
Residential
*if candidate site as proposed by respondent
2. Land Use/ Planning History
UDP allocation?
Residential Allocation (GR3/27)
Relevant Planning History
S/13914 – Granted 19/10/2006 – 5 Residential units. Site Completed.
3. Phase 1 – Identification of Strategic Sites
Is the Site Strategic?
Yes (Site proceeds to Phase 2b)
No
x
(Site proceeds to Phase 2a as a Non-Strategic Site)
The site is not considered to be strategic in nature for the following reasons:
not located in a settlement defined as a Growth Area
x
not of an appropriate size
not situated at a key location in terms of transport and accessibility
x
the site is not critical to the delivery of the strategy
This does not preclude the site’s consideration as a Non-Strategic Site.
Expanded reasons for non identification of the site as strategic are available.
4. Phase 2a – Initial Analysis
Q.1
x
Land use allocation specific or non allocation related?
Allocation (proceeds to Q.2)
Non allocation (Considered through LDP policy)
Q.2
x
Within or immediately adjoining an identified settlement in the Preferred Strategy?
Yes (Site proceeds to Q.3)
No (Site is dismissed)
Q.3
x
If residential, can the site accommodate 5 or more houses (i.e. is >0.16ha in size)?
Yes (Site proceeds to Phase 2b)
No Considered under the review of Development Limits)
Comments
5. Phase 2b – Further Analysis
Q.4 Is the site located within or adjacent to any of the following?
(If yes, site does not proceed except where potential for mitigation can be demonstrated)
No
Yes
Partly
Adjacent
KEY DETERMINANTS
Nature and Landscape Conservation
Ramsar Site
x
Special Protection Area (SPA)
x
Special Area of Conservation (SAC)
x
National Nature Reserve (NNR)
x
Site of Special Scientific Interest (SSSI)
x
Common Land or Registered Village Green
x
Cultural Heritage
Scheduled Ancient Monument or remains of
national importance
Flooding
TAN 15 Development Advice Maps
x
x
EA Flood Map - nat_floodzone3
x
Minerals
Mineral buffer zone
x
Q.5 Would development of the site represent or result in:
Tandem development
No
x
Ribbon development
x
Coalescence
x
Development unrelated to the existing urban form
x
Sporadic & fragmented pattern of development (either constitute or contribute to)
x
An illogical extension to the settlement
x
Conflicts with existing land use or known plans and strategies
x
A Detrimental Impact on the Character and Setting of the settlement or its features
(including views and glimpses both into and out of the settlement)
A loss of areas of open space and amenity value
x
General Planning Principles
Yes
x
Comments
Q.6 Additional considerations:
No
Yes
General
Does the site have an available access point with adequate visibility?
x
?
Would development at the site impact upon the highway network and
increase the risk to highway safety?
Is it Previously Developed Land?
No
x
Yes
?
x
Soil / Agricultural Land Quality
Does the site contain high carbon soil e.g. peat?
x
Does the site contain high quality agricultural land?
x
Q.7 Is the site located within or related to any of the following?:
No
Nature and Landscape Conservation
Local Nature Reserves (LNR)
Regionally
Important
Geological
Geomorphological Sites (RIGS)
Cultural Heritage
Conservation Area
Yes
Partly
Adjacent
x
/
x
x
Q.8 Would development at the site impact upon species/habitats of high importance? (refer
to Biodiversity/Connectivity Study)
Yes
x
No
Unknown
Q.9 Accessibility - Is the site within a settlement with access to, or within easy reach of, the
following:
No
Yes
Rail network
x
Highway network (A or B roads)
x
Public transport
x
Cycle ways and/or footpaths
x
Q.10 Site Deliverability - Are there any infrastructure or other issues on the site that would affect
its deliverability during the Plan period.
Yes
x
No
Unknown
Comments
6. Additional Comments
Comments
The site is complete. The land availability study identifies that the 5 dwellings were completed post
2007 and consequently contribute to the land supply figure for the LDP.
Note: Reference should be made to the guidance notes accompanying this proforma when
interpreting its contents.
7. Sustainability Appraisal
Score:
N/A
Score Summary Count
Threats
Low
Medium
High
Issues
Opportunities:
Further
Comments
Not applicable
No. Prospective Opportunities
Carmarthenshire LDP
Site Assessment Proforma
1. Site Details
Ref:
GA3/h25
Location:
Delfryn Estate
Site Ref (where applicable):
Site Area (Ha):
Existing Use*
Vacant field
Potential Use*
Residential
*if candidate site as proposed by respondent
2. Land Use/ Planning History
UDP allocation?
Part of Residential Allocation (GR3/25).
Relevant Planning History
Full Planning for 10 dwellings (AM/05063) was withdrawn 18/1/05. Nothing more recent.
3. Phase 1 – Identification of Strategic Sites
Is the Site Strategic?
Yes (Site proceeds to Phase 2b)
No
x
(Site proceeds to Phase 2a as a Non-Strategic Site)
The site is not considered to be strategic in nature for the following reasons:
not located in a settlement defined as a Growth Area
x
not of an appropriate size
not situated at a key location in terms of transport and accessibility
x
the site is not critical to the delivery of the strategy
This does not preclude the site’s consideration as a Non-Strategic Site.
Expanded reasons for non identification of the site as strategic are available.
4. Phase 2a – Initial Analysis
Q.1
x
Land use allocation specific or non allocation related?
Allocation (proceeds to Q.2)
Non allocation (Considered through LDP policy)
Q.2
x
Within or immediately adjoining an identified settlement in the Preferred Strategy?
Yes (Site proceeds to Q.3)
No (Site is dismissed)
Q.3
x
If residential, can the site accommodate 5 or more houses (i.e. is >0.16ha in size)?
Yes (Site proceeds to Phase 2b)
No Considered under the review of Development Limits)
Comments
5. Phase 2b – Further Analysis
Q.4 Is the site located within or adjacent to any of the following?
(If yes, site does not proceed except where potential for mitigation can be demonstrated)
No
Yes
Partly
Adjacent
KEY DETERMINANTS
Nature and Landscape Conservation
Ramsar Site
x
Special Protection Area (SPA)
x
Special Area of Conservation (SAC)
x
National Nature Reserve (NNR)
x
Site of Special Scientific Interest (SSSI)
x
Common Land or Registered Village Green
x
Cultural Heritage
Scheduled Ancient Monument or remains of
national importance
Flooding
TAN 15 Development Advice Maps
x
x
EA Flood Map - nat_floodzone3
x
Minerals
Mineral buffer zone
x
Q.5 Would development of the site represent or result in:
Tandem development
No
x
Ribbon development
x
Coalescence
x
Development unrelated to the existing urban form
x
Sporadic & fragmented pattern of development (either constitute or contribute to)
x
An illogical extension to the settlement
x
Conflicts with existing land use or known plans and strategies
x
A Detrimental Impact on the Character and Setting of the settlement or its features
(including views and glimpses both into and out of the settlement)
A loss of areas of open space and amenity value
x
General Planning Principles
Yes
x
Comments
Q.6 Additional considerations:
No
Yes
General
Does the site have an available access point with adequate visibility?
x
?
Would development at the site impact upon the highway network and
increase the risk to highway safety?
Is it Previously Developed Land?
No
x
Yes
?
x
Soil / Agricultural Land Quality
Does the site contain high carbon soil e.g. peat?
x
Does the site contain high quality agricultural land?
x
Q.7 Is the site located within or related to any of the following?:
No
Nature and Landscape Conservation
Local Nature Reserves (LNR)
Regionally
Important
Geological
Geomorphological Sites (RIGS)
Cultural Heritage
Conservation Area
Yes
Partly
Adjacent
x
/
x
x
Q.8 Would development at the site impact upon species/habitats of high importance? (refer
to Biodiversity/Connectivity Study)
Yes
x
No
Unknown
Q.9 Accessibility - Is the site within a settlement with access to, or within easy reach of, the
following:
No
Yes
Rail network
x
Highway network (A or B roads)
x
Public transport
x
Cycle ways and/or footpaths
x
Q.10 Site Deliverability - Are there any infrastructure or other issues on the site that would affect
its deliverability during the Plan period.
Yes
No
x
Unknown
Comments
6. Additional Comments
Comments
National Planning Policy is statutorily underpinned by the principle of sustainable development and
accordingly the underlying ethos of the emerging Carmarthenshire Local Development Plan has
been to promote a settlement pattern that is in compliance with the principles of sustainability.
The Local Planning Authority consider that the designation of the subject site is appropriate to
ensure that sufficient land has been allocated within the LDP for residential development purposes
in accordance with Planning Policy Wales.
The site has a number of advantages in terms of retention as a residential allocation – close to the
local amenities and services of the settlement, integrated to the existing residential built form and
with good access and highway links. In planning terms the site offers an appropriate option in
terms of location and lack of harm to the amenity and character of the settlement.
The site has been subject to the SA process, details of which are highlighted in Section 7, below.
In response to EA TOG comments:
The potential for capacity issues at the WWTW is noted however discussions/consultations remain
on going with Dwr Cymru which together with appropriate phasing etc does not preclude
deliverability during the plan period. It is also noted that there is currently potential capacity and
that the issue relates to the level of any future development.
There are currently no significant water body issues. Policy EP1 provides for the consideration of
proposals where they relate to impact on water quality and in relation to matters of environmental
capacity. Consequently any proposals will be required to satisfy its provisions.
Further comments:
Comments made by the County Ecologist are duly noted. Such matters will need to be addressed
in relation to the relevant policies of the Plan prior to development taking place.
Note: Reference should be made to the guidance notes accompanying this proforma when
interpreting its contents.
7. Sustainability Appraisal
Score:
180
Score Summary Count
Threats
Low
Medium
High
7
2
3
No. Prospective Opportunities
7
4
20
Issues
Opportunities:
Further
Comments
Site has a good, positive score. See score card for further detail. No notable
Issues.
Carmarthenshire LDP
Site Assessment Proforma
1. Site Details
Ref:
GA3/h26
Site Ref (where applicable):
Location:
Land adjoining Llys Newydd Nursing Home
Site Area (Ha):
Existing Use*
Vacant land
Potential Use*
Residential
*if candidate site as proposed by respondent
2. Land Use/ Planning History
UDP allocation?
Part of Residential Allocation GR3/25.
Relevant Planning History
Outline Planning Permission (E/18152) for 25 dwellings granted 3/4/08. S106 signed commuted
sum.
3. Phase 1 – Identification of Strategic Sites
Is the Site Strategic?
Yes (Site proceeds to Phase 2b)
No
x
(Site proceeds to Phase 2a as a Non-Strategic Site)
The site is not considered to be strategic in nature for the following reasons:
not located in a settlement defined as a Growth Area
x
not of an appropriate size
not situated at a key location in terms of transport and accessibility
x
the site is not critical to the delivery of the strategy
This does not preclude the site’s consideration as a Non-Strategic Site.
Expanded reasons for non identification of the site as strategic are available.
4. Phase 2a – Initial Analysis
Q.1
x
Land use allocation specific or non allocation related?
Allocation (proceeds to Q.2)
Non allocation (Considered through LDP policy)
Q.2
x
Within or immediately adjoining an identified settlement in the Preferred Strategy?
Yes (Site proceeds to Q.3)
No (Site is dismissed)
Q.3
x
If residential, can the site accommodate 5 or more houses (i.e. is >0.16ha in size)?
Yes (Site proceeds to Phase 2b)
No Considered under the review of Development Limits)
Comments
5. Phase 2b – Further Analysis
Q.4 Is the site located within or adjacent to any of the following?
(If yes, site does not proceed except where potential for mitigation can be demonstrated)
No
Yes
Partly
Adjacent
KEY DETERMINANTS
Nature and Landscape Conservation
Ramsar Site
x
Special Protection Area (SPA)
x
Special Area of Conservation (SAC)
x
National Nature Reserve (NNR)
x
Site of Special Scientific Interest (SSSI)
x
Common Land or Registered Village Green
x
Cultural Heritage
Scheduled Ancient Monument or remains of
national importance
Flooding
TAN 15 Development Advice Maps
x
x
EA Flood Map - nat_floodzone3
x
Minerals
Mineral buffer zone
x
Q.5 Would development of the site represent or result in:
Tandem development
No
x
Ribbon development
x
Coalescence
x
Development unrelated to the existing urban form
x
Sporadic & fragmented pattern of development (either constitute or contribute to)
x
An illogical extension to the settlement
x
Conflicts with existing land use or known plans and strategies
x
A Detrimental Impact on the Character and Setting of the settlement or its features
(including views and glimpses both into and out of the settlement)
A loss of areas of open space and amenity value
x
General Planning Principles
Yes
x
Comments
Q.6 Additional considerations:
No
Yes
General
Does the site have an available access point with adequate visibility?
x
?
Would development at the site impact upon the highway network and
increase the risk to highway safety?
Is it Previously Developed Land?
No
x
Yes
?
x
Soil / Agricultural Land Quality
Does the site contain high carbon soil e.g. peat?
x
Does the site contain high quality agricultural land?
x
Q.7 Is the site located within or related to any of the following?:
No
Nature and Landscape Conservation
Local Nature Reserves (LNR)
Regionally
Important
Geological
Geomorphological Sites (RIGS)
Cultural Heritage
Conservation Area
Yes
Partly
Adjacent
x
/
x
x
Q.8 Would development at the site impact upon species/habitats of high importance? (refer
to Biodiversity/Connectivity Study)
Yes
x
No
Unknown
Q.9 Accessibility - Is the site within a settlement with access to, or within easy reach of, the
following:
No
Yes
Rail network
x
Highway network (A or B roads)
x
Public transport
x
Cycle ways and/or footpaths
x
Q.10 Site Deliverability - Are there any infrastructure or other issues on the site that would affect
its deliverability during the Plan period.
Yes
No
x
Unknown
Comments
6. Additional Comments
Comments
The site comprises an area of vacant land, largely surrounded by the existing residential built form
(including a residential nursing home), at a central location within the settlement.
The site has a number of advantages in terms of retention as a residential allocation – close to the
local amenities and services of the settlement, integrated to the existing residential built form and
with good access and highway links. In planning terms the site offers an appropriate option in
terms of location and lack of harm to the amenity and character of the settlement.
Furthermore, the site has an outline planning permission. The principle of the site for residential
development has therefore been considered acceptable. In conclusion this available land can be
put forward as a residential allocation within the LDP.
The site has been subject to the SA process, details of which are highlighted in Section 7, below.
Note: Reference should be made to the guidance notes accompanying this proforma when
interpreting its contents.
7. Sustainability Appraisal
Score:
138
Score Summary Count
Threats
Low
Medium
High
5
2
3
No. Prospective Opportunities
3
8
14
Issues
Opportunities:
Further
Comments
Site has a positive score. See score card for further detail. No notable Issues.
The site represents a consented commitment.
Carmarthenshire LDP
Site Assessment Proforma
1. Site Details
Ref:
GA3/h27
Site Ref (where applicable):
Location:
Adjacent to Nant Y Ci Road, Saron
Site Area (Ha):
Existing Use*
Vacant land
Potential Use*
Residential
*if candidate site as proposed by respondent
2. Land Use/ Planning History
UDP allocation?
Residential Allocation (GR3/52)
Relevant Planning History
E/13862 – Granted 13/8/07 14 Bungalows (Reserved matters to outline application E/08590
approved 07.01.2005)
E/13863 – Granted 13/8/07 13 Bungalows (Reserved matters application to outline application
E/06796 approved 30.09.04)
3. Phase 1 – Identification of Strategic Sites
Is the Site Strategic?
Yes (Site proceeds to Phase 2b)
No
x
(Site proceeds to Phase 2a as a Non-Strategic Site)
The site is not considered to be strategic in nature for the following reasons:
not located in a settlement defined as a Growth Area
x
not of an appropriate size
not situated at a key location in terms of transport and accessibility
x
the site is not critical to the delivery of the strategy
This does not preclude the site’s consideration as a Non-Strategic Site.
Expanded reasons for non identification of the site as strategic are available.
4. Phase 2a – Initial Analysis
Q.1
x
Land use allocation specific or non allocation related?
Allocation (proceeds to Q.2)
Non allocation (Considered through LDP policy)
Q.2
x
Within or immediately adjoining an identified settlement in the Preferred Strategy?
Yes (Site proceeds to Q.3)
No (Site is dismissed)
Q.3
x
If residential, can the site accommodate 5 or more houses (i.e. is >0.16ha in size)?
Yes (Site proceeds to Phase 2b)
No Considered under the review of Development Limits)
Comments
5. Phase 2b – Further Analysis
Q.4 Is the site located within or adjacent to any of the following?
(If yes, site does not proceed except where potential for mitigation can be demonstrated)
No
Yes
Partly
Adjacent
KEY DETERMINANTS
Nature and Landscape Conservation
Ramsar Site
x
Special Protection Area (SPA)
x
Special Area of Conservation (SAC)
x
National Nature Reserve (NNR)
x
Site of Special Scientific Interest (SSSI)
x
Common Land or Registered Village Green
x
Cultural Heritage
Scheduled Ancient Monument or remains of
national importance
Flooding
TAN 15 Development Advice Maps
x
x
EA Flood Map - nat_floodzone3
x
Minerals
Mineral buffer zone
x
Q.5 Would development of the site represent or result in:
Tandem development
No
x
Ribbon development
x
Coalescence
x
Development unrelated to the existing urban form
x
Sporadic & fragmented pattern of development (either constitute or contribute to)
x
An illogical extension to the settlement
x
Conflicts with existing land use or known plans and strategies
x
A Detrimental Impact on the Character and Setting of the settlement or its features
(including views and glimpses both into and out of the settlement)
A loss of areas of open space and amenity value
x
General Planning Principles
Yes
x
Comments
Q.6 Additional considerations:
No
General
Yes
?
No
Does the site have an available access point with adequate visibility?
Would development at the site impact upon the highway network and
increase the risk to highway safety?
Is it Previously Developed Land?
Yes
x
?
x
x
Soil / Agricultural Land Quality
Does the site contain high carbon soil e.g. peat?
x
Does the site contain high quality agricultural land?
x
Q.7 Is the site located within or related to any of the following?:
No
Nature and Landscape Conservation
Local Nature Reserves (LNR)
Regionally
Important
Geological
Geomorphological Sites (RIGS)
Cultural Heritage
Conservation Area
Yes
Partly
Adjacent
x
/
x
x
Q.8 Would development at the site impact upon species/habitats of high importance? (refer
to Biodiversity/Connectivity Study)
Yes
x
No
Unknown
Q.9 Accessibility - Is the site within a settlement with access to, or within easy reach of, the
following:
No
Yes
Rail network
x
Highway network (A or B roads)
x
Public transport
x
Cycle ways and/or footpaths
x
Q.10 Site Deliverability - Are there any infrastructure or other issues on the site that would affect
its deliverability during the Plan period.
Yes
x
No
Unknown
Comments
6. Additional Comments
Comments
The site represents an extension to the existing housing estate in line with that proposed within the
UDP. The deliverability of the site has been demonstrated over recent years through the continued
development of the elements of the estate and the inclusion and allocation of this site would
represent a reasonable and logical extension of that development. It represents a well defined and
enclosed site with the estate development to the north and a defined natural boundary delineating
the remainder. The site appears to have minimal agricultural value.
The settlement is sustainably located and enjoys a number of key services and facilities and well
related to other key service provisions in terms of retail, recreation, health care etc.
The site currently enjoys valid planning consents as detailed above both of which have
commenced with some 12 units completed during the plan period to date. The continued inclusion
of the site is considered appropriate given its committed status.
The site has been subject to the SA process, details of which are highlighted in Section 7, below.
Note: Reference should be made to the guidance notes accompanying this proforma when
interpreting its contents.
7. Sustainability Appraisal
Score:
88
Score Summary Count
Threats
Low
Medium
High
4
3
2
No. Prospective Opportunities
2
5
10
Issues
Opportunities:
Further
Comments
No notable Issues. The site represents a consented commitment.
Carmarthenshire LDP
Site Assessment Proforma
1. Site Details
Ref:
GA3/h28
Site Ref (where applicable):
Location:
Land to Rear of 152 Saron Road
Site Area (Ha):
Existing Use*
Vacant land
Potential Use*
Residential
*if candidate site as proposed by respondent
2. Land Use/ Planning History
UDP allocation?
None, white land within development limits.
Relevant Planning History
E/16678 – Full Planning Permission granted 10/9/09 for 17 dwellings together with the formation of
access with associated works.
3. Phase 1 – Identification of Strategic Sites
Is the Site Strategic?
Yes (Site proceeds to Phase 2b)
No
x
(Site proceeds to Phase 2a as a Non-Strategic Site)
The site is not considered to be strategic in nature for the following reasons:
not located in a settlement defined as a Growth Area
x
not of an appropriate size
not situated at a key location in terms of transport and accessibility
x
the site is not critical to the delivery of the strategy
This does not preclude the site’s consideration as a Non-Strategic Site.
Expanded reasons for non identification of the site as strategic are available.
4. Phase 2a – Initial Analysis
Q.1
x
Land use allocation specific or non allocation related?
Allocation (proceeds to Q.2)
Non allocation (Considered through LDP policy)
Q.2
x
Within or immediately adjoining an identified settlement in the Preferred Strategy?
Yes (Site proceeds to Q.3)
No (Site is dismissed)
Q.3
x
If residential, can the site accommodate 5 or more houses (i.e. is >0.16ha in size)?
Yes (Site proceeds to Phase 2b)
No Considered under the review of Development Limits)
Comments
5. Phase 2b – Further Analysis
Q.4 Is the site located within or adjacent to any of the following?
(If yes, site does not proceed except where potential for mitigation can be demonstrated)
No
Yes
Partly
Adjacent
KEY DETERMINANTS
Nature and Landscape Conservation
Ramsar Site
x
Special Protection Area (SPA)
x
Special Area of Conservation (SAC)
x
National Nature Reserve (NNR)
x
Site of Special Scientific Interest (SSSI)
x
Common Land or Registered Village Green
x
Cultural Heritage
Scheduled Ancient Monument or remains of
national importance
Flooding
TAN 15 Development Advice Maps
x
x
EA Flood Map - nat_floodzone3
x
Minerals
Mineral buffer zone
x
Q.5 Would development of the site represent or result in:
Tandem development
No
x
Ribbon development
x
Coalescence
x
Development unrelated to the existing urban form
x
Sporadic & fragmented pattern of development (either constitute or contribute to)
x
An illogical extension to the settlement
x
Conflicts with existing land use or known plans and strategies
x
A Detrimental Impact on the Character and Setting of the settlement or its features
(including views and glimpses both into and out of the settlement)
A loss of areas of open space and amenity value
x
General Planning Principles
Yes
x
Comments
Q.6 Additional considerations:
No
General
Yes
?
No
Does the site have an available access point with adequate visibility?
Would development at the site impact upon the highway network and
increase the risk to highway safety?
Is it Previously Developed Land?
Yes
x
?
x
x
Soil / Agricultural Land Quality
Does the site contain high carbon soil e.g. peat?
x
Does the site contain high quality agricultural land?
x
Q.7 Is the site located within or related to any of the following?:
No
Nature and Landscape Conservation
Local Nature Reserves (LNR)
Regionally
Important
Geological
Geomorphological Sites (RIGS)
Cultural Heritage
Conservation Area
Yes
Partly
Adjacent
x
/
x
x
Q.8 Would development at the site impact upon species/habitats of high importance? (refer
to Biodiversity/Connectivity Study)
Yes
x
No
Unknown
Q.9 Accessibility - Is the site within a settlement with access to, or within easy reach of, the
following:
No
Yes
Rail network
x
Highway network (A or B roads)
x
Public transport
x
Cycle ways and/or footpaths
x
Q.10 Site Deliverability - Are there any infrastructure or other issues on the site that would affect
its deliverability during the Plan period.
Yes
x
No
Unknown
Comments
6. Additional Comments
Comments
The site represents a logical extension to the current urban form following well defined physical
boundaries to create an enclosed site. It is bounded by frontage development to the south and
east and trees to the west. The site appears to have minimal agricultural value.
The settlement is sustainably located and enjoys good access to of key services and facilities in
relation to retail, recreation, health care etc.
The site currently benefits from a valid planning consent as detailed above. The respective merits
of the site, together with its current planning permission, supports the inclusion of the site as being
an appropriate for residential allocation within the LDP.
Note: Reference should be made to the guidance notes accompanying this proforma when
interpreting its contents.
7. Sustainability Appraisal
Score:
91
Score Summary Count
Threats
Low
Medium
High
4
4
2
No. Prospective Opportunities
5
6
10
Issues
Opportunities:
Further
Comments
No notable Issues. The site represents a consented commitment.
Carmarthenshire LDP
Site Assessment Proforma
1. Site Details
Ref:
GA3/h29
Site Ref (where applicable):
Location:
Land off Llys y Nant, Llandybie
Site Area (Ha):
Existing Use*
Vacant field
Potential Use*
Residential
*if candidate site as proposed by respondent
2. Land Use/ Planning History
UDP allocation?
None, white land within development limits.
Relevant Planning History
Site has outline planning permission (E/18984) granted on 19/3/09. Reserved Matters planning
permission (E/24093) for an access road off Llys y Nant granted 27/1/11.
3. Phase 1 – Identification of Strategic Sites
Is the Site Strategic?
Yes (Site proceeds to Phase 2b)
No
x
(Site proceeds to Phase 2a as a Non-Strategic Site)
The site is not considered to be strategic in nature for the following reasons:
not located in a settlement defined as a Growth Area
x
not of an appropriate size
not situated at a key location in terms of transport and accessibility
x
the site is not critical to the delivery of the strategy
This does not preclude the site’s consideration as a Non-Strategic Site.
Expanded reasons for non identification of the site as strategic are available.
4. Phase 2a – Initial Analysis
Q.1
x
Land use allocation specific or non allocation related?
Allocation (proceeds to Q.2)
Non allocation (Considered through LDP policy)
Q.2
x
Within or immediately adjoining an identified settlement in the Preferred Strategy?
Yes (Site proceeds to Q.3)
No (Site is dismissed)
Q.3
x
If residential, can the site accommodate 5 or more houses (i.e. is >0.16ha in size)?
Yes (Site proceeds to Phase 2b)
No Considered under the review of Development Limits)
Comments
5. Phase 2b – Further Analysis
Q.4 Is the site located within or adjacent to any of the following?
(If yes, site does not proceed except where potential for mitigation can be demonstrated)
No
Yes
Partly
Adjacent
KEY DETERMINANTS
Nature and Landscape Conservation
Ramsar Site
x
Special Protection Area (SPA)
x
Special Area of Conservation (SAC)
x
National Nature Reserve (NNR)
x
Site of Special Scientific Interest (SSSI)
x
Common Land or Registered Village Green
x
Cultural Heritage
Scheduled Ancient Monument or remains of
national importance
Flooding
TAN 15 Development Advice Maps
x
x
EA Flood Map - nat_floodzone3
Minerals
Mineral buffer zone
x
x
Q.5 Would development of the site represent or result in:
Tandem development
No
x
Ribbon development
x
Coalescence
x
Development unrelated to the existing urban form
x
Sporadic & fragmented pattern of development (either constitute or contribute to)
x
An illogical extension to the settlement
x
Conflicts with existing land use or known plans and strategies
x
A Detrimental Impact on the Character and Setting of the settlement or its features
(including views and glimpses both into and out of the settlement)
A loss of areas of open space and amenity value
x
General Planning Principles
Yes
x
Comments
Although the site itself is not located within an identified flood zone, access to the site would need
to pass through a C2 flood risk area.
Q.6 Additional considerations:
No
General
Yes
?
No
Does the site have an available access point with adequate visibility?
Would development at the site impact upon the highway network and
increase the risk to highway safety?
Is it Previously Developed Land?
Yes
x
?
x
x
Soil / Agricultural Land Quality
Does the site contain high carbon soil e.g. peat?
x
Does the site contain high quality agricultural land?
x
Q.7 Is the site located within or related to any of the following?:
No
Nature and Landscape Conservation
Local Nature Reserves (LNR)
Regionally
Important
Geological
Geomorphological Sites (RIGS)
Cultural Heritage
Conservation Area
Yes
Partly
Adjacent
x
/
x
x
Q.8 Would development at the site impact upon species/habitats of high importance? (refer
to Biodiversity/Connectivity Study)
Yes
x
No
Unknown
Q.9 Accessibility - Is the site within a settlement with access to, or within easy reach of, the
following:
No
Yes
Rail network
x
Highway network (A or B roads)
x
Public transport
x
Cycle ways and/or footpaths
x
Q.10 Site Deliverability - Are there any infrastructure or other issues on the site that would affect
its deliverability during the Plan period.
Yes
No
x
Unknown
Comments
6. Additional Comments
Comments
The site has a number of advantages in terms of retention as a residential allocation – close to the
local amenities and services of the settlement, integrated to the existing residential built form and
with good access and highway links. In planning terms the site offers an appropriate option in
terms of location and lack of harm to the amenity and character of the settlement.
Furthermore, the site has an outline planning permission and reserved matters planning
permission for an access road from Llys y Nant. In conclusion this available land can be put
forward as a residential allocation within the LDP.
The site has been subject to the SA process, details of which are highlighted in Section 7, below.
Note: Reference should be made to the guidance notes accompanying this proforma when
interpreting its contents.
7. Sustainability Appraisal
Score:
320
Score Summary Count
Threats
Low
Medium
High
10
0
1
No. Prospective Opportunities
5
5
31
Issues
Opportunities:
Further
Comments
Site has a good, positive score. See score card for further detail. No notable
Issues. Site represents a consented commitment.
Carmarthenshire LDP
Site Assessment Proforma
1. Site Details
Ref:
GA3/h30
Site Ref (where applicable):
Location:
King’s Road, Llandybie
Site Area (Ha):
Existing Use*
Vacant field
Potential Use*
Residential
*if candidate site as proposed by respondent
2. Land Use/ Planning History
UDP allocation?
Residential Allocation GR3/42
Relevant Planning History
Site has full planning permission for 22 dwellings (E/15577), pending the signing of a S106
Agreement at the time of the Deposit LDP.
3. Phase 1 – Identification of Strategic Sites
Is the Site Strategic?
Yes (Site proceeds to Phase 2b)
No
x
(Site proceeds to Phase 2a as a Non-Strategic Site)
The site is not considered to be strategic in nature for the following reasons:
not located in a settlement defined as a Growth Area
x
not of an appropriate size
not situated at a key location in terms of transport and accessibility
x
the site is not critical to the delivery of the strategy
This does not preclude the site’s consideration as a Non-Strategic Site.
Expanded reasons for non identification of the site as strategic are available.
4. Phase 2a – Initial Analysis
Q.1
x
Land use allocation specific or non allocation related?
Allocation (proceeds to Q.2)
Non allocation (Considered through LDP policy)
Q.2
x
Within or immediately adjoining an identified settlement in the Preferred Strategy?
Yes (Site proceeds to Q.3)
No (Site is dismissed)
Q.3
x
If residential, can the site accommodate 5 or more houses (i.e. is >0.16ha in size)?
Yes (Site proceeds to Phase 2b)
No Considered under the review of Development Limits)
Comments
5. Phase 2b – Further Analysis
Q.4 Is the site located within or adjacent to any of the following?
(If yes, site does not proceed except where potential for mitigation can be demonstrated)
No
Yes
Partly
Adjacent
KEY DETERMINANTS
Nature and Landscape Conservation
Ramsar Site
x
Special Protection Area (SPA)
x
Special Area of Conservation (SAC)
x
National Nature Reserve (NNR)
x
Site of Special Scientific Interest (SSSI)
x
Common Land or Registered Village Green
x
Cultural Heritage
Scheduled Ancient Monument or remains of
national importance
Flooding
TAN 15 Development Advice Maps
x
x
EA Flood Map - nat_floodzone3
x
Minerals
Mineral buffer zone
x
Q.5 Would development of the site represent or result in:
Tandem development
No
x
Ribbon development
x
Coalescence
x
Development unrelated to the existing urban form
x
Sporadic & fragmented pattern of development (either constitute or contribute to)
x
An illogical extension to the settlement
x
Conflicts with existing land use or known plans and strategies
x
A Detrimental Impact on the Character and Setting of the settlement or its features
(including views and glimpses both into and out of the settlement)
A loss of areas of open space and amenity value
x
General Planning Principles
Yes
x
Comments
Q.6 Additional considerations:
No
Yes
General
Does the site have an available access point with adequate visibility?
x
?
Would development at the site impact upon the highway network and
increase the risk to highway safety?
Is it Previously Developed Land?
No
x
Yes
?
x
Soil / Agricultural Land Quality
Does the site contain high carbon soil e.g. peat?
x
Does the site contain high quality agricultural land?
x
Q.7 Is the site located within or related to any of the following?:
No
Nature and Landscape Conservation
Local Nature Reserves (LNR)
Regionally
Important
Geological
Geomorphological Sites (RIGS)
Cultural Heritage
Conservation Area
Yes
Partly
Adjacent
x
/
x
x
Q.8 Would development at the site impact upon species/habitats of high importance? (refer
to Biodiversity/Connectivity Study)
Yes
x
No
Unknown
Q.9 Accessibility - Is the site within a settlement with access to, or within easy reach of, the
following:
No
Yes
Rail network
x
Highway network (A or B roads)
x
Public transport
x
Cycle ways and/or footpaths
x
Q.10 Site Deliverability - Are there any infrastructure or other issues on the site that would affect
its deliverability during the Plan period.
Yes
x
No
Unknown
Comments
6. Additional Comments
Comments
The site has a number of advantages in terms of retention as a residential allocation – close to the
local amenities and services of the settlement, integrated to the existing residential built form and
with good access and highway links. In planning terms the site offers an appropriate option in
terms of location and lack of harm to the amenity and character of the settlement.
Furthermore, the site has a full planning permission. The principle and detailed assessment of the
site for residential development has therefore been considered acceptable. In conclusion this
available land can be put forward as a residential allocation within the LDP.
The site has been subject to the SA process, details of which are highlighted in Section 7, below.
Note: Reference should be made to the guidance notes accompanying this proforma when
interpreting its contents.
7. Sustainability Appraisal
Score:
310
Score Summary Count
Threats
Low
Medium
High
8
0
4
No. Prospective Opportunities
3
5
33
Issues
Opportunities:
Further
Comments
Site has a good, positive score. See score card for further detail. No notable
Issues.
Carmarthenshire LDP
Site Assessment Proforma
1. Site Details
Ref:
GA3/h31
Site Ref (where applicable):
Location:
Adjacent Primary School
Site Area (Ha):
Existing Use*
Vacant field
Potential Use*
Residential
*if candidate site as proposed by respondent
2. Land Use/ Planning History
UDP allocation?
Residential Allocation GR3/42
Relevant Planning History
Site has full planning permission for 33 dwellings (E/09308), granted 6/7/06. Site is under
construction and is almost complete. One dwelling was completed prior to the Plan period.
3. Phase 1 – Identification of Strategic Sites
Is the Site Strategic?
Yes (Site proceeds to Phase 2b)
No
x
(Site proceeds to Phase 2a as a Non-Strategic Site)
The site is not considered to be strategic in nature for the following reasons:
not located in a settlement defined as a Growth Area
x
not of an appropriate size
not situated at a key location in terms of transport and accessibility
x
the site is not critical to the delivery of the strategy
This does not preclude the site’s consideration as a Non-Strategic Site.
Expanded reasons for non identification of the site as strategic are available.
4. Phase 2a – Initial Analysis
Q.1
x
Land use allocation specific or non allocation related?
Allocation (proceeds to Q.2)
Non allocation (Considered through LDP policy)
Q.2
x
Within or immediately adjoining an identified settlement in the Preferred Strategy?
Yes (Site proceeds to Q.3)
No (Site is dismissed)
Q.3
x
If residential, can the site accommodate 5 or more houses (i.e. is >0.16ha in size)?
Yes (Site proceeds to Phase 2b)
No Considered under the review of Development Limits)
Comments
5. Phase 2b – Further Analysis
Q.4 Is the site located within or adjacent to any of the following?
(If yes, site does not proceed except where potential for mitigation can be demonstrated)
No
Yes
Partly
Adjacent
KEY DETERMINANTS
Nature and Landscape Conservation
Ramsar Site
x
Special Protection Area (SPA)
x
Special Area of Conservation (SAC)
x
National Nature Reserve (NNR)
x
Site of Special Scientific Interest (SSSI)
x
Common Land or Registered Village Green
x
Cultural Heritage
Scheduled Ancient Monument or remains of
national importance
Flooding
TAN 15 Development Advice Maps
x
x
EA Flood Map - nat_floodzone3
x
Minerals
Mineral buffer zone
x
Q.5 Would development of the site represent or result in:
Tandem development
No
x
Ribbon development
x
Coalescence
x
Development unrelated to the existing urban form
x
Sporadic & fragmented pattern of development (either constitute or contribute to)
x
An illogical extension to the settlement
x
Conflicts with existing land use or known plans and strategies
x
A Detrimental Impact on the Character and Setting of the settlement or its features
(including views and glimpses both into and out of the settlement)
A loss of areas of open space and amenity value
x
General Planning Principles
Yes
x
Comments
Q.6 Additional considerations:
No
Yes
General
Does the site have an available access point with adequate visibility?
x
?
Would development at the site impact upon the highway network and
increase the risk to highway safety?
Is it Previously Developed Land?
No
x
Yes
?
x
Soil / Agricultural Land Quality
Does the site contain high carbon soil e.g. peat?
x
Does the site contain high quality agricultural land?
x
Q.7 Is the site located within or related to any of the following?:
No
Nature and Landscape Conservation
Local Nature Reserves (LNR)
Regionally
Important
Geological
Geomorphological Sites (RIGS)
Cultural Heritage
Conservation Area
Yes
Partly
Adjacent
x
/
x
x
Q.8 Would development at the site impact upon species/habitats of high importance? (refer
to Biodiversity/Connectivity Study)
Yes
x
No
Unknown
Q.9 Accessibility - Is the site within a settlement with access to, or within easy reach of, the
following:
No
Yes
Rail network
x
Highway network (A or B roads)
x
Public transport
x
Cycle ways and/or footpaths
x
Q.10 Site Deliverability - Are there any infrastructure or other issues on the site that would affect
its deliverability during the Plan period.
Yes
No
x
Unknown
Comments
6. Additional Comments
Comments
The site has a number of advantages in terms of retention as a residential allocation – close to the
local amenities and services of the settlement, integrated to the existing residential built form and
with good access and highway links. In planning terms the site offers an appropriate option in
terms of location and lack of harm to the amenity and character of the settlement.
Furthermore, the site has a full planning permission. The principle and detailed assessment of the
site for residential development has therefore been considered acceptable. A large proportion of
the site has already been completed and the remaining units are under construction. In conclusion
this available land can be put forward as a residential allocation within the LDP.
The site has been subject to the SA process, details of which are highlighted in Section 7, below.
Note: Reference should be made to the guidance notes accompanying this proforma when
interpreting its contents.
7. Sustainability Appraisal
Score:
272
Score Summary Count
Threats
Low
Medium
High
9
1
3
No. Prospective Opportunities
6
14
24
Issues
Opportunities:
Further
Comments
Site has a good, positive score. See score card for further detail. No notable
Issues. The site represents a consented commitment.
Carmarthenshire LDP
Site Assessment Proforma
1. Site Details
Ref:
GA3/h32
Site Ref (where applicable):
Location:
Land adjacent to Maespiode, Llandybie
Candidate Sites
095-14 & 16
Site Area (Ha):
Existing Use*
Vacant field
Potential Use*
Residential
*if candidate site as proposed by respondent
2. Land Use/ Planning History
UDP allocation?
None, outside development limits
Relevant Planning History
No recent planning history. The site was the subject of a representation to the UDP. The
Inspector did not recommend the site’s inclusion, however, this was due merely to the fact that
sufficient land for residential purposes existed elsewhere within the settlement or growth area. The
Inspector could not see anything fundamentally wrong with the site.
3. Phase 1 – Identification of Strategic Sites
Is the Site Strategic?
Yes (Site proceeds to Phase 2b)
No
x
(Site proceeds to Phase 2a as a Non-Strategic Site)
The site is not considered to be strategic in nature for the following reasons:
not located in a settlement defined as a Growth Area
x
not of an appropriate size
not situated at a key location in terms of transport and accessibility
x
the site is not critical to the delivery of the strategy
This does not preclude the site’s consideration as a Non-Strategic Site.
Expanded reasons for non identification of the site as strategic are available.
4. Phase 2a – Initial Analysis
Q.1
x
Land use allocation specific or non allocation related?
Allocation (proceeds to Q.2)
Non allocation (Considered through LDP policy)
Q.2
x
Within or immediately adjoining an identified settlement in the Preferred Strategy?
Yes (Site proceeds to Q.3)
No (Site is dismissed)
Q.3
x
If residential, can the site accommodate 5 or more houses (i.e. is >0.16ha in size)?
Yes (Site proceeds to Phase 2b)
No Considered under the review of Development Limits)
Comments
5. Phase 2b – Further Analysis
Q.4 Is the site located within or adjacent to any of the following?
(If yes, site does not proceed except where potential for mitigation can be demonstrated)
No
Yes
Partly
Adjacent
KEY DETERMINANTS
Nature and Landscape Conservation
Ramsar Site
x
Special Protection Area (SPA)
x
Special Area of Conservation (SAC)
x
National Nature Reserve (NNR)
x
Site of Special Scientific Interest (SSSI)
x
Common Land or Registered Village Green
x
Cultural Heritage
Scheduled Ancient Monument or remains of
national importance
Flooding
TAN 15 Development Advice Maps
x
x
EA Flood Map - nat_floodzone3
x
Minerals
Mineral buffer zone
x
Q.5 Would development of the site represent or result in:
Tandem development
No
x
Ribbon development
x
Coalescence
x
Development unrelated to the existing urban form
x
Sporadic & fragmented pattern of development (either constitute or contribute to)
x
An illogical extension to the settlement
x
Conflicts with existing land use or known plans and strategies
x
A Detrimental Impact on the Character and Setting of the settlement or its features
(including views and glimpses both into and out of the settlement)
A loss of areas of open space and amenity value
x
General Planning Principles
Yes
x
Comments
Q.6 Additional considerations:
No
General
Yes
?
No
Does the site have an available access point with adequate visibility?
Would development at the site impact upon the highway network and
increase the risk to highway safety?
Is it Previously Developed Land?
Yes
x
?
x
x
Soil / Agricultural Land Quality
Does the site contain high carbon soil e.g. peat?
x
Does the site contain high quality agricultural land?
x
Q.7 Is the site located within or related to any of the following?:
No
Nature and Landscape Conservation
Local Nature Reserves (LNR)
Regionally
Important
Geological
Geomorphological Sites (RIGS)
Cultural Heritage
Conservation Area
Yes
Partly
Adjacent
x
/
x
x
Q.8 Would development at the site impact upon species/habitats of high importance? (refer
to Biodiversity/Connectivity Study)
Yes
x
No
Unknown
Q.9 Accessibility - Is the site within a settlement with access to, or within easy reach of, the
following:
No
Yes
Rail network
x
Highway network (A or B roads)
x
Public transport
x
Cycle ways and/or footpaths
x
Q.10 Site Deliverability - Are there any infrastructure or other issues on the site that would affect
its deliverability during the Plan period.
Yes
No
x
Unknown
Comments
6. Additional Comments
Comments
The site has a number of advantages in terms of retention as a residential allocation – close to the
local amenities and services of the settlement, integrated to the existing residential built form and
with good access and highway links. In planning terms the site offers an appropriate option in
terms of location and lack of harm to the amenity and character of the settlement.
The site was the subject of a representation to the UDP with the intention that it be allocated for
residential purposes. The Inspector did not recommend the site’s inclusion, however, this was due
merely to the fact that sufficient land for residential purposes existed elsewhere within the
settlement or growth area. The Inspector could not see anything fundamentally wrong with the site
being utilised for residential purposes in the future, beyond the Plan period, should the need arise.
The site has been subject to the SA process, details of which are highlighted in Section 7, below.
Response to EA TOG comments:
The potential for capacity issues at the WWTW is noted however discussions/consultations remain
on going with Dwr Cymru which together with appropriate phasing etc does not preclude
deliverability during the plan period. It is also noted that there is currently potential capacity and
that the issue relates to the level of any future development.
There are currently no significant water body issues. Policy EP1 provides for the consideration of
proposals where they relate to impact on water quality and in relation to matters of environmental
capacity. Consequently any proposals will be required to satisfy its provisions.
Reference will need to be made to policy EP3 and the requirement for SuDS.
Note: Reference should be made to the guidance notes accompanying this proforma when
interpreting its contents.
7. Sustainability Appraisal
Score:
258
Score Summary Count
Threats
Low
Medium
High
7
0
3
No. Prospective Opportunities
5
18
20
Issues
Opportunities:
Further
Comments
Site has a good, positive score. See score card for further detail. No notable
Issues.
Carmarthenshire LDP
Site Assessment Proforma
1. Site Details
Ref:
GA3/h33
Site Ref (where applicable):
Location:
Land Adjacent to Penygroes Road
Site Area (Ha):
Existing Use*
Vacant
Potential Use*
Residential
*if candidate site as proposed by respondent
2. Land Use/ Planning History
UDP allocation?
Part of Residential Allocation (GR3/23)
Relevant Planning History
E/20300 – Full Planning granted 17/7/09 - Proposed extension to nearby coal depot to provide
additional parking and new access.
GW/02616 – Outline Consent Granted for residential development on 12/12/02.
3. Phase 1 – Identification of Strategic Sites
Is the Site Strategic?
Yes (Site proceeds to Phase 2b)
No
x
(Site proceeds to Phase 2a as a Non-Strategic Site)
The site is not considered to be strategic in nature for the following reasons:
not located in a settlement defined as a Growth Area
x
not of an appropriate size
not situated at a key location in terms of transport and accessibility
x
the site is not critical to the delivery of the strategy
This does not preclude the site’s consideration as a Non-Strategic Site.
Expanded reasons for non identification of the site as strategic are available.
4. Phase 2a – Initial Analysis
Q.1
x
Land use allocation specific or non allocation related?
Allocation (proceeds to Q.2)
Non allocation (Considered through LDP policy)
Q.2
x
Within or immediately adjoining an identified settlement in the Preferred Strategy?
Yes (Site proceeds to Q.3)
No (Site is dismissed)
Q.3
x
If residential, can the site accommodate 5 or more houses (i.e. is >0.16ha in size)?
Yes (Site proceeds to Phase 2b)
No Considered under the review of Development Limits)
Comments
5. Phase 2b – Further Analysis
Q.4 Is the site located within or adjacent to any of the following?
(If yes, site does not proceed except where potential for mitigation can be demonstrated)
No
Yes
Partly
Adjacent
KEY DETERMINANTS
Nature and Landscape Conservation
Ramsar Site
x
Special Protection Area (SPA)
x
Special Area of Conservation (SAC)
x
National Nature Reserve (NNR)
x
Site of Special Scientific Interest (SSSI)
x
Common Land or Registered Village Green
x
Cultural Heritage
Scheduled Ancient Monument or remains of
national importance
Flooding
TAN 15 Development Advice Maps
x
x
EA Flood Map - nat_floodzone3
x
Minerals
Mineral buffer zone
x
Q.5 Would development of the site represent or result in:
Tandem development
No
x
Ribbon development
x
Coalescence
x
Development unrelated to the existing urban form
x
Sporadic & fragmented pattern of development (either constitute or contribute to)
x
An illogical extension to the settlement
x
Conflicts with existing land use or known plans and strategies
x
A Detrimental Impact on the Character and Setting of the settlement or its features
(including views and glimpses both into and out of the settlement)
A loss of areas of open space and amenity value
x
General Planning Principles
Yes
x
Comments
Q.6 Additional considerations:
No
Yes
General
Does the site have an available access point with adequate visibility?
x
?
Would development at the site impact upon the highway network and
increase the risk to highway safety?
Is it Previously Developed Land?
No
x
Yes
?
x
Soil / Agricultural Land Quality
Does the site contain high carbon soil e.g. peat?
x
Does the site contain high quality agricultural land?
x
Q.7 Is the site located within or related to any of the following?:
No
Nature and Landscape Conservation
Local Nature Reserves (LNR)
Regionally
Important
Geological
Geomorphological Sites (RIGS)
Cultural Heritage
Conservation Area
Yes
Partly
Adjacent
x
/
x
x
Q.8 Would development at the site impact upon species/habitats of high importance? (refer
to Biodiversity/Connectivity Study)
Yes
x
No
Unknown
Q.9 Accessibility - Is the site within a settlement with access to, or within easy reach of, the
following:
No
Yes
Rail network
x
Highway network (A or B roads)
x
Public transport
x
Cycle ways and/or footpaths
x
Q.10 Site Deliverability - Are there any infrastructure or other issues on the site that would affect
its deliverability during the Plan period.
Yes
x
No
Unknown
Comments
6. Additional Comments
Comments
The site is surrounded on 3 sides by residential development represents an appropriate extension
to the existing urban form at the heart of the settlement of Blaenau.
The inclusion and allocation of this site would represent a reasonable and logical extension of that
development at a scale compatible with the size and character of the settlement. It represents a
well defined and enclosed site with no agricultural land quality and can be characterised as an area
of rough scrub. Comments in respect of potential biodiversity as submitted by the EA are noted
however no adverse comments were received from CCW and County Council ecologists.
Reference is however made to the Biodiversity/Connectivity Study which identifies part of the site
as mid biodiversity value. In this respect, any proposals on site maybe required to incorporate
mitigation measures (refer to policy EQ4). This would be unlikely to prevent the deliverability of the
site.
The granting of consent for an access into the nearby coal yard whilst marginally reducing the
developable site area affords an opportunity for improved access arrangements.
There are currently no significant water body issues. Policy EP1 provides for the consideration of
proposals where they relate to impact on water quality and in relation to matters of environmental
capacity. Consequently any proposals will be required to satisfy its provisions.
Reference will need to be made to policy EP3 and the requirement for SUDS.
The site has been subject to the SA process, details of which are highlighted in Section 7, below.
Note: Reference should be made to the guidance notes accompanying this proforma when
interpreting its contents.
7. Sustainability Appraisal
Score:
111
Score Summary Count
Threats
Low
Medium
High
Issues
Opportunities:
Further
Comments
No notable Issues
7
0
0
No. Prospective Opportunities
3
5
9
Carmarthenshire LDP
Site Assessment Proforma
1. Site Details
Ref:
GA3/h34
Site Ref (where applicable):
Location:
Adj. Caerbryn Road
Site Area (Ha):
Existing Use*
Residential (site complete)
Potential Use*
N/A
*if candidate site as proposed by respondent
2. Land Use/ Planning History
UDP allocation?
Residential Allocation GR3/51
Relevant Planning History
E/15135 – Reserved Matters for 24 dwellings granted 27/9/07. Site completed during Plan period.
3. Phase 1 – Identification of Strategic Sites
Is the Site Strategic?
Yes (Site proceeds to Phase 2b)
No
x
(Site proceeds to Phase 2a as a Non-Strategic Site)
The site is not considered to be strategic in nature for the following reasons:
not located in a settlement defined as a Growth Area
x
not of an appropriate size
not situated at a key location in terms of transport and accessibility
x
the site is not critical to the delivery of the strategy
This does not preclude the site’s consideration as a Non-Strategic Site.
Expanded reasons for non identification of the site as strategic are available.
4. Phase 2a – Initial Analysis
Q.1
x
Land use allocation specific or non allocation related?
Allocation (proceeds to Q.2)
Non allocation (Considered through LDP policy)
Q.2
x
Within or immediately adjoining an identified settlement in the Preferred Strategy?
Yes (Site proceeds to Q.3)
No (Site is dismissed)
Q.3
x
If residential, can the site accommodate 5 or more houses (i.e. is >0.16ha in size)?
Yes (Site proceeds to Phase 2b)
No Considered under the review of Development Limits)
Comments
Site completed during the Plan period. The figures will contribute towards the overall LDP housing
provision.
5. Phase 2b – Further Analysis
Q.4 Is the site located within or adjacent to any of the following?
(If yes, site does not proceed except where potential for mitigation can be demonstrated)
No
Yes
Partly
Adjacent
KEY DETERMINANTS
Nature and Landscape Conservation
Ramsar Site
x
Special Protection Area (SPA)
x
Special Area of Conservation (SAC)
x
National Nature Reserve (NNR)
x
Site of Special Scientific Interest (SSSI)
x
Common Land or Registered Village Green
x
Cultural Heritage
Scheduled Ancient Monument or remains of
national importance
Flooding
TAN 15 Development Advice Maps
x
x
EA Flood Map - nat_floodzone3
x
Minerals
Mineral buffer zone
x
Q.5 Would development of the site represent or result in:
Tandem development
No
x
Ribbon development
x
Coalescence
x
Development unrelated to the existing urban form
x
Sporadic & fragmented pattern of development (either constitute or contribute to)
x
An illogical extension to the settlement
x
Conflicts with existing land use or known plans and strategies
x
A Detrimental Impact on the Character and Setting of the settlement or its features
(including views and glimpses both into and out of the settlement)
A loss of areas of open space and amenity value
x
General Planning Principles
Yes
x
Comments
Q.6 Additional considerations:
No
Yes
?
No
Yes
?
General
x
Does the site have an available access point with adequate visibility?
Would development at the site impact upon the highway network and
increase the risk to highway safety?
Is it Previously Developed Land?
x
x
Soil / Agricultural Land Quality
Does the site contain high carbon soil e.g. peat?
x
Does the site contain high quality agricultural land?
x
Q.7 Is the site located within or related to any of the following?:
No
Nature and Landscape Conservation
Local Nature Reserves (LNR)
Regionally
Important
Geological
Geomorphological Sites (RIGS)
Cultural Heritage
Conservation Area
Yes
Partly
Adjacent
x
/
x
x
Q.8 Would development at the site impact upon species/habitats of high importance? (refer
to Biodiversity/Connectivity Study)
Yes
x
No
Unknown
Q.9 Accessibility - Is the site within a settlement with access to, or within easy reach of, the
following:
No
Yes
Rail network
x
Highway network (A or B roads)
x
Public transport
x
Cycle ways and/or footpaths
x
Q.10 Site Deliverability - Are there any infrastructure or other issues on the site that would affect
its deliverability during the Plan period.
Yes
x
No
Unknown
Comments
6. Additional Comments
Comments
The site is complete. The housing land availability study identifies that the 24 dwellings were
completed post 2007 and consequently contribute to the land supply figure for the LDP.
Note: Reference should be made to the guidance notes accompanying this proforma when
interpreting its contents.
7. Sustainability Appraisal
Score:
N/A
Score Summary Count
Threats
Low
Medium
High
Issues
Opportunities:
Further
Comments
Not applicable
No. Prospective Opportunities
Carmarthenshire LDP
Site Assessment Proforma
1. Site Details
Ref:
GA3/h35
Site Ref (where applicable):
Location:
Adjacent to Pant y Blodau
Part of candidate site
149-005
Site Area (Ha):
Existing Use*
Vacant field
Potential Use*
Residential
*if candidate site as proposed by respondent
2. Land Use/ Planning History
UDP allocation?
Residential Allocation GR3/49
Relevant Planning History
Current full application for 79 dwellings (E/22489) on a large part of the site.
3. Phase 1 – Identification of Strategic Sites
Is the Site Strategic?
Yes (Site proceeds to Phase 2b)
No
x
(Site proceeds to Phase 2a as a Non-Strategic Site)
The site is not considered to be strategic in nature for the following reasons:
not located in a settlement defined as a Growth Area
x
not of an appropriate size
not situated at a key location in terms of transport and accessibility
x
the site is not critical to the delivery of the strategy
This does not preclude the site’s consideration as a Non-Strategic Site.
Expanded reasons for non identification of the site as strategic are available.
4. Phase 2a – Initial Analysis
Q.1
x
Land use allocation specific or non allocation related?
Allocation (proceeds to Q.2)
Non allocation (Considered through LDP policy)
Q.2
x
Within or immediately adjoining an identified settlement in the Preferred Strategy?
Yes (Site proceeds to Q.3)
No (Site is dismissed)
Q.3
x
If residential, can the site accommodate 5 or more houses (i.e. is >0.16ha in size)?
Yes (Site proceeds to Phase 2b)
No Considered under the review of Development Limits)
Comments
5. Phase 2b – Further Analysis
Q.4 Is the site located within or adjacent to any of the following?
(If yes, site does not proceed except where potential for mitigation can be demonstrated)
No
Yes
Partly
Adjacent
KEY DETERMINANTS
Nature and Landscape Conservation
Ramsar Site
x
Special Protection Area (SPA)
x
Special Area of Conservation (SAC)
x
National Nature Reserve (NNR)
x
Site of Special Scientific Interest (SSSI)
x
Common Land or Registered Village Green
x
Cultural Heritage
Scheduled Ancient Monument or remains of
national importance
Flooding
TAN 15 Development Advice Maps
x
x
EA Flood Map - nat_floodzone3
x
Minerals
Mineral buffer zone
x
Q.5 Would development of the site represent or result in:
Tandem development
No
x
Ribbon development
x
Coalescence
x
Development unrelated to the existing urban form
x
Sporadic & fragmented pattern of development (either constitute or contribute to)
x
An illogical extension to the settlement
x
Conflicts with existing land use or known plans and strategies
x
A Detrimental Impact on the Character and Setting of the settlement or its features
(including views and glimpses both into and out of the settlement)
A loss of areas of open space and amenity value
x
General Planning Principles
Yes
x
Comments
Q.6 Additional considerations:
No
Yes
General
Does the site have an available access point with adequate visibility?
x
?
Would development at the site impact upon the highway network and
increase the risk to highway safety?
Is it Previously Developed Land?
No
x
Yes
?
x
Soil / Agricultural Land Quality
Does the site contain high carbon soil e.g. peat?
x
Does the site contain high quality agricultural land?
x
Q.7 Is the site located within or related to any of the following?:
No
Nature and Landscape Conservation
Local Nature Reserves (LNR)
Regionally
Important
Geological
Geomorphological Sites (RIGS)
Cultural Heritage
Conservation Area
Yes
Partly
Adjacent
x
/
x
x
Q.8 Would development at the site impact upon species/habitats of high importance? (refer
to Biodiversity/Connectivity Study)
Yes
x
No
Unknown
Q.9 Accessibility - Is the site within a settlement with access to, or within easy reach of, the
following:
No
Yes
Rail network
x
Highway network (A or B roads)
x
Public transport
x
Cycle ways and/or footpaths
x
Q.10 Site Deliverability - Are there any infrastructure or other issues on the site that would affect
its deliverability during the Plan period.
Yes
No
x
Unknown
Comments
6. Additional Comments
Comments
National Planning Policy is statutorily underpinned by the principle of sustainable development and
accordingly the underlying ethos of the emerging Carmarthenshire Local Development Plan has
been to promote a settlement pattern that is in compliance with the principles of sustainability.
The Local Planning Authority consider that the designation of the subject site is appropriate to
ensure that sufficient land has been allocated within the LDP for residential development purposes
in accordance with Planning Policy Wales.
The site has a number of advantages in terms of retention as a residential allocation – close to the
local amenities and services of the settlement, integrated to the existing residential built form and
with good access and highway links. In planning terms the site offers an appropriate option in
terms of location and lack of harm to the amenity and character of the settlement. Furthermore,
interest with regards to developing the site has been shown through the full planning application for
79 dwellings which is currently being determined on a large portion of the site.
In conclusion this available land can be put forward as a residential allocation within the LDP.
The site has been subject to the SA process, details of which are highlighted in Section 7, below.
Response in respect of TOG comments:
In respect of comments from the EA, the potential for capacity issues at the WWTW is noted
however discussions/consultations remain on going with Dwr Cymru which together with
appropriate phasing etc does not preclude deliverability during the plan period. It is also noted that
there is currently potential capacity and that the issue relates to the level of any future
development.
There are currently no significant water body issues. Policy EP1 provides for the consideration of
proposals where they relate to impact on water quality and in relation to matters of environmental
capacity. Consequently any proposals will be required to satisfy its provisions.
Reference will need to be made to Policy EP3 and the requirement for SUDS
Matters relating to potential biodiversity issues in relation to the site, highlighted by the CCW, are
duly noted and regard will need to be had to the provisions of Policy EQ4 and all relevant policies
contained within the Plan.
Comments made by the County Ecologist are duly noted. Such matters will need to be addressed
in relation to the relevant policies of the Plan prior to development taking place.
Note: Reference should be made to the guidance notes accompanying this proforma when
interpreting its contents.
7. Sustainability Appraisal
Score:
160
Score Summary Count
Threats
Low
Medium
High
Issues
Opportunities:
5
0
0
No. Prospective Opportunities
20
1
14
Further
Comments
Site has a good, positive score. See score card for further detail. No notable
Issues.
Carmarthenshire LDP
Site Assessment Proforma
1. Site Details
Ref:
GA3/h36
Location:
Adj. Clos y Cwm
Site Ref (where applicable):
Site Area (Ha):
Existing Use*
Vacant field
Potential Use*
Residential
*if candidate site as proposed by respondent
2. Land Use/ Planning History
UDP allocation?
Residential Allocation GR3/46
Relevant Planning History
E/13141 – outline planning for 11 units – Sec. 70 Non-determination 13/6/08.
3. Phase 1 – Identification of Strategic Sites
Is the Site Strategic?
Yes (Site proceeds to Phase 2b)
No
x
(Site proceeds to Phase 2a as a Non-Strategic Site)
The site is not considered to be strategic in nature for the following reasons:
not located in a settlement defined as a Growth Area
x
not of an appropriate size
not situated at a key location in terms of transport and accessibility
x
the site is not critical to the delivery of the strategy
This does not preclude the site’s consideration as a Non-Strategic Site.
Expanded reasons for non identification of the site as strategic are available.
4. Phase 2a – Initial Analysis
Q.1
x
Land use allocation specific or non allocation related?
Allocation (proceeds to Q.2)
Non allocation (Considered through LDP policy)
Q.2
x
Within or immediately adjoining an identified settlement in the Preferred Strategy?
Yes (Site proceeds to Q.3)
No (Site is dismissed)
Q.3
x
If residential, can the site accommodate 5 or more houses (i.e. is >0.16ha in size)?
Yes (Site proceeds to Phase 2b)
No Considered under the review of Development Limits)
Comments
5. Phase 2b – Further Analysis
Q.4 Is the site located within or adjacent to any of the following?
(If yes, site does not proceed except where potential for mitigation can be demonstrated)
No
Yes
Partly
Adjacent
KEY DETERMINANTS
Nature and Landscape Conservation
Ramsar Site
x
Special Protection Area (SPA)
x
Special Area of Conservation (SAC)
x
National Nature Reserve (NNR)
x
Site of Special Scientific Interest (SSSI)
x
Common Land or Registered Village Green
x
Cultural Heritage
Scheduled Ancient Monument or remains of
national importance
Flooding
TAN 15 Development Advice Maps
x
x
EA Flood Map - nat_floodzone3
x
Minerals
Mineral buffer zone
x
Q.5 Would development of the site represent or result in:
Tandem development
No
x
Ribbon development
x
Coalescence
x
Development unrelated to the existing urban form
x
Sporadic & fragmented pattern of development (either constitute or contribute to)
x
An illogical extension to the settlement
x
Conflicts with existing land use or known plans and strategies
x
A Detrimental Impact on the Character and Setting of the settlement or its features
(including views and glimpses both into and out of the settlement)
A loss of areas of open space and amenity value
x
General Planning Principles
Yes
x
Comments
Q.6 Additional considerations:
No
Yes
General
Does the site have an available access point with adequate visibility?
x
?
Would development at the site impact upon the highway network and
increase the risk to highway safety?
Is it Previously Developed Land?
No
x
Yes
?
x
Soil / Agricultural Land Quality
Does the site contain high carbon soil e.g. peat?
x
Does the site contain high quality agricultural land?
x
Q.7 Is the site located within or related to any of the following?:
No
Nature and Landscape Conservation
Local Nature Reserves (LNR)
Regionally
Important
Geological
Geomorphological Sites (RIGS)
Cultural Heritage
Conservation Area
Yes
Partly
Adjacent
x
/
x
x
Q.8 Would development at the site impact upon species/habitats of high importance? (refer
to Biodiversity/Connectivity Study)
Yes
x
No
Unknown
Q.9 Accessibility - Is the site within a settlement with access to, or within easy reach of, the
following:
No
Yes
Rail network
x
Highway network (A or B roads)
x
Public transport
x
Cycle ways and/or footpaths
x
Q.10 Site Deliverability - Are there any infrastructure or other issues on the site that would affect
its deliverability during the Plan period.
Yes
x
No
Unknown
Comments
6. Additional Comments
Comments
This site forms the remaining portion of an existing UDP residential allocation; the other part of the
allocation has already been completed. The site has a number of advantages in terms of retention
as a residential allocation – close to the local amenities and services of the settlement, integrated
to the existing residential built form and with good access and highway links. In planning terms the
site offers an appropriate option in terms of location and lack of harm to the amenity and character
of the settlement.
Eight units were completed on the existing UDP allocation area during the LDP Plan period,
leaving space for approximately 4 dwellings. In conclusion this available remaining land can be put
forward as a residential allocation within the LDP.
Whilst it is acknowledged that a planning application for 11 units on this remaining area was
submitted in recent years (although it was eventually non-determined) the indicative number set
out in the LDP is lower and more reflective of the surrounding built form. This, however, should not
prejudice a future proposal for a higher figure should an appropriate scheme be put forward.
The site has been subject to the SA process, details of which are highlighted in Section 7, below.
Note: Reference should be made to the guidance notes accompanying this proforma when
interpreting its contents.
7. Sustainability Appraisal
Score:
130
Score Summary Count
Threats
Low
Medium
High
7
0
0
No. Prospective Opportunities
17
6
9
Issues
Opportunities:
Further
Comments
Site has a positive score. See score card for further detail. No notable Issues.
Carmarthenshire LDP
Site Assessment Proforma
1. Site Details
Ref:
GA3/h37
Location:
Clos y Cwm
Site Ref (where applicable):
Site Area (Ha):
Existing Use*
Vacant field
Potential Use*
Residential
*if candidate site as proposed by respondent
2. Land Use/ Planning History
UDP allocation?
Residential Allocation GR3/48
Relevant Planning History
Full planning permission (E/18054) granted on 8/2/08 to retain development (17 new dwellings)
undertaken as an amended scheme to that previously granted planning permission E/14263 dated
19.10.2006. Planning permission E/14263 was itself to retain development of 17 new starter
homes undertaken as an amended scheme to that previously granted planning permission
E/11394 dated 19.07.05.
Currently under construction.
3. Phase 1 – Identification of Strategic Sites
Is the Site Strategic?
Yes (Site proceeds to Phase 2b)
No
x
(Site proceeds to Phase 2a as a Non-Strategic Site)
The site is not considered to be strategic in nature for the following reasons:
not located in a settlement defined as a Growth Area
x
not of an appropriate size
not situated at a key location in terms of transport and accessibility
x
the site is not critical to the delivery of the strategy
This does not preclude the site’s consideration as a Non-Strategic Site.
Expanded reasons for non identification of the site as strategic are available.
4. Phase 2a – Initial Analysis
Q.1
x
Land use allocation specific or non allocation related?
Allocation (proceeds to Q.2)
Non allocation (Considered through LDP policy)
Q.2
x
Within or immediately adjoining an identified settlement in the Preferred Strategy?
Yes (Site proceeds to Q.3)
No (Site is dismissed)
Q.3
x
If residential, can the site accommodate 5 or more houses (i.e. is >0.16ha in size)?
Yes (Site proceeds to Phase 2b)
No Considered under the review of Development Limits)
Comments
5. Phase 2b – Further Analysis
Q.4 Is the site located within or adjacent to any of the following?
(If yes, site does not proceed except where potential for mitigation can be demonstrated)
No
Yes
Partly
Adjacent
KEY DETERMINANTS
Nature and Landscape Conservation
Ramsar Site
x
Special Protection Area (SPA)
x
Special Area of Conservation (SAC)
x
National Nature Reserve (NNR)
x
Site of Special Scientific Interest (SSSI)
x
Common Land or Registered Village Green
x
Cultural Heritage
Scheduled Ancient Monument or remains of
national importance
Flooding
TAN 15 Development Advice Maps
x
x
EA Flood Map - nat_floodzone3
x
Minerals
Mineral buffer zone
x
Q.5 Would development of the site represent or result in:
Tandem development
No
x
Ribbon development
x
Coalescence
x
Development unrelated to the existing urban form
x
Sporadic & fragmented pattern of development (either constitute or contribute to)
x
An illogical extension to the settlement
x
Conflicts with existing land use or known plans and strategies
x
A Detrimental Impact on the Character and Setting of the settlement or its features
(including views and glimpses both into and out of the settlement)
A loss of areas of open space and amenity value
x
General Planning Principles
Yes
x
Comments
Q.6 Additional considerations:
No
Yes
?
No
Yes
?
General
x
Does the site have an available access point with adequate visibility?
Would development at the site impact upon the highway network and
increase the risk to highway safety?
Is it Previously Developed Land?
x
x
Soil / Agricultural Land Quality
Does the site contain high carbon soil e.g. peat?
x
Does the site contain high quality agricultural land?
x
Q.7 Is the site located within or related to any of the following?:
No
Nature and Landscape Conservation
Local Nature Reserves (LNR)
Regionally
Important
Geological
Geomorphological Sites (RIGS)
Cultural Heritage
Conservation Area
Yes
Partly
Adjacent
x
/
x
x
Q.8 Would development at the site impact upon species/habitats of high importance? (refer
to Biodiversity/Connectivity Study)
Yes
x
No
Unknown
Q.9 Accessibility - Is the site within a settlement with access to, or within easy reach of, the
following:
No
Yes
Rail network
x
Highway network (A or B roads)
x
Public transport
x
Cycle ways and/or footpaths
x
Q.10 Site Deliverability - Are there any infrastructure or other issues on the site that would affect
its deliverability during the Plan period.
Yes
x
No
Unknown
Comments
6. Additional Comments
Comments
National Planning Policy is statutorily underpinned by the principle of sustainable development and
accordingly the underlying ethos of the emerging Carmarthenshire Local Development Plan has
been to promote a settlement pattern that is in compliance with the principles of sustainability.
The Local Planning Authority consider that the designation of the subject site is appropriate to
ensure that sufficient land has been allocated within the LDP for residential development purposes
in accordance with Planning Policy Wales.
The site has a number of advantages in terms of retention as a residential allocation – close to the
local amenities and services of the settlement, integrated to the existing residential built form and
with good access and highway links. In planning terms the site offers an appropriate option in
terms of location and lack of harm to the amenity and character of the settlement.
Furthermore, the site has a full planning permission. The principle and detailed assessment of the
site for residential development has therefore been considered acceptable, and the site is already
under construction. In conclusion this available land can be put forward as a residential allocation
within the LDP.
The site has been subject to the SA process, details of which are highlighted in Section 7, below.
Whilst it is noted that the EA have made comments in relation to this site in their TOG capacity, the
site benefits from full planning permission and the EA would have had the opportunity to comment
on the scheme during the planning application stage.
Note: Reference should be made to the guidance notes accompanying this proforma when
interpreting its contents.
7. Sustainability Appraisal
Score:
120
Score Summary Count
Threats
Low
Medium
High
7
0
0
No. Prospective Opportunities
17
6
8
Issues
Opportunities:
Further
Comments
Site has a positive score. See score card for further detail. No notable Issues.
The site represents a consented commitment.
Carmarthenshire LDP
Site Assessment Proforma
1. Site Details
Ref:
GA3/h38
Site Ref (where applicable):
Location:
Land at Waterloo Road
Candidate Site 149-003
Site Area (Ha):
Existing Use*
Vacant field
Potential Use*
Residential
*if candidate site as proposed by respondent
2. Land Use/ Planning History
UDP allocation?
Residential Allocation GR3/47
Relevant Planning History
Full planning permission on part of site (E/13860 granted 19/8/07) & (E/20128 granted 17/7/09).
This part of the site is almost complete.
E/21757 – outline planning permission for 10 units on a further part of site, with access provided
via Clos Ael Y Bryn and its established access onto Waterloo Road (Resubmission of E/19849
withdrawn 10.03.09) Granted 14/10/10.
3. Phase 1 – Identification of Strategic Sites
Is the Site Strategic?
Yes (Site proceeds to Phase 2b)
No
x
(Site proceeds to Phase 2a as a Non-Strategic Site)
The site is not considered to be strategic in nature for the following reasons:
not located in a settlement defined as a Growth Area
x
not of an appropriate size
not situated at a key location in terms of transport and accessibility
x
the site is not critical to the delivery of the strategy
This does not preclude the site’s consideration as a Non-Strategic Site.
Expanded reasons for non identification of the site as strategic are available.
4. Phase 2a – Initial Analysis
Q.1
x
Land use allocation specific or non allocation related?
Allocation (proceeds to Q.2)
Non allocation (Considered through LDP policy)
Q.2
x
Within or immediately adjoining an identified settlement in the Preferred Strategy?
Yes (Site proceeds to Q.3)
No (Site is dismissed)
Q.3
If residential, can the site accommodate 5 or more houses (i.e. is >0.16ha in size)?
x
Yes (Site proceeds to Phase 2b)
No Considered under the review of Development Limits)
Comments
5. Phase 2b – Further Analysis
Q.4 Is the site located within or adjacent to any of the following?
(If yes, site does not proceed except where potential for mitigation can be demonstrated)
No
Yes
Partly
Adjacent
KEY DETERMINANTS
Nature and Landscape Conservation
Ramsar Site
x
Special Protection Area (SPA)
x
Special Area of Conservation (SAC)
x
National Nature Reserve (NNR)
x
Site of Special Scientific Interest (SSSI)
x
Common Land or Registered Village Green
x
Cultural Heritage
Scheduled Ancient Monument or remains of
national importance
Flooding
TAN 15 Development Advice Maps
x
x
EA Flood Map - nat_floodzone3
x
Minerals
Mineral buffer zone
x
Q.5 Would development of the site represent or result in:
Tandem development
No
x
Ribbon development
x
Coalescence
x
Development unrelated to the existing urban form
x
Sporadic & fragmented pattern of development (either constitute or contribute to)
x
An illogical extension to the settlement
x
Conflicts with existing land use or known plans and strategies
x
A Detrimental Impact on the Character and Setting of the settlement or its features
(including views and glimpses both into and out of the settlement)
A loss of areas of open space and amenity value
x
General Planning Principles
Yes
x
Comments
Q.6 Additional considerations:
No
General
Yes
?
No
Does the site have an available access point with adequate visibility?
Would development at the site impact upon the highway network and
increase the risk to highway safety?
Is it Previously Developed Land?
Yes
x
?
x
x
Soil / Agricultural Land Quality
Does the site contain high carbon soil e.g. peat?
x
Does the site contain high quality agricultural land?
x
Q.7 Is the site located within or related to any of the following?:
No
Nature and Landscape Conservation
Local Nature Reserves (LNR)
Regionally
Important
Geological
Geomorphological Sites (RIGS)
Cultural Heritage
Conservation Area
Yes
Partly
Adjacent
x
/
x
x
Q.8 Would development at the site impact upon species/habitats of high importance? (refer
to Biodiversity/Connectivity Study)
Yes
x
No
Unknown
Q.9 Accessibility - Is the site within a settlement with access to, or within easy reach of, the
following:
No
Yes
Rail network
x
Highway network (A or B roads)
x
Public transport
x
Cycle ways and/or footpaths
x
Q.10 Site Deliverability - Are there any infrastructure or other issues on the site that would affect
its deliverability during the Plan period.
Yes
x
No
Unknown
Comments
6. Additional Comments
Comments
National Planning Policy is statutorily underpinned by the principle of sustainable development and
accordingly the underlying ethos of the emerging Carmarthenshire Local Development Plan has
been to promote a settlement pattern that is in compliance with the principles of sustainability.
The Local Planning Authority consider that the designation of the subject site is appropriate to
ensure that sufficient land has been allocated within the LDP for residential development purposes
in accordance with Planning Policy Wales.
The site has a number of advantages in terms of retention as a residential allocation – close to the
local amenities and services of the settlement, integrated to the existing residential built form and
with good access and highway links. In planning terms the site offers an appropriate option in
terms of location and lack of harm to the amenity and character of the settlement.
Furthermore, a proportion of the site benefits from a full planning permission and its development
is nearing completion. The remainder of the the site has an outline planning permission. The
principle of this remaining area of the site for residential development has therefore been
considered acceptable. In conclusion this available land can be put forward as a residential
allocation within the LDP.
The site has been subject to the SA process, details of which are highlighted in Section 7, below.
Note: Reference should be made to the guidance notes accompanying this proforma when
interpreting its contents.
7. Sustainability Appraisal
Score:
113
Score Summary Count
Threats
Low
Medium
High
5
1
0
No. Prospective Opportunities
13
6
8
Issues
Opportunities:
Further
Comments
Site has a positive score. See score card for further detail. No notable Issues.
The site represents a consented commitment.
Carmarthenshire LDP
Site Assessment Proforma
1. Site Details
Ref:
GA3/h39
Site Ref (where applicable):
Location:
Land at junction of Black Lion Road and Gorsddu Road
Site Area (Ha):
Existing Use*
Vacant field
Potential Use*
Residential
*if candidate site as proposed by respondent
2. Land Use/ Planning History
UDP allocation?
None, white land within development limits.
Relevant Planning History
Three phase development of 27 residential units is proposed, the following current applications
relate to Phases 2&3:
Application E/23768 is currently being considered and relates to Phase No.2 of the development
which includes 8 new residential units and a new access road to serve future phases
Application E/23814 is currently being considered and relates to Phase No.3 of the development
which includes 11 new residential units.
Full Planning Application E/23633 for residential development was granted on 31/3/11.
3. Phase 1 – Identification of Strategic Sites
Is the Site Strategic?
Yes (Site proceeds to Phase 2b)
No
x
(Site proceeds to Phase 2a as a Non-Strategic Site)
The site is not considered to be strategic in nature for the following reasons:
not located in a settlement defined as a Growth Area
x
not of an appropriate size
not situated at a key location in terms of transport and accessibility
x
the site is not critical to the delivery of the strategy
This does not preclude the site’s consideration as a Non-Strategic Site.
Expanded reasons for non identification of the site as strategic are available.
4. Phase 2a – Initial Analysis
Q.1
x
Land use allocation specific or non allocation related?
Allocation (proceeds to Q.2)
Non allocation (Considered through LDP policy)
Q.2
x
Within or immediately adjoining an identified settlement in the Preferred Strategy?
Yes (Site proceeds to Q.3)
No (Site is dismissed)
Q.3
x
If residential, can the site accommodate 5 or more houses (i.e. is >0.16ha in size)?
Yes (Site proceeds to Phase 2b)
No Considered under the review of Development Limits)
Comments
5. Phase 2b – Further Analysis
Q.4 Is the site located within or adjacent to any of the following?
(If yes, site does not proceed except where potential for mitigation can be demonstrated)
No
Yes
Partly
Adjacent
KEY DETERMINANTS
Nature and Landscape Conservation
Ramsar Site
x
Special Protection Area (SPA)
x
Special Area of Conservation (SAC)
x
National Nature Reserve (NNR)
x
Site of Special Scientific Interest (SSSI)
x
Common Land or Registered Village Green
x
Cultural Heritage
Scheduled Ancient Monument or remains of
national importance
Flooding
TAN 15 Development Advice Maps
x
x
EA Flood Map - nat_floodzone3
x
Minerals
Mineral buffer zone
x
Q.5 Would development of the site represent or result in:
Tandem development
No
x
Ribbon development
x
Coalescence
x
Development unrelated to the existing urban form
x
Sporadic & fragmented pattern of development (either constitute or contribute to)
x
An illogical extension to the settlement
x
Conflicts with existing land use or known plans and strategies
x
A Detrimental Impact on the Character and Setting of the settlement or its features
(including views and glimpses both into and out of the settlement)
A loss of areas of open space and amenity value
x
General Planning Principles
Comments
x
Yes
Q.6 Additional considerations:
No
Yes
?
General
x
Does the site have an available access point with adequate visibility?
Would development at the site impact upon the highway network and
increase the risk to highway safety?
Is it Previously Developed Land?
x
x
Soil / Agricultural Land Quality
Does the site contain high carbon soil e.g. peat?
x
Does the site contain high quality agricultural land?
x
Q.7 Is the site located within or related to any of the following?:
No
Nature and Landscape Conservation
Local Nature Reserves (LNR)
Regionally
Important
Geological
Geomorphological Sites (RIGS)
Cultural Heritage
Conservation Area
Yes
Partly
Adjacent
x
/
x
x
Q.8 Would development at the site impact upon species/habitats of high importance? (refer
to Biodiversity/Connectivity Study)
Yes
x
No
Unknown
Q.9 Accessibility - Is the site within a settlement with access to, or within easy reach of, the
following:
No
Yes
Rail network
x
Highway network (A or B roads)
x
Public transport
x
Cycle ways and/or footpaths
x
Q.10 Site Deliverability - Are there any infrastructure or other issues on the site that would affect
its deliverability during the Plan period.
Yes
x
No
Unknown
Comments
6. Additional Comments
Comments
National Planning Policy is statutorily underpinned by the principle of sustainable development and
accordingly the underlying ethos of the emerging Carmarthenshire Local Development Plan has
been to promote a settlement pattern that is in compliance with the principles of sustainability.
The Local Planning Authority consider that the designation of the subject site is appropriate to
ensure that sufficient land has been allocated within the LDP for residential development purposes
in accordance with Planning Policy Wales.
The site has a number of advantages in terms of its designation as a residential allocation – close
to the local amenities and services of the settlement, integrated to the existing residential built form
and with good access and highway links. In planning terms the site offers an appropriate option in
terms of location and lack of harm to the amenity and character of the settlement.
Furthermore, the principle and detailed assessment of the site for residential development is
currently being considered through two full planning applications that have been submitted, which
in themselves indicate the interest in developing this appropriately located site.
In conclusion it is considered that this available land is appropriate to be put forward as a
residential allocation within the LDP.
The site has been subject to the SA process, details of which are highlighted in Section 7, below.
Response to TOG comments:
In relation to the comments from the EA, the potential for capacity issues at the WWTW is noted
however discussions/consultations remain on going with Dwr Cymru which together with
appropriate phasing etc does not preclude deliverability during the plan period. It is also noted that
there is currently potential capacity and that the issue relates to the level of any future
development.
There are currently no significant water body issues. Policy EP1 provides for the consideration of
proposals where they relate to impact on water quality and in relation to matters of environmental
capacity. Consequently any proposals will be required to satisfy its provisions.
Reference will need to be made to Policy EP3 and the requirement for SUDS.
The CCW note that the site supports BAP species and habitat (inc. Marsh fritillary) and should only
be considered for development if a mitigation strategy is put in place. However, as noted above,
the site is the subject of two current planning applications on which the CCW have been consulted,
and therefore any appropriate habitat and biodiversity matters would have been considered.
Note: Reference should be made to the guidance notes accompanying this proforma when
interpreting its contents.
7. Sustainability Appraisal
Score:
182
Score Summary Count
Threats
Low
Medium
High
Issues
Opportunities:
4
1
0
No. Prospective Opportunities
21
10
12
Further
Comments
Site has a good, positive score. See score card for further detail. No notable
Issues.
Carmarthenshire LDP
Site Assessment Proforma
1. Site Details
Ref:
GA3/h40
Site Ref (where applicable):
Location:
Land Adjacent to A476 (The Gate)
Site Area (Ha):
Existing Use*
Vacant
Potential Use*
Residential
*if candidate site as proposed by respondent
2. Land Use/ Planning History
UDP allocation?
None, white land within development limits.
Relevant Planning History
E/19493 – Reserved Matters Granted 29/10/08 Residential development - 9 no dwellings
E/21056 – Reserved Matters Granted 2/7/09 for Residential development - 9 no dwellings
3. Phase 1 – Identification of Strategic Sites
Is the Site Strategic?
Yes (Site proceeds to Phase 2b)
No
x
(Site proceeds to Phase 2a as a Non-Strategic Site)
The site is not considered to be strategic in nature for the following reasons:
not located in a settlement defined as a Growth Area
x
not of an appropriate size
not situated at a key location in terms of transport and accessibility
x
the site is not critical to the delivery of the strategy
This does not preclude the site’s consideration as a Non-Strategic Site.
Expanded reasons for non identification of the site as strategic are available.
4. Phase 2a – Initial Analysis
Q.1
x
Land use allocation specific or non allocation related?
Allocation (proceeds to Q.2)
Non allocation (Considered through LDP policy)
Q.2
x
Within or immediately adjoining an identified settlement in the Preferred Strategy?
Yes (Site proceeds to Q.3)
No (Site is dismissed)
Q.3
x
If residential, can the site accommodate 5 or more houses (i.e. is >0.16ha in size)?
Yes (Site proceeds to Phase 2b)
No Considered under the review of Development Limits)
Comments
5. Phase 2b – Further Analysis
Q.4 Is the site located within or adjacent to any of the following?
(If yes, site does not proceed except where potential for mitigation can be demonstrated)
No
Yes
Partly
Adjacent
KEY DETERMINANTS
Nature and Landscape Conservation
Ramsar Site
x
Special Protection Area (SPA)
x
Special Area of Conservation (SAC)
x
National Nature Reserve (NNR)
x
Site of Special Scientific Interest (SSSI)
x
Common Land or Registered Village Green
x
Cultural Heritage
Scheduled Ancient Monument or remains of
national importance
Flooding
TAN 15 Development Advice Maps
x
x
EA Flood Map - nat_floodzone3
x
Minerals
Mineral buffer zone
x
Q.5 Would development of the site represent or result in:
Tandem development
No
x
Ribbon development
x
Coalescence
x
Development unrelated to the existing urban form
x
Sporadic & fragmented pattern of development (either constitute or contribute to)
x
An illogical extension to the settlement
x
Conflicts with existing land use or known plans and strategies
x
A Detrimental Impact on the Character and Setting of the settlement or its features
(including views and glimpses both into and out of the settlement)
A loss of areas of open space and amenity value
x
General Planning Principles
Yes
x
Comments
Q.6 Additional considerations:
No
Yes
General
Does the site have an available access point with adequate visibility?
x
?
Would development at the site impact upon the highway network and
increase the risk to highway safety?
Is it Previously Developed Land?
No
x
Yes
?
x
Soil / Agricultural Land Quality
Does the site contain high carbon soil e.g. peat?
x
Does the site contain high quality agricultural land?
x
Q.7 Is the site located within or related to any of the following?:
No
Nature and Landscape Conservation
Local Nature Reserves (LNR)
Regionally
Important
Geological
Geomorphological Sites (RIGS)
Cultural Heritage
Conservation Area
Yes
Partly
Adjacent
x
/
x
x
Q.8 Would development at the site impact upon species/habitats of high importance? (refer
to Biodiversity/Connectivity Study)
Yes
x
No
Unknown
Q.9 Accessibility - Is the site within a settlement with access to, or within easy reach of, the
following:
No
Yes
Rail network
x
Highway network (A or B roads)
x
Public transport
x
Cycle ways and/or footpaths
x
Q.10 Site Deliverability - Are there any infrastructure or other issues on the site that would affect
its deliverability during the Plan period.
Yes
x
No
Unknown
Comments
6. Additional Comments
Comments
The site is centrally located within the settlement of Castell y Rhingyll and well defined and
integrated and related to the urban form. It represents a development site of a scale and at a
location compatible with the size and character of the settlement. The site has no agricultural land
quality issues.
The inclusion of the site for residential development represents an appropriate allocation reflecting
its valid planning permission.
Note: Reference should be made to the guidance notes accompanying this proforma when
interpreting its contents.
7. Sustainability Appraisal
Score:
41
Score Summary Count
Threats
Low
Medium
High
Issues
Opportunities:
Further
Comments
No notable Issues.
4
0
4
No. Prospective Opportunities
5
2
7
Carmarthenshire LDP
Site Assessment Proforma
1. Site Details
Ref:
GA3/h41
Location:
Grove Hill Park
Site Ref (where applicable):
Site Area (Ha):
Existing Use*
Vacant scrub
Potential Use*
Residential
*if candidate site as proposed by respondent
2. Land Use/ Planning History
UDP allocation?
None, white land within development limits.
Relevant Planning History
E/14264 – TO RETAIN RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT UNDERTAKEN AS AN AMENDED SCHEME TO THAT
PREVIOUSLY GRANTED PLANNING PERMISSION (P6/17/6543/80) ON 16.10.80. AMENDMENTS TO INCLUDE
CHANGE OF BUNGALOW TYPES AND DENSITY. Granted 21/12/06
3. Phase 1 – Identification of Strategic Sites
Is the Site Strategic?
Yes (Site proceeds to Phase 2b)
No
x
(Site proceeds to Phase 2a as a Non-Strategic Site)
The site is not considered to be strategic in nature for the following reasons:
not located in a settlement defined as a Growth Area
x
not of an appropriate size
not situated at a key location in terms of transport and accessibility
x
the site is not critical to the delivery of the strategy
This does not preclude the site’s consideration as a Non-Strategic Site.
Expanded reasons for non identification of the site as strategic are available.
4. Phase 2a – Initial Analysis
Q.1
x
Land use allocation specific or non allocation related?
Allocation (proceeds to Q.2)
Non allocation (Considered through LDP policy)
Q.2
x
Within or immediately adjoining an identified settlement in the Preferred Strategy?
Yes (Site proceeds to Q.3)
No (Site is dismissed)
Q.3
x
If residential, can the site accommodate 5 or more houses (i.e. is >0.16ha in size)?
Yes (Site proceeds to Phase 2b)
No Considered under the review of Development Limits)
Comments
5. Phase 2b – Further Analysis
Q.4 Is the site located within or adjacent to any of the following?
(If yes, site does not proceed except where potential for mitigation can be demonstrated)
No
Yes
Partly
Adjacent
KEY DETERMINANTS
Nature and Landscape Conservation
Ramsar Site
x
Special Protection Area (SPA)
x
Special Area of Conservation (SAC)
x
National Nature Reserve (NNR)
x
Site of Special Scientific Interest (SSSI)
x
Common Land or Registered Village Green
x
Cultural Heritage
Scheduled Ancient Monument or remains of
national importance
Flooding
TAN 15 Development Advice Maps
x
x
EA Flood Map - nat_floodzone3
x
Minerals
Mineral buffer zone
x
Q.5 Would development of the site represent or result in:
Tandem development
No
x
Ribbon development
x
Coalescence
x
Development unrelated to the existing urban form
x
Sporadic & fragmented pattern of development (either constitute or contribute to)
x
An illogical extension to the settlement
x
Conflicts with existing land use or known plans and strategies
x
A Detrimental Impact on the Character and Setting of the settlement or its features
(including views and glimpses both into and out of the settlement)
A loss of areas of open space and amenity value
x
General Planning Principles
Yes
x
Comments
Q.6 Additional considerations:
No
Yes
General
Does the site have an available access point with adequate visibility?
x
?
Would development at the site impact upon the highway network and
increase the risk to highway safety?
Is it Previously Developed Land?
No
x
Yes
?
x
Soil / Agricultural Land Quality
Does the site contain high carbon soil e.g. peat?
X
(Adjacent)
x
Does the site contain high quality agricultural land?
Q.7 Is the site located within or related to any of the following?:
No
Nature and Landscape Conservation
Local Nature Reserves (LNR)
Regionally
Important
Geological
Geomorphological Sites (RIGS)
Cultural Heritage
Conservation Area
Yes
Partly
Adjacent
x
/
x
x
Q.8 Would development at the site impact upon species/habitats of high importance? (refer
to Biodiversity/Connectivity Study)
Yes
x
No
Unknown
Q.9 Accessibility - Is the site within a settlement with access to, or within easy reach of, the
following:
No
Yes
Rail network
x
Highway network (A or B roads)
x
Public transport
x
Cycle ways and/or footpaths
x
Q.10 Site Deliverability - Are there any infrastructure or other issues on the site that would affect
its deliverability during the Plan period.
Yes
x
No
Unknown
Comments
6. Additional Comments
Comments
The site represents a logical extension of the current estate development. The site has a valid
planning permission and development is currently on going with the land availability study
indicating that some 7 units of the allocated 13 having been completed during the plan period.
The deliverability of the site has been demonstrated over recent years through the continued
development of the elements of the estate and the inclusion and allocation of this site would
represent a reasonable and logical extension of that development. The continued inclusion of the
site is considered appropriate given its committed status.
Note: Reference should be made to the guidance notes accompanying this proforma when
interpreting its contents.
7. Sustainability Appraisal
Score:
152
Score Summary Count
Threats
Low
Medium
High
Issues
Opportunities:
Further
Comments
No notable Issues.
5
0
1
No. Prospective Opportunities
12
15
8
Carmarthenshire LDP
Site Assessment Proforma
1. Site Details
Ref:
GA3/h42
Site Ref (where applicable):
Location:
Rear of Maesygrug, Llandeilo Road
Site Area (Ha):
Existing Use*
Vacant
Potential Use*
Residential
*if candidate site as proposed by respondent
2. Land Use/ Planning History
UDP allocation?
None, white land within development limits.
Relevant Planning History
E/21021 – Outline planning permission for Residential Development granted 2/7/09 (renewal of
Outline Planning Permission E/11921)
3. Phase 1 – Identification of Strategic Sites
Is the Site Strategic?
Yes (Site proceeds to Phase 2b)
No
x
(Site proceeds to Phase 2a as a Non-Strategic Site)
The site is not considered to be strategic in nature for the following reasons:
not located in a settlement defined as a Growth Area
x
not of an appropriate size
not situated at a key location in terms of transport and accessibility
x
the site is not critical to the delivery of the strategy
This does not preclude the site’s consideration as a Non-Strategic Site.
Expanded reasons for non identification of the site as strategic are available.
4. Phase 2a – Initial Analysis
Q.1
x
Land use allocation specific or non allocation related?
Allocation (proceeds to Q.2)
Non allocation (Considered through LDP policy)
Q.2
x
Within or immediately adjoining an identified settlement in the Preferred Strategy?
Yes (Site proceeds to Q.3)
No (Site is dismissed)
Q.3
x
If residential, can the site accommodate 5 or more houses (i.e. is >0.16ha in size)?
Yes (Site proceeds to Phase 2b)
No Considered under the review of Development Limits)
Comments
5. Phase 2b – Further Analysis
Q.4 Is the site located within or adjacent to any of the following?
(If yes, site does not proceed except where potential for mitigation can be demonstrated)
No
Yes
Partly
Adjacent
KEY DETERMINANTS
Nature and Landscape Conservation
Ramsar Site
x
Special Protection Area (SPA)
x
Special Area of Conservation (SAC)
x
National Nature Reserve (NNR)
x
Site of Special Scientific Interest (SSSI)
Common Land or Registered Village Green
Cultural Heritage
Scheduled Ancient Monument or remains of
national importance
Flooding
TAN 15 Development Advice Maps
x
x
x
x
EA Flood Map - nat_floodzone3
x
Minerals
Mineral buffer zone
x
Q.5 Would development of the site represent or result in:
Tandem development
No
x
Ribbon development
x
Coalescence
x
Development unrelated to the existing urban form
x
Sporadic & fragmented pattern of development (either constitute or contribute to)
x
An illogical extension to the settlement
x
Conflicts with existing land use or known plans and strategies
x
A Detrimental Impact on the Character and Setting of the settlement or its features
(including views and glimpses both into and out of the settlement)
A loss of areas of open space and amenity value
x
General Planning Principles
Yes
x
Comments
Q.6 Additional considerations:
No
Yes
General
Does the site have an available access point with adequate visibility?
x
?
Would development at the site impact upon the highway network and
increase the risk to highway safety?
Is it Previously Developed Land?
No
x
Yes
?
x
Soil / Agricultural Land Quality
Does the site contain high carbon soil e.g. peat?
x
Does the site contain high quality agricultural land?
x
Q.7 Is the site located within or related to any of the following?:
No
Nature and Landscape Conservation
Local Nature Reserves (LNR)
Regionally
Important
Geological
Geomorphological Sites (RIGS)
Cultural Heritage
Conservation Area
Yes
Partly
Adjacent
x
/
x
x
Q.8 Would development at the site impact upon species/habitats of high importance? (refer
to Biodiversity/Connectivity Study)
Yes
x
No
Unknown
Q.9 Accessibility - Is the site within a settlement with access to, or within easy reach of, the
following:
No
Yes
Rail network
x
Highway network (A or B roads)
x
Public transport
x
Cycle ways and/or footpaths
x
Q.10 Site Deliverability - Are there any infrastructure or other issues on the site that would affect
its deliverability during the Plan period.
Yes
x
No
Unknown
Comments
6. Additional Comments
Comments
The site has a valid planning permission for some 6 units on a previously developed site well
related to the built form. It is noted that the site would require development to the rear of the
existing frontage however this would represent appropriate backland rather than tandem
development. An assessment of the current development pattern along Llandeilo Road also
provides support given other examples of similar in depth patterns of development in the vicinity.
The sites location along the A476 in relatively close proximity to the centre of Gorslas and its
services and facilities as well as the broader road network through access to the A48 (T) highlights
its sustainability and accessibility credentials. The proximity of the SSSI and the Marsh Fritillary
Habitats in the area is noted however the development itself does not impact directly on any
habitat or apparent connectivity corridor. Care would however be required in implementing any
proposal to ensure there is no disturbance or harm resulting from the development.
In light of the above, and the fact that the site benefits from a current valid planning consent
endorse its potential to accommodate development. It is therefore considered appropriate to
reflect this potential in the interests of consistency and clarity by allocating the site for residential
development within the LDP.
Note: Reference should be made to the guidance notes accompanying this proforma when
interpreting its contents.
7. Sustainability Appraisal
Score:
49
Score Summary Count
Threats
Issues
No. Prospective Opportunities
Low
4
18
Medium
1
2
High
4
7
It is noted that the site performs poorly particularly in accessibility terms through the
climate change measure. However, its siting on the strategic highway network and
the presence of broader accessibility benefits including the cycle network a short
distance away in Cross Hands requires recognition.
Opportunities:
Further
Comments
No notable Issues. The sites’ performance is almost neutral, however its position
in planning terms within the urban form and the valid planning permission requires
recognition and drive its allocation and inclusion within the LDP.
Carmarthenshire LDP
Site Assessment Proforma
1. Site Details
Ref:
GA3/h43
Site Ref (where applicable):
Location:
Land off Ffordd Werdd
Site Area (Ha):
Existing Use*
Vacant
Potential Use*
Residential
*if candidate site as proposed by respondent
2. Land Use/ Planning History
UDP allocation?
None, white land within development limits.
Relevant Planning History
W/16013 – Full Planning permission granted 1/4/10 for 10 NO DWELLING HOUSES, ACCESS
ROAD AND ASSOCIATED INFRASTRUCTURE
3. Phase 1 – Identification of Strategic Sites
Is the Site Strategic?
Yes (Site proceeds to Phase 2b)
No
x
(Site proceeds to Phase 2a as a Non-Strategic Site)
The site is not considered to be strategic in nature for the following reasons:
not located in a settlement defined as a Growth Area
x
not of an appropriate size
not situated at a key location in terms of transport and accessibility
x
the site is not critical to the delivery of the strategy
This does not preclude the site’s consideration as a Non-Strategic Site.
Expanded reasons for non identification of the site as strategic are available.
4. Phase 2a – Initial Analysis
Q.1
x
Land use allocation specific or non allocation related?
Allocation (proceeds to Q.2)
Non allocation (Considered through LDP policy)
Q.2
x
Within or immediately adjoining an identified settlement in the Preferred Strategy?
Yes (Site proceeds to Q.3)
No (Site is dismissed)
Q.3
x
If residential, can the site accommodate 5 or more houses (i.e. is >0.16ha in size)?
Yes (Site proceeds to Phase 2b)
No Considered under the review of Development Limits)
Comments
5. Phase 2b – Further Analysis
Q.4 Is the site located within or adjacent to any of the following?
(If yes, site does not proceed except where potential for mitigation can be demonstrated)
No
Yes
Partly
Adjacent
KEY DETERMINANTS
Nature and Landscape Conservation
Ramsar Site
x
Special Protection Area (SPA)
x
Special Area of Conservation (SAC)
x
National Nature Reserve (NNR)
x
Site of Special Scientific Interest (SSSI)
x
Common Land or Registered Village Green
x
Cultural Heritage
Scheduled Ancient Monument or remains of
national importance
Flooding
TAN 15 Development Advice Maps
x
x
EA Flood Map - nat_floodzone3
x
Minerals
Mineral buffer zone
x
Q.5 Would development of the site represent or result in:
Tandem development
No
x
Ribbon development
x
Coalescence
x
Development unrelated to the existing urban form
x
Sporadic & fragmented pattern of development (either constitute or contribute to)
x
An illogical extension to the settlement
x
Conflicts with existing land use or known plans and strategies
x
A Detrimental Impact on the Character and Setting of the settlement or its features
(including views and glimpses both into and out of the settlement)
A loss of areas of open space and amenity value
x
General Planning Principles
Yes
x
Comments
Q.6 Additional considerations:
No
Yes
General
Does the site have an available access point with adequate visibility?
x
?
Would development at the site impact upon the highway network and
increase the risk to highway safety?
Is it Previously Developed Land?
No
x
Yes
?
x
Soil / Agricultural Land Quality
Does the site contain high carbon soil e.g. peat?
X
Does the site contain high quality agricultural land?
x
Q.7 Is the site located within or related to any of the following?:
No
Nature and Landscape Conservation
Local Nature Reserves (LNR)
Regionally
Important
Geological
Geomorphological Sites (RIGS)
Cultural Heritage
Conservation Area
Yes
Partly
Adjacent
x
/
x
x
Q.8 Would development at the site impact upon species/habitats of high importance? (refer
to Biodiversity/Connectivity Study)
Yes
x
No
Unknown
Q.9 Accessibility - Is the site within a settlement with access to, or within easy reach of, the
following:
No
Yes
Rail network
x
Highway network (A or B roads)
x
Public transport
x
Cycle ways and/or footpaths
x
Q.10 Site Deliverability - Are there any infrastructure or other issues on the site that would affect
its deliverability during the Plan period.
Yes
x
No
Unknown
Comments
EA comments:
Settlement served by Pontyberem WWTW which discharges to the Gwendraeth Fawr. This stretch is
currently failing to meet Water Framework Directive standards for phosphates. The EA are undertaking
investigations in this catchment to determine the potential source(s) of phosphates and possible
opportunities to reduce the nutrient loading to the stretch.
This WWTW is not within the AMP 5 quality programme, although is listed for Change Protocol under the
Habitats driver.
EA recommends consultation with DCWW to ensure hydraulic and biological capacity and possible phasing
of development.
Ordinary watercourse runs through the centre of the site and along the western boundary of the site. No
culverting. SUDS should be implemented.
6. Additional Comments
Comments
The site has a valid full planning permission for 10 units and is well related to the built form and
which would represent a continuation of Ffordd Werdd to the north.
The sites’ location within Gorslas and in relatively close proximity to the centre of settlement with
its services and facilities and accessibility to the broader road network through access to the A48
(T) highlights its sustainability and accessibility credentials.
Response to TOG comments:
In regard to the comments from the EA, the position in relation to the treatment works will be
continually monitored with discussions on going with both Dwr Cymru/Welsh Water and the EA.
The preparation of a phasing plan (pending finalisation) in relation to the LDP will assist in
providing further certainty in relation to the deliverability of the site by considering factors and
influences ranging from that of the treatment works through to the considerations relating to the
SAC and the Marsh Fritillary Butterfly.
Matters relating to the watercourse will have been considerations at planning application stage and
duly considered in the granting of permission.
Reference will need to be made to Policy EP3 and the requirement for SUDS.
The above and the existence of a current valid planning consent endorse the potential of the site to
accommodate development. It is therefore considered appropriate to reflect this potential in the
interests of consistency and clarity by allocating the site for residential development within the
LDP.
Note: Reference should be made to the guidance notes accompanying this proforma when
interpreting its contents.
7. Sustainability Appraisal
Score:
85
Score Summary Count
Threats
Low
Medium
High
5
3
1
No. Prospective Opportunities
25
10
4
Issues
Opportunities:
Further
Comments
No notable Issues. The sites performance is adequate, however its position in
planning terms, being situated within the urban form and with a valid planning
permission, requires recognition and further promotes its proposed inclusion within
the LDP.
Carmarthenshire LDP
Site Assessment Proforma
1. Site Details
Ref:
GA3/h44
Site Ref (where applicable):
Location:
Part of Breakers Yard and Former garden centre
Site Area (Ha):
Existing Use*
Part scrap metal
recycling/part vacant
Potential Use*
Residential
*if candidate site as proposed by respondent
2. Land Use/ Planning History
UDP allocation?
Part of Planning and Development Brief (PDB30) & part of former garden
centre (white land within development limits).
Relevant Planning History
No recent planning history.
3. Phase 1 – Identification of Strategic Sites
Is the Site Strategic?
Yes (Site proceeds to Phase 2b)
No
x
(Site proceeds to Phase 2a as a Non-Strategic Site)
The site is not considered to be strategic in nature for the following reasons:
not located in a settlement defined as a Growth Area
x
not of an appropriate size
not situated at a key location in terms of transport and accessibility
x
the site is not critical to the delivery of the strategy
This does not preclude the site’s consideration as a Non-Strategic Site.
Expanded reasons for non identification of the site as strategic are available.
4. Phase 2a – Initial Analysis
Q.1
x
Land use allocation specific or non allocation related?
Allocation (proceeds to Q.2)
Non allocation (Considered through LDP policy)
Q.2
x
Within or immediately adjoining an identified settlement in the Preferred Strategy?
Yes (Site proceeds to Q.3)
No (Site is dismissed)
Q.3
x
If residential, can the site accommodate 5 or more houses (i.e. is >0.16ha in size)?
Yes (Site proceeds to Phase 2b)
No Considered under the review of Development Limits)
Comments
5. Phase 2b – Further Analysis
Q.4 Is the site located within or adjacent to any of the following?
(If yes, site does not proceed except where potential for mitigation can be demonstrated)
No
Yes
Partly
Adjacent
KEY DETERMINANTS
Nature and Landscape Conservation
Ramsar Site
x
Special Protection Area (SPA)
x
Special Area of Conservation (SAC)
x
National Nature Reserve (NNR)
x
Site of Special Scientific Interest (SSSI)
x
Common Land or Registered Village Green
x
Cultural Heritage
Scheduled Ancient Monument or remains of
national importance
Flooding
TAN 15 Development Advice Maps
x
x
EA Flood Map - nat_floodzone3
x
Minerals
Mineral buffer zone
x
Q.5 Would development of the site represent or result in:
Tandem development
No
x
Ribbon development
x
Coalescence
x
Development unrelated to the existing urban form
x
Sporadic & fragmented pattern of development (either constitute or contribute to)
x
An illogical extension to the settlement
x
Conflicts with existing land use or known plans and strategies
x
A Detrimental Impact on the Character and Setting of the settlement or its features
(including views and glimpses both into and out of the settlement)
A loss of areas of open space and amenity value
x
General Planning Principles
Yes
x
Comments
Q.6 Additional considerations:
No
Yes
General
Does the site have an available access point with adequate visibility?
x
?
Would development at the site impact upon the highway network and
increase the risk to highway safety?
Is it Previously Developed Land?
No
x
Yes
?
x
Soil / Agricultural Land Quality
Does the site contain high carbon soil e.g. peat?
X
Does the site contain high quality agricultural land?
x
Q.7 Is the site located within or related to any of the following?:
No
Nature and Landscape Conservation
Local Nature Reserves (LNR)
Regionally
Important
Geological
Geomorphological Sites (RIGS)
Cultural Heritage
Conservation Area
Yes
Partly
Adjacent
x
/
x
x
Q.8 Would development at the site impact upon species/habitats of high importance? (refer
to Biodiversity/Connectivity Study)
Yes
x
No
Unknown
Q.9 Accessibility - Is the site within a settlement with access to, or within easy reach of, the
following:
No
Yes
Rail network
x
Highway network (A or B roads)
x
Public transport
x
Cycle ways and/or footpaths
x
Q.10 Site Deliverability - Are there any infrastructure or other issues on the site that would affect
its deliverability during the Plan period.
Yes
x
No
Unknown
Comments
EA comments:
Ordinary watercourse Gwendraeth Fawr runs through the centre of the site.
Settlement served by Pontyberem WWTW which discharges to the Gwendraeth Fawr. This stretch is
currently failing to meet Water Framework Directive standards for phosphates. The EA are undertaking
investigations in this catchment to determine the potential source(s) of phosphates and possible
opportunities to reduce the nutrient loading to the stretch.
This WWTW is not within the AMP 5 quality programme, although is listed for Change Protocol under the
Habitats driver.
EA recommends consultation with DCWW to ensure hydraulic and biological capacity and possible phasing
of development.
6. Additional Comments
Comments
The site consists of two distinct elements namely the former Garden Centre and the current metal
scrap yard. With the former vacant and the desirability and aspiration to relocate the latter to a
more appropriate location, the site offers significant redevelopment potential.
The sites’ potential redevelopment affords an opportunity for broader environmental and amenity
improvements through the relocation of a highly visible bad neighbour activity in close proximity to
residential properties.
The site is strategically located at the key nodal point on the A48 at Cross Hands and is close to
the heart of the settlement of Gorslas, its services and facilities and has easy access to those
located elsewhere within the Growth Area and surrounding and wider communities.
The Preferred strategy identified the site as part of the Cross Hands Strategic Zone, however
following review of evidence, most notably the cumulative biodiversity concerns and the potential
impact on the Marsh Fritillary Butterfly, the site is now not seen as capable of offering the strategic
contribution required. The surrounding biodiversity value should be duly considered as part of any
proposal in relation to the site, indeed any onsite value should also be carefully considered.
Potential impacts must be managed through any development be it in the form of mitigation or
management. In this respect, regard will need to be had to policy EQ4 of the emerging plan to
ensure that any impacts are satisfactorily mitigated, acceptably minimised or appropriately
managed. Proposals should look to include net enhancements.
The position in relation to the treatment works will be continually monitored with discussions on
going with both Dwr Cymru/Welsh Water and the EA. The preparation of a phasing plan (pending
finalisation) in relation to the LDP will assist in providing further certainty in relation to the
deliverability of the site by considering factors and influences ranging from that of the treatment
works through to the considerations relating to the SAC and the Marsh Fritillary Butterfly.
Reference will need to be made to Policy EP3 and the requirement for SUDS.
It is noted that there is potential for on site contamination. As such proposals will be required to
have due regard with appropriate investigations undertaken as necessary.
Note: Reference should be made to the guidance notes accompanying this proforma when
interpreting its contents.
7. Sustainability Appraisal
Score:
236
Score Summary Count
Threats
Low
Medium
High
Issues
4
4
1
No. Prospective Opportunities
15
13
19
Opportunities:
Further
Comments
The sites offer of notable sustainability benefits is reflected in the overall score but
also through the level of opportunities over threats.
Carmarthenshire LDP
Site Assessment Proforma
1. Site Details
Ref:
GA3/h45
Site Ref (where applicable):
Location:
Opposite Ty Newydd Terrace
Site Area (Ha):
Existing Use*
Site under construction
Potential Use*
Residential
*if candidate site as proposed by respondent
2. Land Use/ Planning History
UDP allocation?
Residential Allocation (GR3/20)
Relevant Planning History
W/08990 – Outline Planning Permission Granted 3/05/07.
W/19365 – Reserved Matters Consent Granted 30/6/09 – Residential Development 67 dwellings
W/21879 – Reserved Matters Consent Granted 28/01/10 – Residential Development 65 dwellings
W/22879 – Reserved Matters Consent Granted 16/07/10 – Residential Development 56 Dwellings
3. Phase 1 – Identification of Strategic Sites
Is the Site Strategic?
Yes (Site proceeds to Phase 2b)
No
x
(Site proceeds to Phase 2a as a Non-Strategic Site)
The site is not considered to be strategic in nature for the following reasons:
not located in a settlement defined as a Growth Area
x
not of an appropriate size
not situated at a key location in terms of transport and accessibility
x
the site is not critical to the delivery of the strategy
This does not preclude the site’s consideration as a Non-Strategic Site.
Expanded reasons for non identification of the site as strategic are available.
4. Phase 2a – Initial Analysis
Q.1
x
Land use allocation specific or non allocation related?
Allocation (proceeds to Q.2)
Non allocation (Considered through LDP policy)
Q.2
x
Within or immediately adjoining an identified settlement in the Preferred Strategy?
Yes (Site proceeds to Q.3)
No (Site is dismissed)
Q.3
x
If residential, can the site accommodate 5 or more houses (i.e. is >0.16ha in size)?
Yes (Site proceeds to Phase 2b)
No Considered under the review of Development Limits)
Comments
5. Phase 2b – Further Analysis
Q.4 Is the site located within or adjacent to any of the following?
(If yes, site does not proceed except where potential for mitigation can be demonstrated)
No
Yes
Partly
Adjacent
KEY DETERMINANTS
Nature and Landscape Conservation
Ramsar Site
x
Special Protection Area (SPA)
x
Special Area of Conservation (SAC)
x
National Nature Reserve (NNR)
x
Site of Special Scientific Interest (SSSI)
x
Common Land or Registered Village Green
x
Cultural Heritage
Scheduled Ancient Monument or remains of
national importance
Flooding
TAN 15 Development Advice Maps
x
x
EA Flood Map - nat_floodzone3
x
Minerals
Mineral buffer zone
x
Q.5 Would development of the site represent or result in:
Tandem development
No
x
Ribbon development
x
Coalescence
x
Development unrelated to the existing urban form
x
Sporadic & fragmented pattern of development (either constitute or contribute to)
x
An illogical extension to the settlement
x
Conflicts with existing land use or known plans and strategies
x
A Detrimental Impact on the Character and Setting of the settlement or its features
(including views and glimpses both into and out of the settlement)
A loss of areas of open space and amenity value
x
General Planning Principles
Yes
x
Comments
Q.6 Additional considerations:
No
Yes
?
No
Yes
?
General
x
Does the site have an available access point with adequate visibility?
Would development at the site impact upon the highway network and
increase the risk to highway safety?
Is it Previously Developed Land?
x
x
Soil / Agricultural Land Quality
Does the site contain high carbon soil e.g. peat?
x
Does the site contain high quality agricultural land?
x
Q.7 Is the site located within or related to any of the following?:
No
Nature and Landscape Conservation
Local Nature Reserves (LNR)
Regionally
Important
Geological
Geomorphological Sites (RIGS)
Cultural Heritage
Conservation Area
Yes
Partly
Adjacent
x
/
x
x
Q.8 Would development at the site impact upon species/habitats of high importance? (refer
to Biodiversity/Connectivity Study)
Yes
x
No
Unknown
Q.9 Accessibility - Is the site within a settlement with access to, or within easy reach of, the
following:
No
Yes
Rail network
x
Highway network (A or B roads)
x
Public transport
x
Cycle ways and/or footpaths
x
Q.10 Site Deliverability - Are there any infrastructure or other issues on the site that would affect
its deliverability during the Plan period.
Yes
x
No
Unknown
Comments
6. Additional Comments
Comments
The site is the subject of a valid consent with construction currently underway. The site is
compatible with the strategy of the plan and its sustainability objectives. Cross Hands represents a
sustainable location for growth. It is consequently considered appropriate to include the site as a
residential allocation within the LDP.
Note: Reference should be made to the guidance notes accompanying this proforma when
interpreting its contents.
7. Sustainability Appraisal
Score:
247
Score Summary Count
Threats
Low
Medium
High
Issues
Opportunities:
Further
Comments
No notable Issues
3
3
1
No. Prospective Opportunities
15
14
19
Carmarthenshire LDP
Site Assessment Proforma
1. Site Details
Ref:
GA3/h46
Site Ref (where applicable):
Location:
Adjacent to Maesyrhaf
Site Area (Ha):
Existing Use*
Vacant – trees & scrub
Potential Use*
Residential
*if candidate site as proposed by respondent
2. Land Use/ Planning History
UDP allocation?
Residential Allocation (GR3/22)
Relevant Planning History
S/22921 – Outline Permission Granted 1/4/11 – Residential Development (maximum of 10
dwellings).
3. Phase 1 – Identification of Strategic Sites
Is the Site Strategic?
Yes (Site proceeds to Phase 2b)
No
x
(Site proceeds to Phase 2a as a Non-Strategic Site)
The site is not considered to be strategic in nature for the following reasons:
not located in a settlement defined as a Growth Area
x
not of an appropriate size
not situated at a key location in terms of transport and accessibility
x
the site is not critical to the delivery of the strategy
This does not preclude the site’s consideration as a Non-Strategic Site.
Expanded reasons for non identification of the site as strategic are available.
4. Phase 2a – Initial Analysis
Q.1
x
Land use allocation specific or non allocation related?
Allocation (proceeds to Q.2)
Non allocation (Considered through LDP policy)
Q.2
x
Within or immediately adjoining an identified settlement in the Preferred Strategy?
Yes (Site proceeds to Q.3)
No (Site is dismissed)
Q.3
x
If residential, can the site accommodate 5 or more houses (i.e. is >0.16ha in size)?
Yes (Site proceeds to Phase 2b)
No Considered under the review of Development Limits)
Comments
5. Phase 2b – Further Analysis
Q.4 Is the site located within or adjacent to any of the following?
(If yes, site does not proceed except where potential for mitigation can be demonstrated)
No
Yes
Partly
Adjacent
KEY DETERMINANTS
Nature and Landscape Conservation
Ramsar Site
x
Special Protection Area (SPA)
x
Special Area of Conservation (SAC)
x
National Nature Reserve (NNR)
x
Site of Special Scientific Interest (SSSI)
x
Common Land or Registered Village Green
x
Cultural Heritage
Scheduled Ancient Monument or remains of
national importance
Flooding
TAN 15 Development Advice Maps
x
x
EA Flood Map - nat_floodzone3
x
Minerals
Mineral buffer zone
x
Q.5 Would development of the site represent or result in:
Tandem development
No
x
Ribbon development
x
Coalescence
x
Development unrelated to the existing urban form
x
Sporadic & fragmented pattern of development (either constitute or contribute to)
x
An illogical extension to the settlement
x
Conflicts with existing land use or known plans and strategies
x
A Detrimental Impact on the Character and Setting of the settlement or its features
(including views and glimpses both into and out of the settlement)
A loss of areas of open space and amenity value
x
General Planning Principles
Yes
x
Comments
Q.6 Additional considerations:
No
Yes
General
Does the site have an available access point with adequate visibility?
x
?
Would development at the site impact upon the highway network and
increase the risk to highway safety?
Is it Previously Developed Land?
No
x
Yes
?
x
Soil / Agricultural Land Quality
Does the site contain high carbon soil e.g. peat?
x
Does the site contain high quality agricultural land?
x
Q.7 Is the site located within or related to any of the following?:
No
Nature and Landscape Conservation
Local Nature Reserves (LNR)
Regionally
Important
Geological
Geomorphological Sites (RIGS)
Cultural Heritage
Conservation Area
Yes
Partly
Adjacent
x
/
x
x
Q.8 Would development at the site impact upon species/habitats of high importance? (refer
to Biodiversity/Connectivity Study)
Yes
x
No
Unknown
Q.9 Accessibility - Is the site within a settlement with access to, or within easy reach of, the
following:
No
Yes
Rail network
x
Highway network (A or B roads)
x
Public transport
x
Cycle ways and/or footpaths
x
Q.10 Site Deliverability - Are there any infrastructure or other issues on the site that would affect
its deliverability during the Plan period.
Yes
x
No
Unknown
Comments
6. Additional Comments
Comments
The site is well located near the heart of the settlement and its services and amenities. It
represents a logical and clearly defined developable area surrounded by the current urban form.
The site is subject of a valid consent and is compatible with the strategy of the plan and its
sustainability objectives. Cross Hands represents a sustainable location for growth.
It is
consequently considered appropriate to include the site as a residential allocation within the LDP.
Note: Reference should be made to the guidance notes accompanying this proforma when
interpreting its contents.
7. Sustainability Appraisal
Score:
166
Score Summary Count
Threats
Low
Medium
High
Issues
Opportunities:
Further
Comments
No notable Issues
5
0
1
No. Prospective Opportunities
16
3
15
Carmarthenshire LDP
Site Assessment Proforma
1. Site Details
Ref:
GA3/h47
Site Ref (where applicable):
Location:
Adjacent to Pantgwyn
Part of Candidate Site
037-013
Site Area (Ha):
Existing Use*
Vacant
Potential Use*
Residential
*if candidate site as proposed by respondent
2. Land Use/ Planning History
UDP allocation?
Part of Residential Allocation (GR3/18)
Relevant Planning History
S/19241 – Outline Consent Granted 6/10/10 – Residential Development at LAND AT FORMER
CARAVAN SALES SITE, AND REAR OF, CARMARTHEN ROAD & HEOL BRYNGWILI
3. Phase 1 – Identification of Strategic Sites
Is the Site Strategic?
Yes (Site proceeds to Phase 2b)
No
x
(Site proceeds to Phase 2a as a Non-Strategic Site)
The site is not considered to be strategic in nature for the following reasons:
not located in a settlement defined as a Growth Area
x
not of an appropriate size
not situated at a key location in terms of transport and accessibility
x
the site is not critical to the delivery of the strategy
This does not preclude the site’s consideration as a Non-Strategic Site.
Expanded reasons for non identification of the site as strategic are available.
4. Phase 2a – Initial Analysis
Q.1
x
Land use allocation specific or non allocation related?
Allocation (proceeds to Q.2)
Non allocation (Considered through LDP policy)
Q.2
x
Within or immediately adjoining an identified settlement in the Preferred Strategy?
Yes (Site proceeds to Q.3)
No (Site is dismissed)
Q.3
x
If residential, can the site accommodate 5 or more houses (i.e. is >0.16ha in size)?
Yes (Site proceeds to Phase 2b)
No Considered under the review of Development Limits)
Comments
5. Phase 2b – Further Analysis
Q.4 Is the site located within or adjacent to any of the following?
(If yes, site does not proceed except where potential for mitigation can be demonstrated)
No
Yes
Partly
Adjacent
KEY DETERMINANTS
Nature and Landscape Conservation
Ramsar Site
x
Special Protection Area (SPA)
x
Special Area of Conservation (SAC)
x
National Nature Reserve (NNR)
x
Site of Special Scientific Interest (SSSI)
x
Common Land or Registered Village Green
x
Cultural Heritage
Scheduled Ancient Monument or remains of
national importance
Flooding
TAN 15 Development Advice Maps
x
x
EA Flood Map - nat_floodzone3
x
Minerals
Mineral buffer zone
x
Q.5 Would development of the site represent or result in:
Tandem development
No
x
Ribbon development
x
Coalescence
x
Development unrelated to the existing urban form
x
Sporadic & fragmented pattern of development (either constitute or contribute to)
x
An illogical extension to the settlement
x
Conflicts with existing land use or known plans and strategies
x
A Detrimental Impact on the Character and Setting of the settlement or its features
(including views and glimpses both into and out of the settlement)
A loss of areas of open space and amenity value
x
General Planning Principles
Yes
x
Comments
Q.6 Additional considerations:
No
Yes
General
Does the site have an available access point with adequate visibility?
x
?
Would development at the site impact upon the highway network and
increase the risk to highway safety?
Is it Previously Developed Land?
No
x
Yes
?
x
Soil / Agricultural Land Quality
Does the site contain high carbon soil e.g. peat?
x
Does the site contain high quality agricultural land?
x
Q.7 Is the site located within or related to any of the following?:
No
Nature and Landscape Conservation
Local Nature Reserves (LNR)
Regionally
Important
Geological
Geomorphological Sites (RIGS)
Cultural Heritage
Conservation Area
Yes
Partly
Adjacent
x
/
x
x
Q.8 Would development at the site impact upon species/habitats of high importance? (refer
to Biodiversity/Connectivity Study)
x
Yes
No
Unknown
Q.9 Accessibility - Is the site within a settlement with access to, or within easy reach of, the
following:
No
Yes
Rail network
x
Highway network (A or B roads)
x
Public transport
x
Cycle ways and/or footpaths
x
Q.10 Site Deliverability - Are there any infrastructure or other issues on the site that would affect
its deliverability during the Plan period.
Yes
x
No
Unknown
Comments
6. Additional Comments
Comments
A candidate site was submitted which includes the area represented by Deposit LDP residential
allocation GA3/h47. The candidate site broadly corresponds with that of the UDP allocation
GR3/18. However it is noted that this wider site is in part restricted in biodiversity terms, with the
non LDP allocated areas containing habitat associated with the Marsh Fritillary Butterfly. In this
regard and in the interests of consistency in interpreting evidence and in order to safeguard the
interests of the Marsh Fritillary Butterfly’s meta-population, the eastern parts of the site have not
been considered appropriate for inclusion and allocation within the plan. This is also consistent
with the above outline consent which applies a condition to ensure management strictly in
accordance the agreed management scheme.
The remainder of the site represents an appropriate extension to the urban form and includes the
opportunity to maximise on the previously developed nature of large parts of the remaining site
area (former Ennis Caravans)
The management of the remaining site area would create a well defined and enclosed site close to
the centre of Cross Hands and its sustainability benefits with notable consequential biodiversity
benefits.
The settlement enjoys a number of key services and facilities including education, retail, recreation,
health care etc.
Note: Reference should be made to the guidance notes accompanying this proforma when
interpreting its contents.
7. Sustainability Appraisal
Score:
241
Score Summary Count
Threats
Low
Medium
High
Issues
Opportunities:
Further
Comments
No notable Issues
6
0
1
No. Prospective Opportunities
12
13
18
Carmarthenshire LDP
Site Assessment Proforma
1. Site Details
Ref:
GA3/h48
Location:
Land at Heol Y Dre, Cefneithin
Site Area (Ha):
0.43
Existing Use*
Vacant
Site Ref (where applicable):
Potential Use*
Candidate Site 031-001
Residential
*if candidate site as proposed by respondent
2. Land Use/ Planning History
UDP allocation?
Site forms part of a Green Wedge outside development limits.
Relevant Planning History
W/20900 Granted 1 Oct 2009 for a lawful development certificate for an existing use or operation building/engineering operations including demolition constituting a material start on planning
applications D4/15855 and D4/18321.
3. Phase 1 – Identification of Strategic Sites
Is the Site Strategic?
Yes (Site proceeds to Phase 2b)
No
x
(Site proceeds to Phase 2a as a Non-Strategic Site)
The site is not considered to be strategic in nature for the following reasons:
not located in a settlement defined as a Growth Area
x
not of an appropriate size
not situated at a key location in terms of transport and accessibility
x
the site is not critical to the delivery of the strategy
This does not preclude the site’s consideration as a Non-Strategic Site.
Expanded reasons for non identification of the site as strategic are available.
4. Phase 2a – Initial Analysis
Q.1
x
Land use allocation specific or non allocation related?
Allocation (proceeds to Q.2)
Non allocation (Considered through LDP policy)
Q.2
x
Within or immediately adjoining an identified settlement in the Preferred Strategy?
Yes (Site proceeds to Q.3)
No (Site is dismissed)
Q.3
x
If residential, can the site accommodate 5 or more houses (i.e. is >0.16ha in size)?
Yes (Site proceeds to Phase 2b)
No Considered under the review of Development Limits)
Comments
5. Phase 2b – Further Analysis
Q.4 Is the site located within or adjacent to any of the following?
(If yes, site does not proceed except where potential for mitigation can be demonstrated)
No
Yes
Partly
Adjacent
KEY DETERMINANTS
Nature and Landscape Conservation
Ramsar Site
x
Special Protection Area (SPA)
x
Special Area of Conservation (SAC)
x
National Nature Reserve (NNR)
x
Site of Special Scientific Interest (SSSI)
x
Common Land or Registered Village Green
x
Cultural Heritage
Scheduled Ancient Monument or remains of
national importance
Flooding
TAN 15 Development Advice Maps
x
x
EA Flood Map - nat_floodzone3
x
Minerals
Mineral buffer zone
x
Q.5 Would development of the site represent or result in:
Tandem development
No
x
Ribbon development
x
Coalescence
x
Development unrelated to the existing urban form
x
Sporadic & fragmented pattern of development (either constitute or contribute to)
x
An illogical extension to the settlement
x
Conflicts with existing land use or known plans and strategies
x
A Detrimental Impact on the Character and Setting of the settlement or its features
(including views and glimpses both into and out of the settlement)
A loss of areas of open space and amenity value
x
General Planning Principles
Yes
x
Comments
Q.6 Additional considerations:
No
Yes
General
Does the site have an available access point with adequate visibility?
x
?
Would development at the site impact upon the highway network and
increase the risk to highway safety?
Is it Previously Developed Land?
No
x
Yes
?
x
Soil / Agricultural Land Quality
Does the site contain high carbon soil e.g. peat?
x
Does the site contain high quality agricultural land?
x
Q.7 Is the site located within or related to any of the following?:
No
Nature and Landscape Conservation
Local Nature Reserves (LNR)
Regionally
Important
Geological
Geomorphological Sites (RIGS)
Cultural Heritage
Conservation Area
Yes
Partly
Adjacent
x
/
x
x
Q.8 Would development at the site impact upon species/habitats of high importance? (refer
to Biodiversity/Connectivity Study)
x
Yes
No
Unknown
Q.9 Accessibility - Is the site within a settlement with access to, or within easy reach of, the
following:
No
Yes
Rail network
x
Highway network (A or B roads)
x
Public transport
x
Cycle ways and/or footpaths
x
Q.10 Site Deliverability - Are there any infrastructure or other issues on the site that would affect
its deliverability during the Plan period.
Yes
x
No
Unknown
Comments
6. Additional Comments
Comments
The site represents an extension of development along Heol Y Dre in Cefneithin. The site has
permission for a lawful development certificate for an existing use or operation building/engineering operations including demolition constituting a material start on the planning
permissions D4/15855 & D4/18321. Consequently the site enjoys an extant permission and as
such it is considered appropriate to include and allocate the site for residential development within
the LDP.
The site contributes to the deliverability of the Plan’s strategic objectives by providing sustainably
located development which is integrated into the urban form.
It is noted that the Marsh Fritillary Butterfly Connectivity Study identifies the site as being located
on a potential route for this transient species. However this route is currently through existing
properties. Consequently whilst the route is noted the existence of the material start provides for
the sites’ potential development irrespective of its allocation within the plan. Consequently it is
considered prudent in the interests of certainty and clarity to reflect the sites’ development
potential.
Note: Reference should be made to the guidance notes accompanying this proforma when
interpreting its contents.
7. Sustainability Appraisal
Score:
249
Score Summary Count
Threats
Low
Medium
High
Issues
Opportunities:
Further
Comments
No notable Issues
6
4
0
No. Prospective Opportunities
15
8
22
Carmarthenshire LDP
Site Assessment Proforma
1. Site Details
Ref:
GA3/h49
Site Ref (where applicable):
Location:
Treventy Road, East
Site Area (Ha):
Existing Use*
Vacant
Potential Use*
Residential
*if candidate site as proposed by respondent
2. Land Use/ Planning History
UDP allocation?
Residential Allocation (GR3/30)
Relevant Planning History
W/22226 Refused 19/3/10 Demolition of existing dwelling and construction of 41 residential
dwellings.
Appeal in respect of the refusal of application W/22226 upheld 26/1/11.
3. Phase 1 – Identification of Strategic Sites
Is the Site Strategic?
Yes (Site proceeds to Phase 2b)
No
x
(Site proceeds to Phase 2a as a Non-Strategic Site)
The site is not considered to be strategic in nature for the following reasons:
not located in a settlement defined as a Growth Area
x
not of an appropriate size
not situated at a key location in terms of transport and accessibility
x
the site is not critical to the delivery of the strategy
This does not preclude the site’s consideration as a Non-Strategic Site.
Expanded reasons for non identification of the site as strategic are available.
4. Phase 2a – Initial Analysis
Q.1
x
Land use allocation specific or non allocation related?
Allocation (proceeds to Q.2)
Non allocation (Considered through LDP policy)
Q.2
x
Within or immediately adjoining an identified settlement in the Preferred Strategy?
Yes (Site proceeds to Q.3)
No (Site is dismissed)
Q.3
x
If residential, can the site accommodate 5 or more houses (i.e. is >0.16ha in size)?
Yes (Site proceeds to Phase 2b)
No Considered under the review of Development Limits)
Comments
5. Phase 2b – Further Analysis
Q.4 Is the site located within or adjacent to any of the following?
(If yes, site does not proceed except where potential for mitigation can be demonstrated)
No
Yes
Partly
Adjacent
KEY DETERMINANTS
Nature and Landscape Conservation
Ramsar Site
x
Special Protection Area (SPA)
x
Special Area of Conservation (SAC)
x
National Nature Reserve (NNR)
x
Site of Special Scientific Interest (SSSI)
x
Common Land or Registered Village Green
x
Cultural Heritage
Scheduled Ancient Monument or remains of
national importance
Flooding
TAN 15 Development Advice Maps
x
x
EA Flood Map - nat_floodzone3
x
Minerals
Mineral buffer zone
x
Q.5 Would development of the site represent or result in:
Tandem development
No
x
Ribbon development
x
Coalescence
x
Development unrelated to the existing urban form
x
Sporadic & fragmented pattern of development (either constitute or contribute to)
x
An illogical extension to the settlement
x
Conflicts with existing land use or known plans and strategies
x
A Detrimental Impact on the Character and Setting of the settlement or its features
(including views and glimpses both into and out of the settlement)
A loss of areas of open space and amenity value
x
General Planning Principles
Yes
x
Comments
Q.6 Additional considerations:
No
Yes
General
Does the site have an available access point with adequate visibility?
x
?
Would development at the site impact upon the highway network and
increase the risk to highway safety?
Is it Previously Developed Land?
No
x
Yes
?
x
Soil / Agricultural Land Quality
Does the site contain high carbon soil e.g. peat?
x
Does the site contain high quality agricultural land?
x
Q.7 Is the site located within or related to any of the following?:
No
Nature and Landscape Conservation
Local Nature Reserves (LNR)
Regionally
Important
Geological
Geomorphological Sites (RIGS)
Cultural Heritage
Conservation Area
Yes
Partly
Adjacent
x
/
x
x
Q.8 Would development at the site impact upon species/habitats of high importance? (refer
to Biodiversity/Connectivity Study)
x
Yes
No
Unknown
Q.9 Accessibility - Is the site within a settlement with access to, or within easy reach of, the
following:
No
Yes
Rail network
x
Highway network (A or B roads)
x
Public transport
x
Cycle ways and/or footpaths
x
Q.10 Site Deliverability - Are there any infrastructure or other issues on the site that would affect
its deliverability during the Plan period.
Yes
x
No
Unknown
Comments
6. Additional Comments
Comments
The site represents an extension to the existing housing estate in line with that proposed within the
existing UDP. The deliverability of the site has been demonstrated over recent years through the
continued development of the elements of the estate and the inclusion and allocation of this site
would represent a reasonable and logical extension of that development. It represents a well
defined and enclosed site with two sides bordered by the existing development with minimal
agricultural land quality.
The site is of biodiversity value with the area identified as containing habitat appropriate to the
Marsh Fritillary Butterfly. This has however been subject to full consideration through the appeal
as referred to above. In this regard the Inspector in up holding the appeal referred to agreed off
site mitigation.
The site contributes to the deliverability of the Plan’s strategic objectives by providing sustainably
located development which is integrated into the urban form.
Following the Inspector’s decision at appeal to grant consent for 41 units it is considered prudent in
the interests of certainty and clarity to reflect the sites’ development potential.
Note: Reference should be made to the guidance notes accompanying this proforma when
interpreting its contents.
7. Sustainability Appraisal
Score:
212
Score Summary Count
Threats
Low
Medium
High
Issues
Opportunities:
Further
Comments
No notable Issues
4
3
0
No. Prospective Opportunities
6
15
15
Carmarthenshire LDP
Site Assessment Proforma
1. Site Details
Ref:
GA3/h50
Site Ref (where applicable):
Location:
Pt Heol Rhosybonwen/Treventy Road West
031-004 (in part) - CHECK
Site Area (Ha):
Existing Use*
Residential
Potential Use*
Residential
*if candidate site as proposed by respondent
2. Land Use/ Planning History
UDP allocation?
Part of Residential Allocation (GR3/29)
Relevant Planning History
W/07059 Granted 16/9/04 14 NO. DETACHED HOUSE/DORMER BUNGALOWS. Site Complete.
3. Phase 1 – Identification of Strategic Sites
Is the Site Strategic?
Yes (Site proceeds to Phase 2b)
No
x
(Site proceeds to Phase 2a as a Non-Strategic Site)
The site is not considered to be strategic in nature for the following reasons:
not located in a settlement defined as a Growth Area
x
not of an appropriate size
not situated at a key location in terms of transport and accessibility
x
the site is not critical to the delivery of the strategy
This does not preclude the site’s consideration as a Non-Strategic Site.
Expanded reasons for non identification of the site as strategic are available.
4. Phase 2a – Initial Analysis
Q.1
x
Land use allocation specific or non allocation related?
Allocation (proceeds to Q.2)
Non allocation (Considered through LDP policy)
Q.2
x
Within or immediately adjoining an identified settlement in the Preferred Strategy?
Yes (Site proceeds to Q.3)
No (Site is dismissed)
Q.3
x
If residential, can the site accommodate 5 or more houses (i.e. is >0.16ha in size)?
Yes (Site proceeds to Phase 2b)
No Considered under the review of Development Limits)
Comments
5. Phase 2b – Further Analysis
Q.4 Is the site located within or adjacent to any of the following?
(If yes, site does not proceed except where potential for mitigation can be demonstrated)
No
Yes
Partly
Adjacent
KEY DETERMINANTS
Nature and Landscape Conservation
Ramsar Site
x
Special Protection Area (SPA)
x
Special Area of Conservation (SAC)
x
National Nature Reserve (NNR)
x
Site of Special Scientific Interest (SSSI)
x
Common Land or Registered Village Green
x
Cultural Heritage
Scheduled Ancient Monument or remains of
national importance
Flooding
TAN 15 Development Advice Maps
x
x
EA Flood Map - nat_floodzone3
x
Minerals
Mineral buffer zone
x
Q.5 Would development of the site represent or result in:
Tandem development
No
x
Ribbon development
x
Coalescence
x
Development unrelated to the existing urban form
x
Sporadic & fragmented pattern of development (either constitute or contribute to)
x
An illogical extension to the settlement
x
Conflicts with existing land use or known plans and strategies
x
A Detrimental Impact on the Character and Setting of the settlement or its features
(including views and glimpses both into and out of the settlement)
A loss of areas of open space and amenity value
x
General Planning Principles
Yes
x
Comments
Q.6 Additional considerations:
No
Yes
General
Does the site have an available access point with adequate visibility?
x
?
Would development at the site impact upon the highway network and
increase the risk to highway safety?
Is it Previously Developed Land?
No
x
Yes
?
x
Soil / Agricultural Land Quality
Does the site contain high carbon soil e.g. peat?
x
Does the site contain high quality agricultural land?
x
Q.7 Is the site located within or related to any of the following?:
No
Nature and Landscape Conservation
Local Nature Reserves (LNR)
Regionally
Important
Geological
Geomorphological Sites (RIGS)
Cultural Heritage
Conservation Area
Yes
Partly
Adjacent
x
/
x
x
Q.8 Would development at the site impact upon species/habitats of high importance? (refer
to Biodiversity/Connectivity Study)
x
Yes
No
Unknown
Q.9 Accessibility - Is the site within a settlement with access to, or within easy reach of, the
following:
No
Yes
Rail network
x
Highway network (A or B roads)
x
Public transport
x
Cycle ways and/or footpaths
x
Q.10 Site Deliverability - Are there any infrastructure or other issues on the site that would affect
its deliverability during the Plan period.
Yes
x
No
Unknown
Comments
6. Additional Comments
Comments
The housing land availability study indicates that the site has been completed (14 dwellings) during
the plan period and consequently contributes to meeting the LDP housing land requirement.
It should be noted that in the UDP a much larger area was allocated for housing, of which this
completed element formed a part. A candidate site (031-004) was also submitted and related to a
larger area than GA3/h50. However these elements, beyond site GA3/h50, are of notable
biodiversity value being identified as containing habitat appropriate to the Marsh Fritillary Butterfly.
In this regard, in the interests of consistency in interpreting the evidence and in order to safeguard
the interests of the Marsh Fritillary Butterfly’s meta-population, the site has not been considered
appropriate for inclusion and allocation within the plan.
Note: Reference should be made to the guidance notes accompanying this proforma when
interpreting its contents.
7. Sustainability Appraisal
Score:
N/A
Score Summary Count
Threats
Low
Medium
High
Issues
Opportunities:
Further
Comments
Not applicable
No. Prospective Opportunities
Carmarthenshire LDP
Site Assessment Proforma
1. Site Details
Ref:
GA3/h51
Location:
Land at Bron-yr-ynn
Site Area (Ha):
Existing Use*
Site Ref (where applicable):
059-008 & 059-001
1.10
Agricultural
Potential Use*
Residential
*if candidate site as proposed by respondent
2. Land Use/ Planning History
UDP allocation?
Residential Allocation (GR3/37)
Relevant Planning History
W/18148 – Outline Planning for Residential Development, pending signing of Section 106.
3. Phase 1 – Identification of Strategic Sites
Is the Site Strategic?
Yes (Site proceeds to Phase 2b)
No
x
(Site proceeds to Phase 2a as a Non-Strategic Site)
The site is not considered to be strategic in nature for the following reasons:
not located in a settlement defined as a Growth Area
x
not of an appropriate size
not situated at a key location in terms of transport and accessibility
x
the site is not critical to the delivery of the strategy
This does not preclude the site’s consideration as a Non-Strategic Site.
Expanded reasons for non identification of the site as strategic are available.
4. Phase 2a – Initial Analysis
Q.1
x
Land use allocation specific or non allocation related?
Allocation (proceeds to Q.2)
Non allocation (Considered through LDP policy)
Q.2
x
Within or immediately adjoining an identified settlement in the Preferred Strategy?
Yes (Site proceeds to Q.3)
No (Site is dismissed)
Q.3
x
If residential, can the site accommodate 5 or more houses (i.e. is >0.16ha in size)?
Yes (Site proceeds to Phase 2b)
No Considered under the review of Development Limits)
Comments
5. Phase 2b – Further Analysis
Q.4 Is the site located within or adjacent to any of the following?
(If yes, site does not proceed except where potential for mitigation can be demonstrated)
No
Yes
Partly
Adjacent
KEY DETERMINANTS
Nature and Landscape Conservation
Ramsar Site
x
Special Protection Area (SPA)
x
Special Area of Conservation (SAC)
x
National Nature Reserve (NNR)
x
Site of Special Scientific Interest (SSSI)
x
Common Land or Registered Village Green
x
Cultural Heritage
Scheduled Ancient Monument or remains of
national importance
Flooding
TAN 15 Development Advice Maps
x
x
EA Flood Map - nat_floodzone3
x
Minerals
Mineral buffer zone
x
Q.5 Would development of the site represent or result in:
Tandem development
No
x
Ribbon development
x
Coalescence
x
Development unrelated to the existing urban form
x
Sporadic & fragmented pattern of development (either constitute or contribute to)
x
An illogical extension to the settlement
x
Conflicts with existing land use or known plans and strategies
x
A Detrimental Impact on the Character and Setting of the settlement or its features
(including views and glimpses both into and out of the settlement)
A loss of areas of open space and amenity value
x
General Planning Principles
Yes
x
Comments
Q.6 Additional considerations:
No
Yes
General
Does the site have an available access point with adequate visibility?
x
?
Would development at the site impact upon the highway network and
increase the risk to highway safety?
Is it Previously Developed Land?
No
x
Yes
?
x
Soil / Agricultural Land Quality
Does the site contain high carbon soil e.g. peat?
x
Does the site contain high quality agricultural land?
x
Q.7 Is the site located within or related to any of the following?:
No
Nature and Landscape Conservation
Local Nature Reserves (LNR)
Regionally
Important
Geological
Geomorphological Sites (RIGS)
Cultural Heritage
Conservation Area
Yes
Partly
Adjacent
x
/
x
x
Q.8 Would development at the site impact upon species/habitats of high importance? (refer
to Biodiversity/Connectivity Study)
Yes
x
No
Unknown
Q.9 Accessibility - Is the site within a settlement with access to, or within easy reach of, the
following:
No
Yes
Rail network
x
Highway network (A or B roads)
x
Public transport
x
Cycle ways and/or footpaths
x
Q.10 Site Deliverability - Are there any infrastructure or other issues on the site that would affect
its deliverability during the Plan period.
Yes
No
x
Unknown
Comments
6. Additional Comments
Comments
The site represents an appropriate extension to the current built form. The inclusion and
identification for residential purposes allows for the potential development of a site which is
enclosed by the highway to the north and the estate road and built development associated with
Bron-yr-Ynn to the south. The eastern boundary is defined by an established and defensible
boundary which provides a clear edge for future development.
It is considered that the site would not result in a detrimental impact on the character or
appearance of the area. The site is considered to be sustainable and deliverable being located
within a settlement identified as part of a growth area and of a scale consistent with the character
of that settlement. Its proximity to a range of available services and facilities further supports its
sustainability credentials.
The current pending application (Awaiting signing of s106 agreement) is noted with the outcome of
the Councils’ deliberations subject to monitoring.
Note: Reference should be made to the guidance notes accompanying this proforma when
interpreting its contents.
7. Sustainability Appraisal
Score:
199
Score Summary Count
Threats
Low
Medium
High
2
2
0
No. Prospective Opportunities
6
3
19
Issues
Opportunities:
Further
Comments
The site and the settlements sustainability offer is reflected not only in the overall
score but also through the level of opportunities over threats.
Carmarthenshire LDP
Site Assessment Proforma
1. Site Details
Ref:
GA3/h52
Location:
Land off Heol Caegwyn
Site Area (Ha):
Existing Use*
Site Ref (where applicable):
Part of Candidate Site
059-007
1.38
Agricultural
Potential Use*
Residential
*if candidate site as proposed by respondent
2. Land Use/ Planning History
UDP allocation?
None, outside development limits.
Relevant Planning History
No recent planning history, although the site had planning permission for residential development
in the 1970s – D4/5210/8 & 11.
3. Phase 1 – Identification of Strategic Sites
Is the Site Strategic?
Yes (Site proceeds to Phase 2b)
No
x
(Site proceeds to Phase 2a as a Non-Strategic Site)
The site is not considered to be strategic in nature for the following reasons:
not located in a settlement defined as a Growth Area
x
not of an appropriate size
not situated at a key location in terms of transport and accessibility
x
the site is not critical to the delivery of the strategy
This does not preclude the site’s consideration as a Non-Strategic Site.
Expanded reasons for non identification of the site as strategic are available.
4. Phase 2a – Initial Analysis
Q.1
x
Land use allocation specific or non allocation related?
Allocation (proceeds to Q.2)
Non allocation (Considered through LDP policy)
Q.2
x
Within or immediately adjoining an identified settlement in the Preferred Strategy?
Yes (Site proceeds to Q.3)
No (Site is dismissed)
Q.3
x
If residential, can the site accommodate 5 or more houses (i.e. is >0.16ha in size)?
Yes (Site proceeds to Phase 2b)
No Considered under the review of Development Limits)
Comments
5. Phase 2b – Further Analysis
Q.4 Is the site located within or adjacent to any of the following?
(If yes, site does not proceed except where potential for mitigation can be demonstrated)
No
Yes
Partly
Adjacent
KEY DETERMINANTS
Nature and Landscape Conservation
Ramsar Site
x
Special Protection Area (SPA)
x
Special Area of Conservation (SAC)
x
National Nature Reserve (NNR)
x
Site of Special Scientific Interest (SSSI)
x
Common Land or Registered Village Green
x
Cultural Heritage
Scheduled Ancient Monument or remains of
national importance
Flooding
TAN 15 Development Advice Maps
x
x
EA Flood Map - nat_floodzone3
x
Minerals
Mineral buffer zone
x
Q.5 Would development of the site represent or result in:
Tandem development
No
x
Ribbon development
x
Coalescence
x
Development unrelated to the existing urban form
x
Sporadic & fragmented pattern of development (either constitute or contribute to)
x
An illogical extension to the settlement
x
Conflicts with existing land use or known plans and strategies
x
A Detrimental Impact on the Character and Setting of the settlement or its features
(including views and glimpses both into and out of the settlement)
A loss of areas of open space and amenity value
x
General Planning Principles
Yes
x
Comments
Q.6 Additional considerations:
No
Yes
General
Does the site have an available access point with adequate visibility?
x
?
Would development at the site impact upon the highway network and
increase the risk to highway safety?
Is it Previously Developed Land?
No
x
Yes
?
x
Soil / Agricultural Land Quality
Does the site contain high carbon soil e.g. peat?
x
Does the site contain high quality agricultural land?
x
Q.7 Is the site located within or related to any of the following?:
No
Nature and Landscape Conservation
Local Nature Reserves (LNR)
Regionally
Important
Geological
Geomorphological Sites (RIGS)
Cultural Heritage
Conservation Area
Yes
Partly
Adjacent
x
/
x
x
Q.8 Would development at the site impact upon species/habitats of high importance? (refer
to Biodiversity/Connectivity Study)
Yes
x
No
Unknown
Q.9 Accessibility - Is the site within a settlement with access to, or within easy reach of, the
following:
No
Yes
Rail network
x
Highway network (A or B roads)
x
Public transport
x
Cycle ways and/or footpaths
x
Q.10 Site Deliverability - Are there any infrastructure or other issues on the site that would affect
its deliverability during the Plan period.
Yes
x
No
Unknown
Comments
The following comments from the EA relate to the whole of candidate site 059-007. The actual area of
residential allocation GA3/h52 comprises only the frontage element of the candidate site:
The settlement is served by Pontyberem WWTW which discharges to the Gwendraeth Fawr. This stretch
is currently failing to meet Water Framework Directive standards for phosphates. The EA are undertaking
investigations in this catchment to determine the potential source(s) of phosphates and possible
opportunities to reduce the nutrient loading to the stretch. This WWTW is not within the AMP 5 quality
programme, although is listed for Change Protocol under the Habitats driver.
EA recommends consultation with DCWW to ensure hydraulic and biological capacity and possible phasing
of development.
Ordinary watercourse runs along the northern boundary of the site. A 7m buffer strip will be required along
the watercourse. The EA would also enforce our embargo period for any in-river works which runs from 17
October to 17 April.
6. Additional Comments
Comments
The candidate site as submitted represents an enclosure fronting onto Heol Caegwyn gently
sloping away westwards to the watercourse. In considering the whole candidate site reference
should be made to the proforma in respect of site ref 059-007 (CS1271).
The allocated site represents a logical opportunity for infill in a manner consistent with the urban
form with no detrimental impact on the character or appearance of the area. The development of
the site would be wholly consistent with the pattern of development prevalent in the area without
contributing to, or resulting in either ribbon development or coalescence whilst also eliminating the
impacts the release of the whole candidate site 059-007 would have on biodiversity interests and
on the water course on the western field boundary.
The site is considered to be a sustainable one located within a settlement identified as part of a
growth area and of a scale consistent with the character of that settlement. Its proximity to a range
of available services and facilities further supports its sustainability merits.
The position in relation to the treatment works will be continually monitored with discussions on
going with both Dwr Cymru/Welsh Water and the EA. The preparation of a phasing plan (pending
finalisation) in relation to the LDP will assist in providing further certainty in relation to the
deliverability of the site by considering factors and influences including the treatment works.
Reference will need to be made to policy EP3 and the requirement for SuDS.
Note: Reference should be made to the guidance notes accompanying this proforma when
interpreting its contents.
7. Sustainability Appraisal
Score:
154
Score Summary Count
Threats
Low
Medium
High
2
4
0
No. Prospective Opportunities
6
12
11
Issues
Opportunities:
Further
Comments
The site and the settlements’ sustainability offer is reflected in the overall score but
also through the level of opportunities over threats.
Carmarthenshire LDP
Site Assessment Proforma
1. Site Details
Ref:
GA3/h53
Location:
Nantydderwen
Site Ref (where applicable):
Site Area (Ha):
Existing Use*
Vacant
Potential Use*
Residential
*if candidate site as proposed by respondent
2. Land Use/ Planning History
UDP allocation?
Residential Allocation (GR3/35)
Relevant Planning History
W/20230 – Planning Application for 33 Dwellings pending decision.
3. Phase 1 – Identification of Strategic Sites
Is the Site Strategic?
Yes (Site proceeds to Phase 2b)
No
x
(Site proceeds to Phase 2a as a Non-Strategic Site)
The site is not considered to be strategic in nature for the following reasons:
not located in a settlement defined as a Growth Area
x
not of an appropriate size
not situated at a key location in terms of transport and accessibility
x
the site is not critical to the delivery of the strategy
This does not preclude the site’s consideration as a Non-Strategic Site.
Expanded reasons for non identification of the site as strategic are available.
4. Phase 2a – Initial Analysis
Q.1
x
Land use allocation specific or non allocation related?
Allocation (proceeds to Q.2)
Non allocation (Considered through LDP policy)
Q.2
x
Within or immediately adjoining an identified settlement in the Preferred Strategy?
Yes (Site proceeds to Q.3)
No (Site is dismissed)
Q.3
x
If residential, can the site accommodate 5 or more houses (i.e. is >0.16ha in size)?
Yes (Site proceeds to Phase 2b)
No Considered under the review of Development Limits)
Comments
5. Phase 2b – Further Analysis
Q.4 Is the site located within or adjacent to any of the following?
(If yes, site does not proceed except where potential for mitigation can be demonstrated)
No
Yes
Partly
Adjacent
KEY DETERMINANTS
Nature and Landscape Conservation
Ramsar Site
x
Special Protection Area (SPA)
x
Special Area of Conservation (SAC)
x
National Nature Reserve (NNR)
x
Site of Special Scientific Interest (SSSI)
x
Common Land or Registered Village Green
x
Cultural Heritage
Scheduled Ancient Monument or remains of
national importance
Flooding
TAN 15 Development Advice Maps
x
x
EA Flood Map - nat_floodzone3
x
Minerals
Mineral buffer zone
x
Q.5 Would development of the site represent or result in:
Tandem development
No
x
Ribbon development
x
Coalescence
x
Development unrelated to the existing urban form
x
Sporadic & fragmented pattern of development (either constitute or contribute to)
x
An illogical extension to the settlement
x
Conflicts with existing land use or known plans and strategies
x
A Detrimental Impact on the Character and Setting of the settlement or its features
(including views and glimpses both into and out of the settlement)
A loss of areas of open space and amenity value
x
General Planning Principles
Yes
x
Comments
Q.6 Additional considerations:
No
Yes
General
Does the site have an available access point with adequate visibility?
x
?
Would development at the site impact upon the highway network and
increase the risk to highway safety?
Is it Previously Developed Land?
No
x
Yes
?
x
Soil / Agricultural Land Quality
Does the site contain high carbon soil e.g. peat?
x
Does the site contain high quality agricultural land?
x
Q.7 Is the site located within or related to any of the following?:
No
Nature and Landscape Conservation
Local Nature Reserves (LNR)
Regionally
Important
Geological
Geomorphological Sites (RIGS)
Cultural Heritage
Conservation Area
Yes
Partly
Adjacent
x
/
x
x
Q.8 Would development at the site impact upon species/habitats of high importance? (refer
to Biodiversity/Connectivity Study)
Yes
No
x
Unknown
Q.9 Accessibility - Is the site within a settlement with access to, or within easy reach of, the
following:
No
Yes
Rail network
x
Highway network (A or B roads)
x
Public transport
x
Cycle ways and/or footpaths
x
Q.10 Site Deliverability - Are there any infrastructure or other issues on the site that would affect
its deliverability during the Plan period.
Yes
x
No
Unknown
Comments
6. Additional Comments
Comments
The site (consisting of two separate holdings) represents a logical opportunity to consolidate on the
development to date in the area. The site was the subject of a previous development plan
allocation (see UDP reference above) forming part of and an extension to the built form in an area
of modern developments. The southern most site is enclosed by development whilst the
remainder fronts onto the site access road and extends to a well defined and defensible boundary.
The inclusion of the site is a logical extension to the built form in a manner consistent with the
pattern of development.
The site is considered to be a sustainable one located within a settlement identified as part of a
growth area and of a scale consistent with the character of that settlement. Its proximity to a range
of available services and facilities further supports its sustainability merits.
The current pending application for 33 affordable dwellings is noted with the outcome of the
Councils’ deliberations subject to monitoring.
Response to TOG comments:
EA:
The potential for capacity issues at the WWTW is noted however discussions/consultations remain
on going with Dwr Cymru which together with appropriate phasing etc does not preclude
deliverability during the plan period. It is also noted that there is currently potential capacity and
that the issue relates to the level of any future development.
There are currently no significant water body issues. Policy EP1 provides for the consideration of
proposals where they relate to impact on water quality and in relation to matters of environmental
capacity. Consequently any proposals will be required to satisfy its provisions.
Matters relating to potential biodiversity issues in relation to the site are duly noted and regard will
need to be had to the provisions of EQ4 and all relevant policies contained within the Plan.
Reference will need to be made to policy EP3 and the requirement for SUDS.
The results of the SA on the site are set out in Section 7 below.
Note: Reference should be made to the guidance notes accompanying this proforma when
interpreting its contents.
7. Sustainability Appraisal
Score:
189
Score Summary Count
Threats
Low
Medium
High
2
2
0
No. Prospective Opportunities
6
3
18
Issues
Opportunities:
Further
Comments
The site and the settlements’ sustainability offer is reflected not only in the overall
score but also through the level of opportunities over threats.
Carmarthenshire LDP
Site Assessment Proforma
1. Site Details
Ref:
GA3/h54
Site Ref (where applicable):
Location:
Rhydycerig Estate, Cwmmawr
Site Area (Ha):
Existing Use*
Vacant field
Potential Use*
Residential
*if candidate site as proposed by respondent
2. Land Use/ Planning History
UDP allocation?
Residential Allocation GR3/57
Relevant Planning History
Outline Planning for 10 dwellings (S/24072) – current.
3. Phase 1 – Identification of Strategic Sites
Is the Site Strategic?
Yes (Site proceeds to Phase 2b)
No
x
(Site proceeds to Phase 2a as a Non-Strategic Site)
The site is not considered to be strategic in nature for the following reasons:
not located in a settlement defined as a Growth Area
x
not of an appropriate size
not situated at a key location in terms of transport and accessibility
x
the site is not critical to the delivery of the strategy
This does not preclude the site’s consideration as a Non-Strategic Site.
Expanded reasons for non identification of the site as strategic are available.
4. Phase 2a – Initial Analysis
Q.1
x
Land use allocation specific or non allocation related?
Allocation (proceeds to Q.2)
Non allocation (Considered through LDP policy)
Q.2
x
Within or immediately adjoining an identified settlement in the Preferred Strategy?
Yes (Site proceeds to Q.3)
No (Site is dismissed)
Q.3
x
If residential, can the site accommodate 5 or more houses (i.e. is >0.16ha in size)?
Yes (Site proceeds to Phase 2b)
No Considered under the review of Development Limits)
Comments
5. Phase 2b – Further Analysis
Q.4 Is the site located within or adjacent to any of the following?
(If yes, site does not proceed except where potential for mitigation can be demonstrated)
No
Yes
Partly
Adjacent
KEY DETERMINANTS
Nature and Landscape Conservation
Ramsar Site
x
Special Protection Area (SPA)
x
Special Area of Conservation (SAC)
x
National Nature Reserve (NNR)
x
Site of Special Scientific Interest (SSSI)
x
Common Land or Registered Village Green
x
Cultural Heritage
Scheduled Ancient Monument or remains of
national importance
Flooding
TAN 15 Development Advice Maps
x
x
EA Flood Map - nat_floodzone3
x
Minerals
Mineral buffer zone
x
Q.5 Would development of the site represent or result in:
Tandem development
No
x
Ribbon development
x
Coalescence
x
Development unrelated to the existing urban form
x
Sporadic & fragmented pattern of development (either constitute or contribute to)
x
An illogical extension to the settlement
x
Conflicts with existing land use or known plans and strategies
x
A Detrimental Impact on the Character and Setting of the settlement or its features
(including views and glimpses both into and out of the settlement)
A loss of areas of open space and amenity value
x
General Planning Principles
Yes
x
Comments
Q.6 Additional considerations:
No
Yes
General
Does the site have an available access point with adequate visibility?
x
?
Would development at the site impact upon the highway network and
increase the risk to highway safety?
Is it Previously Developed Land?
No
x
Yes
?
x
Soil / Agricultural Land Quality
Does the site contain high carbon soil e.g. peat?
x
Does the site contain high quality agricultural land?
x
Q.7 Is the site located within or related to any of the following?:
No
Nature and Landscape Conservation
Local Nature Reserves (LNR)
Regionally
Important
Geological
Geomorphological Sites (RIGS)
Cultural Heritage
Conservation Area
Yes
Partly
Adjacent
x
/
x
x
Q.8 Would development at the site impact upon species/habitats of high importance? (refer
to Biodiversity/Connectivity Study)
Yes
x
No
Unknown
Q.9 Accessibility - Is the site within a settlement with access to, or within easy reach of, the
following:
No
Yes
Rail network
x
Highway network (A or B roads)
x
Public transport
x
Cycle ways and/or footpaths
x
Q.10 Site Deliverability - Are there any infrastructure or other issues on the site that would affect
its deliverability during the Plan period.
Yes
No
x
Unknown
Comments
6. Additional Comments
Comments
National Planning Policy is statutorily underpinned by the principle of sustainable development and
accordingly the underlying ethos of the emerging Carmarthenshire Local Development Plan has
been to promote a settlement pattern that is in compliance with the principles of sustainability.
The Local Planning Authority consider that the designation of the subject site is appropriate to
ensure that sufficient land has been allocated within the LDP for residential development purposes
in accordance with Planning Policy Wales.
The site has a number of advantages in terms of retention as a residential allocation – close to the
local amenities and services of the settlement, integrated to the existing residential built form and
with good access and highway links. In planning terms the site offers an appropriate option in
terms of location and lack of harm to the amenity and character of the settlement.
Furthermore, interest in developing the site for housing is indicated by the fact that the site has a
pending application for outline planning permission.
The site has been subject to the SA process, details of which are highlighted in Section 7, below.
EA TOG comments:
In relation to the EA comment on water quality, Policy EP1 provides for the consideration of
proposals where they relate to impact on water quality and in relation to matters of environmental
capacity. Consequently any proposals will be required to satisfy its provisions.
With regard to the hydraulic and biological capacity of the Pontyberem WWTW, which serves this
settlement, discussions/consultations remain on going with Dwr Cymru which together with
appropriate phasing etc does not preclude deliverability during the plan period.
Reference will need to be made to policy EP3 and the requirement for SuDS.
Note: Reference should be made to the guidance notes accompanying this proforma when
interpreting its contents.
7. Sustainability Appraisal
Score:
52
Score Summary Count
Threats
Low
Medium
High
10
1
1
No. Prospective Opportunities
12
3
14
Issues
Opportunities:
Further
Comments
Site has a positive score, albeit not very high. This is due to a number of issues,
but which have been deemed to be of low importance and sensitivity. See score
card for further detail. No notable Issues.
Carmarthenshire LDP
Site Assessment Proforma
1. Site Details
Ref:
GA3/h55
Site Ref (where applicable):
Location:
Land at the rear of 56 Gwendraeth Road
Site Area (Ha):
Existing Use*
Vacant field
Potential Use*
Residential
*if candidate site as proposed by respondent
2. Land Use/ Planning History
UDP allocation?
None, white land within development limits.
Relevant Planning History
Outline Planning Permission (S/16535) refused 20/7/07, upheld on appeal 6/6/08
S/21262 – variation of condition no. 6 attached to planning permission S/16535 in order to achieve
a suitable means of access into the site, granted 13/8/09
S/24953 – current application – variation of conditions 2 and 3 of planning permission S/21262 to
extend the consent for a further period.
3. Phase 1 – Identification of Strategic Sites
Is the Site Strategic?
Yes (Site proceeds to Phase 2b)
No
x
(Site proceeds to Phase 2a as a Non-Strategic Site)
The site is not considered to be strategic in nature for the following reasons:
not located in a settlement defined as a Growth Area
x
not of an appropriate size
not situated at a key location in terms of transport and accessibility
x
the site is not critical to the delivery of the strategy
This does not preclude the site’s consideration as a Non-Strategic Site.
Expanded reasons for non identification of the site as strategic are available.
4. Phase 2a – Initial Analysis
Q.1
x
Land use allocation specific or non allocation related?
Allocation (proceeds to Q.2)
Non allocation (Considered through LDP policy)
Q.2
x
Within or immediately adjoining an identified settlement in the Preferred Strategy?
Yes (Site proceeds to Q.3)
No (Site is dismissed)
Q.3
x
If residential, can the site accommodate 5 or more houses (i.e. is >0.16ha in size)?
Yes (Site proceeds to Phase 2b)
No Considered under the review of Development Limits)
Comments
5. Phase 2b – Further Analysis
Q.4 Is the site located within or adjacent to any of the following?
(If yes, site does not proceed except where potential for mitigation can be demonstrated)
No
Yes
Partly
Adjacent
KEY DETERMINANTS
Nature and Landscape Conservation
Ramsar Site
x
Special Protection Area (SPA)
x
Special Area of Conservation (SAC)
x
National Nature Reserve (NNR)
x
Site of Special Scientific Interest (SSSI)
x
Common Land or Registered Village Green
x
Cultural Heritage
Scheduled Ancient Monument or remains of
national importance
Flooding
TAN 15 Development Advice Maps
x
x
EA Flood Map - nat_floodzone3
x
Minerals
Mineral buffer zone
x
Q.5 Would development of the site represent or result in:
Tandem development
No
x
Ribbon development
x
Coalescence
x
Development unrelated to the existing urban form
x
Sporadic & fragmented pattern of development (either constitute or contribute to)
x
An illogical extension to the settlement
x
Conflicts with existing land use or known plans and strategies
x
A Detrimental Impact on the Character and Setting of the settlement or its features
(including views and glimpses both into and out of the settlement)
A loss of areas of open space and amenity value
x
General Planning Principles
Yes
x
Comments
Q.6 Additional considerations:
No
General
Yes
?
No
Does the site have an available access point with adequate visibility?
Would development at the site impact upon the highway network and
increase the risk to highway safety?
Is it Previously Developed Land?
Yes
x
?
x
x
Soil / Agricultural Land Quality
Does the site contain high carbon soil e.g. peat?
x
Does the site contain high quality agricultural land?
x
Q.7 Is the site located within or related to any of the following?:
No
Nature and Landscape Conservation
Local Nature Reserves (LNR)
Regionally
Important
Geological
Geomorphological Sites (RIGS)
Cultural Heritage
Conservation Area
Yes
Partly
Adjacent
x
/
x
x
Q.8 Would development at the site impact upon species/habitats of high importance? (refer
to Biodiversity/Connectivity Study)
Yes
x
No
Unknown
Q.9 Accessibility - Is the site within a settlement with access to, or within easy reach of, the
following:
No
Yes
Rail network
x
Highway network (A or B roads)
x
Public transport
x
Cycle ways and/or footpaths
x
Q.10 Site Deliverability - Are there any infrastructure or other issues on the site that would affect
its deliverability during the Plan period.
Yes
No
x
Unknown
Comments
6. Additional Comments
Comments
National Planning Policy is statutorily underpinned by the principle of sustainable development and
accordingly the underlying ethos of the emerging Carmarthenshire Local Development Plan has
been to promote a settlement pattern that is in compliance with the principles of sustainability.
The Local Planning Authority consider that the designation of the subject site is appropriate to
ensure that sufficient land has been allocated within the LDP for residential development purposes
in accordance with Planning Policy Wales.
The site has a number of advantages in terms of retention as a residential allocation – close to the
local amenities and services of the settlement, integrated to the existing residential built form and
with good access and highway links. In planning terms the site offers an appropriate option in
terms of location and lack of harm to the amenity and character of the settlement.
Furthermore, the site has an outline planning permission. The principle of the site for residential
development has therefore been considered acceptable. In conclusion this available land can be
put forward as a residential allocation within the LDP.
The site has been subject to the SA process, details of which are highlighted in Section 7, below.
Note: Reference should be made to the guidance notes accompanying this proforma when
interpreting its contents.
7. Sustainability Appraisal
Score:
153
Score Summary Count
Threats
Low
Medium
High
9
2
0
No. Prospective Opportunities
12
2
15
Issues
Opportunities:
Further
Comments
Site has a positive score. See score card for further detail. No notable Issues.
The site represents a consented commitment.
Carmarthenshire LDP
Site Assessment Proforma
1. Site Details
Ref:
GA3/h56
Site Ref (where applicable):
Location:
Land at Factory Site between 22 & 28 Bethesda Road
Site Area (Ha):
Existing Use*
Vacant field
Potential Use*
Residential
*if candidate site as proposed by respondent
2. Land Use/ Planning History
UDP allocation?
Existing employment use – factory within development limits.
Relevant Planning History
Outline Planning Application (S/24446) – current.
Update May 2013:
Outline Planning Application (S/24446) for residential development was granted on 19/3/13.
3. Phase 1 – Identification of Strategic Sites
Is the Site Strategic?
Yes (Site proceeds to Phase 2b)
No
x
(Site proceeds to Phase 2a as a Non-Strategic Site)
The site is not considered to be strategic in nature for the following reasons:
not located in a settlement defined as a Growth Area
x
not of an appropriate size
not situated at a key location in terms of transport and accessibility
x
the site is not critical to the delivery of the strategy
This does not preclude the site’s consideration as a Non-Strategic Site.
Expanded reasons for non identification of the site as strategic are available.
4. Phase 2a – Initial Analysis
Q.1
x
Land use allocation specific or non allocation related?
Allocation (proceeds to Q.2)
Non allocation (Considered through LDP policy)
Q.2
x
Within or immediately adjoining an identified settlement in the Preferred Strategy?
Yes (Site proceeds to Q.3)
No (Site is dismissed)
Q.3
x
If residential, can the site accommodate 5 or more houses (i.e. is >0.16ha in size)?
Yes (Site proceeds to Phase 2b)
No Considered under the review of Development Limits)
Comments
5. Phase 2b – Further Analysis
Q.4 Is the site located within or adjacent to any of the following?
(If yes, site does not proceed except where potential for mitigation can be demonstrated)
No
Yes
Partly
Adjacent
KEY DETERMINANTS
Nature and Landscape Conservation
Ramsar Site
x
Special Protection Area (SPA)
x
Special Area of Conservation (SAC)
x
National Nature Reserve (NNR)
x
Site of Special Scientific Interest (SSSI)
x
Common Land or Registered Village Green
x
Cultural Heritage
Scheduled Ancient Monument or remains of
national importance
Flooding
TAN 15 Development Advice Maps
x
x
EA Flood Map - nat_floodzone3
x
Minerals
Mineral buffer zone
x
Q.5 Would development of the site represent or result in:
Tandem development
No
x
Ribbon development
x
Coalescence
x
Development unrelated to the existing urban form
x
Sporadic & fragmented pattern of development (either constitute or contribute to)
x
An illogical extension to the settlement
x
Conflicts with existing land use or known plans and strategies
x
A Detrimental Impact on the Character and Setting of the settlement or its features
(including views and glimpses both into and out of the settlement)
A loss of areas of open space and amenity value
x
General Planning Principles
Yes
x
Comments
Q.6 Additional considerations:
No
Yes
General
Does the site have an available access point with adequate visibility?
x
?
Would development at the site impact upon the highway network and
increase the risk to highway safety?
Is it Previously Developed Land?
No
x
Yes
?
x
Soil / Agricultural Land Quality
Does the site contain high carbon soil e.g. peat?
x
Does the site contain high quality agricultural land?
x
Q.7 Is the site located within or related to any of the following?:
No
Nature and Landscape Conservation
Local Nature Reserves (LNR)
Regionally
Important
Geological
Geomorphological Sites (RIGS)
Cultural Heritage
Conservation Area
Yes
Partly
Adjacent
x
/
x
x
Q.8 Would development at the site impact upon species/habitats of high importance? (refer
to Biodiversity/Connectivity Study)
Yes
x
No
Unknown
Q.9 Accessibility - Is the site within a settlement with access to, or within easy reach of, the
following:
No
Yes
Rail network
x
Highway network (A or B roads)
x
Public transport
x
Cycle ways and/or footpaths
x
Q.10 Site Deliverability - Are there any infrastructure or other issues on the site that would affect
its deliverability during the Plan period.
Yes
No
x
Unknown
Comments
6. Additional Comments
Comments
National Planning Policy is statutorily underpinned by the principle of sustainable development and
accordingly the underlying ethos of the emerging Carmarthenshire Local Development Plan has
been to promote a settlement pattern that is in compliance with the principles of sustainability.
The Local Planning Authority consider that the designation of the subject site is appropriate to
ensure that sufficient land has been allocated within the LDP for residential development purposes
in accordance with Planning Policy Wales.
The site has a number of advantages in terms of retention as a residential allocation – close to the
local amenities and services of the settlement, integrated to the existing residential built form and
with good access and highway links. In planning terms the site offers an appropriate option in
terms of location and lack of harm to the amenity and character of the settlement.
Furthermore, interest in developing the site for housing is shown by the pending application for
outline planning permission.
The site has been subject to the SA process, details of which are highlighted in Section 7, below.
EA TOG comments:
In relation to the EA comment on water quality, Policy EP1 provides for the consideration of
proposals where they relate to impact on water quality and in relation to matters of environmental
capacity. Consequently any proposals will be required to satisfy its provisions.
With regard to the hydraulic and biological capacity of the Pontyberem WWTW, which serves this
settlement, discussions/consultations remain on going with Dwr Cymru which together with
appropriate phasing etc does not preclude deliverability during the plan period.
Reference will need to be made to policy EP3 and the requirement for SuDS.
Note: Reference should be made to the guidance notes accompanying this proforma when
interpreting its contents.
7. Sustainability Appraisal
Score:
105
Score Summary Count
Threats
Low
Medium
High
9
1
0
No. Prospective Opportunities
4
11
6
Issues
Opportunities:
Further
Comments
Site has a positive score, albeit not particularly high. This is due to a number of
minor issues that are not deemed to be of high importance or sensitivity. See
score card for further detail. No notable Issues.
Carmarthenshire LDP
Site Assessment Proforma
1. Site Details
Ref:
GA3/h57
Location:
Ravelston Court
Site Ref (where applicable):
Site Area (Ha):
Existing Use*
Vacant field
Potential Use*
Residential
*if candidate site as proposed by respondent
2. Land Use/ Planning History
UDP allocation?
Residential Allocation GR3/56
Relevant Planning History
No recent planning history on the remaining area.
3. Phase 1 – Identification of Strategic Sites
Is the Site Strategic?
Yes (Site proceeds to Phase 2b)
No
x
(Site proceeds to Phase 2a as a Non-Strategic Site)
The site is not considered to be strategic in nature for the following reasons:
not located in a settlement defined as a Growth Area
x
not of an appropriate size
not situated at a key location in terms of transport and accessibility
x
the site is not critical to the delivery of the strategy
This does not preclude the site’s consideration as a Non-Strategic Site.
Expanded reasons for non identification of the site as strategic are available.
4. Phase 2a – Initial Analysis
Q.1
x
Land use allocation specific or non allocation related?
Allocation (proceeds to Q.2)
Non allocation (Considered through LDP policy)
Q.2
x
Within or immediately adjoining an identified settlement in the Preferred Strategy?
Yes (Site proceeds to Q.3)
No (Site is dismissed)
Q.3
x
If residential, can the site accommodate 5 or more houses (i.e. is >0.16ha in size)?
Yes (Site proceeds to Phase 2b)
No Considered under the review of Development Limits)
Comments
5. Phase 2b – Further Analysis
Q.4 Is the site located within or adjacent to any of the following?
(If yes, site does not proceed except where potential for mitigation can be demonstrated)
No
Yes
Partly
Adjacent
KEY DETERMINANTS
Nature and Landscape Conservation
Ramsar Site
x
Special Protection Area (SPA)
x
Special Area of Conservation (SAC)
x
National Nature Reserve (NNR)
x
Site of Special Scientific Interest (SSSI)
x
Common Land or Registered Village Green
x
Cultural Heritage
Scheduled Ancient Monument or remains of
national importance
Flooding
TAN 15 Development Advice Maps
x
x
EA Flood Map - nat_floodzone3
x
Minerals
Mineral buffer zone
x
Q.5 Would development of the site represent or result in:
Tandem development
No
x
Ribbon development
x
Coalescence
x
Development unrelated to the existing urban form
x
Sporadic & fragmented pattern of development (either constitute or contribute to)
x
An illogical extension to the settlement
x
Conflicts with existing land use or known plans and strategies
x
A Detrimental Impact on the Character and Setting of the settlement or its features
(including views and glimpses both into and out of the settlement)
A loss of areas of open space and amenity value
x
General Planning Principles
Yes
x
Comments
Q.6 Additional considerations:
No
Yes
General
Does the site have an available access point with adequate visibility?
x
?
Would development at the site impact upon the highway network and
increase the risk to highway safety?
Is it Previously Developed Land?
No
x
Yes
?
x
Soil / Agricultural Land Quality
Does the site contain high carbon soil e.g. peat?
x
Does the site contain high quality agricultural land?
x
Q.7 Is the site located within or related to any of the following?:
No
Nature and Landscape Conservation
Local Nature Reserves (LNR)
Regionally
Important
Geological
Geomorphological Sites (RIGS)
Cultural Heritage
Conservation Area
Yes
Partly
Adjacent
x
/
x
x
Q.8 Would development at the site impact upon species/habitats of high importance? (refer
to Biodiversity/Connectivity Study)
Yes
x
No
Unknown
Q.9 Accessibility - Is the site within a settlement with access to, or within easy reach of, the
following:
No
Yes
Rail network
x
Highway network (A or B roads)
x
Public transport
x
Cycle ways and/or footpaths
x
Q.10 Site Deliverability - Are there any infrastructure or other issues on the site that would affect
its deliverability during the Plan period.
Yes
No
x
Unknown
Comments
6. Additional Comments
Comments
National Planning Policy is statutorily underpinned by the principle of sustainable development and
accordingly the underlying ethos of the emerging Carmarthenshire Local Development Plan has
been to promote a settlement pattern that is in compliance with the principles of sustainability.
The Local Planning Authority consider that the designation of the subject site is appropriate to
ensure that sufficient land has been allocated within the LDP for residential development purposes
in accordance with Planning Policy Wales.
The site consists of the remaining part of a larger residential estate that has already been
completed. Only space for about 4 dwellings remains. The remaining area has a number of
advantages in terms of retention as a residential allocation – close to the local amenities and
services of the settlement, integrated to the existing residential built form and with good access
and highway links. In planning terms the site offers an appropriate option in terms of location and
lack of harm to the amenity and character of the settlement.
The site has been subject to the SA process, details of which are highlighted in Section 7, below.
Note: Reference should be made to the guidance notes accompanying this proforma when
interpreting its contents.
7. Sustainability Appraisal
Score:
130
Score Summary Count
Threats
Low
Medium
High
9
1
0
No. Prospective Opportunities
4
6
11
Issues
Opportunities:
Further
Comments
Site has a good, positive score. See score card for further detail. No notable
Issues.
Carmarthenshire LDP
Site Assessment Proforma
1. Site Details
Ref:
GA3/h58
Location:
Adj. Lletty Mawr
Site Ref (where applicable):
Site Area (Ha):
Existing Use*
Residential – Site Complete
Potential Use*
*if candidate site as proposed by respondent
2. Land Use/ Planning History
UDP allocation?
Residential Allocation GR3/55
Relevant Planning History
S/05580 – Full Planning for 24 dwellings granted 29/1/04.
3. Phase 1 – Identification of Strategic Sites
Is the Site Strategic?
Yes (Site proceeds to Phase 2b)
No
x
(Site proceeds to Phase 2a as a Non-Strategic Site)
The site is not considered to be strategic in nature for the following reasons:
not located in a settlement defined as a Growth Area
x
not of an appropriate size
not situated at a key location in terms of transport and accessibility
x
the site is not critical to the delivery of the strategy
This does not preclude the site’s consideration as a Non-Strategic Site.
Expanded reasons for non identification of the site as strategic are available.
4. Phase 2a – Initial Analysis
Q.1
x
Land use allocation specific or non allocation related?
Allocation (proceeds to Q.2)
Non allocation (Considered through LDP policy)
Q.2
x
Within or immediately adjoining an identified settlement in the Preferred Strategy?
Yes (Site proceeds to Q.3)
No (Site is dismissed)
Q.3
x
If residential, can the site accommodate 5 or more houses (i.e. is >0.16ha in size)?
Yes (Site proceeds to Phase 2b)
No Considered under the review of Development Limits)
Comments
Site complete. The final six dwellings were completed during the Plan period.
5. Phase 2b – Further Analysis
Q.4 Is the site located within or adjacent to any of the following?
(If yes, site does not proceed except where potential for mitigation can be demonstrated)
No
Yes
Partly
Adjacent
KEY DETERMINANTS
Nature and Landscape Conservation
Ramsar Site
x
Special Protection Area (SPA)
x
Special Area of Conservation (SAC)
x
National Nature Reserve (NNR)
x
Site of Special Scientific Interest (SSSI)
x
Common Land or Registered Village Green
x
Cultural Heritage
Scheduled Ancient Monument or remains of
national importance
Flooding
TAN 15 Development Advice Maps
x
x
EA Flood Map - nat_floodzone3
x
Minerals
Mineral buffer zone
x
Q.5 Would development of the site represent or result in:
Tandem development
No
x
Ribbon development
x
Coalescence
x
Development unrelated to the existing urban form
x
Sporadic & fragmented pattern of development (either constitute or contribute to)
x
An illogical extension to the settlement
x
Conflicts with existing land use or known plans and strategies
x
A Detrimental Impact on the Character and Setting of the settlement or its features
(including views and glimpses both into and out of the settlement)
A loss of areas of open space and amenity value
x
General Planning Principles
Yes
x
Comments
Q.6 Additional considerations:
No
Yes
General
Does the site have an available access point with adequate visibility?
x
?
Would development at the site impact upon the highway network and
increase the risk to highway safety?
Is it Previously Developed Land?
No
x
Yes
?
x
Soil / Agricultural Land Quality
Does the site contain high carbon soil e.g. peat?
x
Does the site contain high quality agricultural land?
x
Q.7 Is the site located within or related to any of the following?:
No
Nature and Landscape Conservation
Local Nature Reserves (LNR)
Regionally
Important
Geological
Geomorphological Sites (RIGS)
Cultural Heritage
Conservation Area
Yes
Partly
Adjacent
x
/
x
x
Q.8 Would development at the site impact upon species/habitats of high importance? (refer
to Biodiversity/Connectivity Study)
Yes
x
No
Unknown
Q.9 Accessibility - Is the site within a settlement with access to, or within easy reach of, the
following:
No
Yes
Rail network
x
Highway network (A or B roads)
x
Public transport
x
Cycle ways and/or footpaths
x
Q.10 Site Deliverability - Are there any infrastructure or other issues on the site that would affect
its deliverability during the Plan period.
Yes
No
x
Unknown
Comments
6. Additional Comments
Comments
The final 6 dwellings were completed during Plan period and so this figure contributes to the
overall LDP housing allocation figure.
Note: Reference should be made to the guidance notes accompanying this proforma when
interpreting its contents.
Carmarthenshire LDP
Site Assessment Proforma
1. Site Details
Ref:
FCM/GA3/c
Site Ref (where applicable):
Location:
Land opposite Plough & Harrow, Betws
Site Area (Ha):
Existing Use*
Vacant land
Potential Use*
Residential
*if candidate site as proposed by respondent
2. Land Use/ Planning History
UDP allocation?
Former use within development limits
Relevant Planning History
Site has Outline planning permission for 9 dwellings (E/25047) granted on 19/01/12.
3. Phase 1 – Identification of Strategic Sites
Is the Site Strategic?
Yes (Site proceeds to Phase 2b)
No
x
(Site proceeds to Phase 2a as a Non-Strategic Site)
The site is not considered to be strategic in nature for the following reasons:
not located in a settlement defined as a Growth Area
x
not of an appropriate size
not situated at a key location in terms of transport and accessibility
x
the site is not critical to the delivery of the strategy
This does not preclude the site’s consideration as a Non-Strategic Site.
Expanded reasons for non identification of the site as strategic are available.
4. Phase 2a – Initial Analysis
Q.1
x
Land use allocation specific or non allocation related?
Allocation (proceeds to Q.2)
Non allocation (Considered through LDP policy)
Q.2
x
Within or immediately adjoining an identified settlement in the Preferred Strategy?
Yes (Site proceeds to Q.3)
No (Site is dismissed)
Q.3
x
If residential, can the site accommodate 5 or more houses (i.e. is >0.16ha in size)?
Yes (Site proceeds to Phase 2b)
No Considered under the review of Development Limits)
Comments
5. Phase 2b – Further Analysis
Q.4 Is the site located within or adjacent to any of the following?
(If yes, site does not proceed except where potential for mitigation can be demonstrated)
No
Yes
Partly
Adjacent
KEY DETERMINANTS
Nature and Landscape Conservation
Ramsar Site
x
Special Protection Area (SPA)
x
Special Area of Conservation (SAC)
x
National Nature Reserve (NNR)
x
Site of Special Scientific Interest (SSSI)
x
Common Land or Registered Village Green
x
Cultural Heritage
Scheduled Ancient Monument or remains of
national importance
Flooding
TAN 15 Development Advice Maps
x
x
EA Flood Map - nat_floodzone3
x
Minerals
Mineral buffer zone
x
Q.5 Would development of the site represent or result in:
Tandem development
No
x
Ribbon development
x
Coalescence
x
Development unrelated to the existing urban form
x
Sporadic & fragmented pattern of development (either constitute or contribute to)
x
An illogical extension to the settlement
x
Conflicts with existing land use or known plans and strategies
x
A Detrimental Impact on the Character and Setting of the settlement or its features
(including views and glimpses both into and out of the settlement)
A loss of areas of open space and amenity value
x
General Planning Principles
Yes
x
Comments
Q.6 Additional considerations:
No
Yes
General
x
Does the site have an available access point with adequate visibility?
Would development at the site impact upon the highway network and
x
?
No
increase the risk to highway safety?
Is it Previously Developed Land?
x
Soil / Agricultural Land Quality
Does the site contain high carbon soil e.g. peat?
x
Does the site contain high quality agricultural land?
x
Yes
?
Q.7 Is the site located within or related to any of the following?:
No
Nature and Landscape Conservation
Local Nature Reserves (LNR)
Regionally
Important
Geological
Geomorphological Sites (RIGS)
Cultural Heritage
Conservation Area
Yes
Partly
Adjacent
x
/
x
x
Q.8 Would development at the site impact upon species/habitats of high importance? (refer
to Biodiversity/Connectivity Study)
Yes
x
No
Unknown
Q.9 Accessibility - Is the site within a settlement with access to, or within easy reach of, the
following:
No
Yes
Rail network
x
Highway network (A or B roads)
x
Public transport
x
Cycle ways and/or footpaths
x
Q.10 Site Deliverability - Are there any infrastructure or other issues on the site that would affect
its deliverability during the Plan period.
Yes
x
No
Unknown
Comments
6. Additional Comments
Comments
The site is located adjacent to existing residential areas in Betws, Ammanford. Being situated
close to local amenities and services and free from any obvious constraints the site represents an
appropriate site for a residential allocation in the LDP.
The site benefits from an outline planning permission. The principle of the site for residential
development has therefore been considered acceptable. In conclusion this available land can be
put forward as a residential allocation within the LDP.
Whilst it is noted that this site is a recent addition to the LDP’s housing provision and did not form
an allocation at the Deposit Stage, its inclusion as a focused change ensures that the Plan makes
appropriate provision to meet the identified housing land requirement and that the LDP responds to
the deletion of non deliverable sites, and/or those which are considered contrary to provisions of
national policy as set out within the Focused Changes.
Note: Reference should be made to the guidance notes accompanying this proforma when
interpreting its contents.
Carmarthenshire LDP
Site Assessment Proforma
1. Site Details
Ref:
FCM/GA3/r
Site Ref (where applicable):
Location:
Land north of Primary School, Cross Hands
Site Area (Ha):
Existing Use*
Agriculture
Potential Use*
Residential
*if candidate site as proposed by respondent
2. Land Use/ Planning History
UDP allocation?
Part of GR3/16
Relevant Planning History
S/06554 – Reserved Matters for 26 No. houses with roads, soft and hard landscaping – Phase 1,
granted 26/03/2004.
S/18782 – Full Planning for residential development of 37 dwellings together with associated
access, car parking and servicing, open space and landscaping, and other ancillary uses and
activities, granted 25/2/13. Site is under construction.
S/18560 – outline planning for a residential development of 105 houses was refused on 29/5/09;
S/19223 – outline planning for residential development together with associated access, car
parking and servicing, open space and landscaping, and other ancillary uses and activities was
refused on 29/05/09.
Both applications S/18560 and S/19223 were allowed on appeal and the outlines granted on
20/3/12.
3. Phase 1 – Identification of Strategic Sites
Is the Site Strategic?
Yes (Site proceeds to Phase 2b)
x
No
(Site proceeds to Phase 2a as a Non-Strategic Site)
The site is not considered to be strategic in nature for the following reasons:
not located in a settlement defined as a Growth Area
x
not of an appropriate size
not situated at a key location in terms of transport and accessibility
x
the site is not critical to the delivery of the strategy
This does not preclude the site’s consideration as a Non-Strategic Site.
Expanded reasons for non identification of the site as strategic are available.
4. Phase 2a – Initial Analysis
Q.1
x
Land use allocation specific or non allocation related?
Allocation (proceeds to Q.2)
Non allocation (Considered through LDP policy)
Q.2
x
Within or immediately adjoining an identified settlement in the Preferred Strategy?
Yes (Site proceeds to Q.3)
No (Site is dismissed)
Q.3
x
If residential, can the site accommodate 5 or more houses (i.e. is >0.16ha in size)?
Yes (Site proceeds to Phase 2b)
No Considered under the review of Development Limits)
Comments
5. Phase 2b – Further Analysis
Q.4 Is the site located within or adjacent to any of the following?
(If yes, site does not proceed except where potential for mitigation can be demonstrated)
No
Yes
Partly
Adjacent
KEY DETERMINANTS
Nature and Landscape Conservation
Ramsar Site
x
Special Protection Area (SPA)
x
Special Area of Conservation (SAC)
x
National Nature Reserve (NNR)
x
Site of Special Scientific Interest (SSSI)
x
Common Land or Registered Village Green
x
Cultural Heritage
Scheduled Ancient Monument or remains of
national importance
Flooding
TAN 15 Development Advice Maps
x
x
EA Flood Map - nat_floodzone3
x
Minerals
Mineral buffer zone
x
Q.5 Would development of the site represent or result in:
Tandem development
No
x
Ribbon development
x
Coalescence
x
Development unrelated to the existing urban form
x
Sporadic & fragmented pattern of development (either constitute or contribute to)
x
An illogical extension to the settlement
x
Conflicts with existing land use or known plans and strategies
x
A Detrimental Impact on the Character and Setting of the settlement or its features
(including views and glimpses both into and out of the settlement)
A loss of areas of open space and amenity value
x
General Planning Principles
x
Yes
Comments
Q.6 Additional considerations:
No
Yes
?
General
x
Does the site have an available access point with adequate visibility?
Would development at the site impact upon the highway network and
increase the risk to highway safety?
Is it Previously Developed Land?
x
x
Soil / Agricultural Land Quality
Does the site contain high carbon soil e.g. peat?
x
Does the site contain high quality agricultural land?
x
Q.7 Is the site located within or related to any of the following?:
No
Nature and Landscape Conservation
Local Nature Reserves (LNR)
Regionally
Important
Geological
Geomorphological Sites (RIGS)
Cultural Heritage
Conservation Area
Yes
Partly
Adjacent
x
/
x
x
Q.8 Would development at the site impact upon species/habitats of high importance? (refer
to Biodiversity/Connectivity Study)
Yes
x
No
Unknown
Q.9 Accessibility - Is the site within a settlement with access to, or within easy reach of, the
following:
No
Yes
Rail network
x
Highway network (A or B roads)
x
Public transport
x
Cycle ways and/or footpaths
x
Q.10 Site Deliverability - Are there any infrastructure or other issues on the site that would affect
its deliverability during the Plan period.
Yes
Comments
x
No
Unknown
6. Additional Comments
Comments
Whilst the site was not considered appropriate for allocation within the Deposit LDP, circumstances
have changed since and following the planning permissions granted on appeal post Deposit, the
site is now considered appropriate for allocation as a focused change. The planning approval has
provided greater clarity and certainty as to the developability of the site and its allocation ensures
that the Plan makes appropriate provision to meet the identified housing land requirement.
Allocation of this site will also ensure that the LDP responds to the deletion of non deliverable sites,
and/or those which are considered contrary to provisions of national policy as set out within the
Focused Changes.
The site now represents a consented commitment and Cross Hands represents a sustainable
location for growth. It is consequently considered appropriate to include the site as a residential
allocation within the LDP.
The site has been the subject of a sustainability appraisal which is set out in section 7 below.
Note: Reference should be made to the guidance notes accompanying this proforma when
interpreting its contents.
7. Sustainability Appraisal
Score:
206
Score Summary Count
Threats
Low
Medium
High
Issues
Opportunities:
Further
Comments
No notable Issues
5
1
4
No. Prospective Opportunities
16
10
19
Carmarthenshire LDP
Site Assessment Proforma
1. Site Details
Ref:
FCM/GA3/aa
Site Ref (where applicable):
Location:
Land to rear of Gwernllwyn, Cross Hands Road
Site Area (Ha):
Existing Use*
Vacant
Potential Use*
Residential
*if candidate site as proposed by respondent
2. Land Use/ Planning History
UDP allocation?
Former use within development limits
Relevant Planning History
No
3. Phase 1 – Identification of Strategic Sites
Is the Site Strategic?
Yes (Site proceeds to Phase 2b)
No
x
(Site proceeds to Phase 2a as a Non-Strategic Site)
The site is not considered to be strategic in nature for the following reasons:
not located in a settlement defined as a Growth Area
x
not of an appropriate size
not situated at a key location in terms of transport and accessibility
x
the site is not critical to the delivery of the strategy
This does not preclude the site’s consideration as a Non-Strategic Site.
Expanded reasons for non identification of the site as strategic are available.
4. Phase 2a – Initial Analysis
Q.1
x
Land use allocation specific or non allocation related?
Allocation (proceeds to Q.2)
Non allocation (Considered through LDP policy)
Q.2
x
Within or immediately adjoining an identified settlement in the Preferred Strategy?
Yes (Site proceeds to Q.3)
No (Site is dismissed)
Q.3
x
If residential, can the site accommodate 5 or more houses (i.e. is >0.16ha in size)?
Yes (Site proceeds to Phase 2b)
No Considered under the review of Development Limits)
Comments
5. Phase 2b – Further Analysis
Q.4 Is the site located within or adjacent to any of the following?
(If yes, site does not proceed except where potential for mitigation can be demonstrated)
No
Yes
Partly
Adjacent
KEY DETERMINANTS
Nature and Landscape Conservation
Ramsar Site
x
Special Protection Area (SPA)
x
Special Area of Conservation (SAC)
x
National Nature Reserve (NNR)
x
Site of Special Scientific Interest (SSSI)
x
Common Land or Registered Village Green
x
Cultural Heritage
Scheduled Ancient Monument or remains of
national importance
Flooding
TAN 15 Development Advice Maps
x
x
EA Flood Map - nat_floodzone3
x
Minerals
Mineral buffer zone
x
Q.5 Would development of the site represent or result in:
Tandem development
No
x
Ribbon development
x
Coalescence
x
Development unrelated to the existing urban form
x
Sporadic & fragmented pattern of development (either constitute or contribute to)
x
An illogical extension to the settlement
x
Conflicts with existing land use or known plans and strategies
x
A Detrimental Impact on the Character and Setting of the settlement or its features
(including views and glimpses both into and out of the settlement)
A loss of areas of open space and amenity value
x
General Planning Principles
Yes
x
Comments
Q.6 Additional considerations:
No
Yes
General
x
Does the site have an available access point with adequate visibility?
Would development at the site impact upon the highway network and
increase the risk to highway safety?
Is it Previously Developed Land?
Soil / Agricultural Land Quality
x
x
?
No
x
Does the site contain high carbon soil e.g. peat?
Yes
?
x
Does the site contain high quality agricultural land?
Q.7 Is the site located within or related to any of the following?:
No
Nature and Landscape Conservation
Local Nature Reserves (LNR)
Regionally
Important
Geological
Geomorphological Sites (RIGS)
Cultural Heritage
Conservation Area
Yes
Partly
Adjacent
x
/
x
x
Q.8 Would development at the site impact upon species/habitats of high importance? (refer
to Biodiversity/Connectivity Study)
Yes
x
No
Unknown
Q.9 Accessibility - Is the site within a settlement with access to, or within easy reach of, the
following:
No
Yes
Rail network
x
Highway network (A or B roads)
x
Public transport
x
Cycle ways and/or footpaths
x
Q.10 Site Deliverability - Are there any infrastructure or other issues on the site that would affect
its deliverability during the Plan period.
Yes
x
No
Unknown
Comments
6. Additional Comments
Comments
Whilst it is noted that this site is a recent addition to the LDP’s housing provision and did not form
an allocation at the Deposit Stage, its inclusion as a focused change ensures that the Plan makes
appropriate provision to meet the identified housing land requirement and that the LDP responds to
the deletion of non deliverable sites, and/or those which are considered contrary to provisions of
national policy as set out within the Focused Changes.
In the Deposit LDP the site formed white land within the development limits. The site is located
adjacent to existing residential areas within the built form of Cross Hands and benefits from good
access. Being situated close to local amenities and services and free from any obvious constraints
the site represents an appropriate site for a residential allocation in the LDP. Furthermore, the
allocation of this site for housing, as opposed to leaving it as white land provides clarity and
certainty as to its deliverability for a specific land use. The site could accommodate approximately
25 units.
Reference should be made to the Council’s schedule of focused changes which has direct
implications for this suggested focused change. Particular regard should be given to the Council’s
response to Deposit representation reference D6149.
Note: Reference should be made to the guidance notes accompanying this proforma when
interpreting its contents.
Carmarthenshire LDP
Site Assessment Proforma
1. Site Details
Ref:
GA3/MU1
Site Ref (where applicable):
Location:
Cross Hands West
Site Area (Ha):
Existing Use*
Vacant Brownfield Site
Potential Use*
Mixed Use
*if candidate site as proposed by respondent
2. Land Use/ Planning History
UDP allocation?
Planning and Development Brief (PDB29)
Relevant Planning History
S/23696 –Outline Application Pending for DEVELOPMENT OF LAND AT CROSS HANDS WEST,
COMPRISING: CLASS A1 RETAIL FOODSTORE; CLASS C3 RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT;
CLASS 01 MEDICAL CARE FACILITY; CLASS C2 RESIDENTIAL HOME; CLASS A3
WORKINGMAN'S CLUB; NEW DRAINAGE, SERVICES, TRANSPORT AND HIGHWAYS
INFRASTRUCTURE, INCLUDING ACCESS TO POTENTIAL SCHOOL “DROP OFF”/VEHICULAR
ACCESS, ASSOCIATED ENGINEERING OPERATIONS, STRATEGIC LANDSCAPE AND
ENVIRONMENTAL RESOURCE AREAS AND PUBLIC OPEN SPACE INCLUDING IMPROVED
PLAYING FIELDS.
3. Phase 1 – Identification of Strategic Sites
Is the Site Strategic?
Yes (Site proceeds to Phase 2b)
x
No
(Site proceeds to Phase 2a as a Non-Strategic Site)
The site is not considered to be strategic in nature for the following reasons:
not located in a settlement defined as a Growth Area
not of an appropriate size
not situated at a key location in terms of transport and accessibility
the site is not critical to the delivery of the strategy
This does not preclude the site’s consideration as a Non-Strategic Site.
Expanded reasons for non identification of the site as strategic are available.
4. Phase 2a – Initial Analysis
Q.1
Land use allocation specific or non allocation related?
Allocation (proceeds to Q.2)
Non allocation (Considered through LDP policy)
Q.2
Within or immediately adjoining an identified settlement in the Preferred Strategy?
Yes (Site proceeds to Q.3)
No (Site is dismissed)
Q.3
If residential, can the site accommodate 5 or more houses (i.e. is >0.16ha in size)?
Yes (Site proceeds to Phase 2b)
No Considered under the review of Development Limits)
Comments
N/A
5. Phase 2b – Further Analysis
Q.4 Is the site located within or adjacent to any of the following?
(If yes, site does not proceed except where potential for mitigation can be demonstrated)
No
Yes
Partly
Adjacent
KEY DETERMINANTS
Nature and Landscape Conservation
Ramsar Site
x
Special Protection Area (SPA)
x
Special Area of Conservation (SAC)
x
National Nature Reserve (NNR)
x
Site of Special Scientific Interest (SSSI)
x
Common Land or Registered Village Green
x
Cultural Heritage
Scheduled Ancient Monument or remains of
national importance
Flooding
TAN 15 Development Advice Maps
x
X
(C1 Zone)
EA Flood Map - nat_floodzone3
x
Minerals
Mineral buffer zone
x
Q.5 Would development of the site represent or result in:
Tandem development
No
x
Ribbon development
x
Coalescence
x
Development unrelated to the existing urban form
x
Sporadic & fragmented pattern of development (either constitute or contribute to)
x
An illogical extension to the settlement
x
Conflicts with existing land use or known plans and strategies
x
A Detrimental Impact on the Character and Setting of the settlement or its features
(including views and glimpses both into and out of the settlement)
A loss of areas of open space and amenity value
x
General Planning Principles
Yes
x
Comments
Q.6 Additional considerations:
No
Yes
?
No
Yes
?
General
x
Does the site have an available access point with adequate visibility?
Would development at the site impact upon the highway network and
increase the risk to highway safety?
Is it Previously Developed Land?
x
x
Soil / Agricultural Land Quality
Does the site contain high carbon soil e.g. peat?
x
Does the site contain high quality agricultural land?
x
Q.7 Is the site located within or related to any of the following?:
No
Nature and Landscape Conservation
Local Nature Reserves (LNR)
Regionally
Important
Geological
Geomorphological Sites (RIGS)
Cultural Heritage
Conservation Area
Yes
Partly
Adjacent
x
/
x
x
Q.8 Would development at the site impact upon species/habitats of high importance? (refer
to Biodiversity/Connectivity Study)
x
Yes
No
Unknown
Q.9 Accessibility - Is the site within a settlement with access to, or within easy reach of, the
following:
No
Yes
Rail network
x
Highway network (A or B roads)
x
Public transport
x
Cycle ways and/or footpaths
x
Q.10 Site Deliverability - Are there any infrastructure or other issues on the site that would affect
its deliverability during the Plan period.
Yes
x
No
Unknown
Comments
6. Additional Comments
Comments
The site is strategically located at the key nodal point on the A48 at Cross Hands. The site forms
part of the Cross Hands strategic zone which is made up of three sites each contributing to the
regeneration and economic development of the Ammanford/Cross Hands Growth Area and
Carmarthenshire as a whole. The Cross Hands West site is situated on the western side of the
A48 with excellent access to the M4, the strategic highway network and surrounding communities.
Taken with the remainder of the sites identified as part of the Cross Hands strategic zone it
represents a relatively large area consisting of previously developed and some green field land.
It represents a highly sustainable site in an area well served by and with ready access to a range
of services and facilities. The site, as part of the current proposal pending determination, would
also expand the current service offer in the area whilst also providing enhanced community benefit
in the form of a health resource centre.
The majority of the site is the subject of a pending planning application for a mix of uses including
residential, retail, medical facility and a care home. Its siting at this location is compatible with the
strategy of the plan and its sustainability objectives. Cross Hands represents a sustainable
location for growth.
Further parts of the site form part of emerging proposals in respect of the secondary school to the
north, including pick up and drop off facilities.
Candidate site 031-008, whilst not forming part of the above planning application area, remains
part of the mixed use allocated area, and within the development limits, and as such any proposals
would be considered accordingly.
Response to TOG comments:
CCW and County Ecologist:
The site has been highlighted as containing areas of biodiversity value including a range of
habitats and protected species. The site also includes habitat of the Marsh Fritillary Butterfly. The
biodiversity value in relation to the site is duly noted and the potential impacts must be managed
through any development be it in the form of mitigation or management. In this respect regard will
need to be had to policy EQ4 of the emerging plan to ensure that any impacts are satisfactorily
mitigated, acceptably minimised or appropriately managed. Proposals should look to include net
enhancements.
EA:
It is noted that there exists potential for on site contamination. As such proposals including that as
contained within the pending application will be required to have due regard with appropriate
investigations undertaken as necessary.
The position in relation to the Cross Hands treatment works will be continually monitored with
discussions on going with both Dwr Cymru/Welsh Water and the EA. The Plan in monitoring the
matter will also take into account the feedback and progress of the relevant planning application in
the area together with their potential contributions in relation to the works. The preparation of a
phasing plan (pending finalisation) in relation to the LDP will assist in providing further certainty in
relation to the deliverability of the site by considering factors and influences ranging from that of the
treatment works through to the considerations relating to the SAC and the Marsh Fritillary Butterfly.
The Gwendraeth Fawr runs through the centre of the site, however, the EA flood maps in the area
are not considered very accurate given its classification as an 'ordinary watercourse'. There is
another ordinary w/c that runs through the centre of the site just south of the Gwendraeth Fawr. It
is noted that the TAN15 maps identify the site as containing C1 areas, however given the
uncertainty, more detailed investigations will be required in bringing any proposal forward and
given the size of the site would not in all likelihood preclude its development.
Reference is made to policy EP3 and the requirement for SUDS.
Note: Reference should be made to the guidance notes accompanying this proforma when
interpreting its contents.
7. Sustainability Appraisal
Score:
339
Score Summary Count
Threats
Low
Medium
High
8
2
3
No. Prospective Opportunities
17
0
37
Issues
Opportunities:
Further
Comments
No notable Issues. The site performs well in sustainability terms.
Carmarthenshire LDP
Site Assessment Proforma
1. Site Details
Ref:
GA3/MU2
Site Ref (where applicable):
Location:
Emlyn Brickworks Site
Site Area (Ha):
Existing Use*
Vacant Brownfield Site
Potential Use*
Residential
*if candidate site as proposed by respondent
2. Land Use/ Planning History
UDP allocation?
Planning & Development Brief Site (PDB28)
Relevant Planning History
Continual renewal of outline planning permission (E/02150) for mixed use development including
residential, granted on 21/8/2000. The latest renewal being E/23535 (granted 20/10/10) which
relates to the variation of a condition no.1 imposed on planning permission E/16744 granted on
22/8/07 as follows: “Application for approval of the following reserved matters; external
appearance; for phase 2 & 3 must be made to the Local Planning Authority before 20 October
2013 and the development of these phases must be commenced not later than whichever is the
later of the following: (A) the expiration of 5 years from the date of permission; (B) the expiration of
2 years from the date of approval of the last of the reserved matters to be approved.
3. Phase 1 – Identification of Strategic Sites
Is the Site Strategic?
Yes (Site proceeds to Phase 2b)
No
x
(Site proceeds to Phase 2a as a Non-Strategic Site)
The site is not considered to be strategic in nature for the following reasons:
not located in a settlement defined as a Growth Area
not of an appropriate size
not situated at a key location in terms of transport and accessibility
x
the site is not critical to the delivery of the strategy
This does not preclude the site’s consideration as a Non-Strategic Site.
Expanded reasons for non identification of the site as strategic are available.
4. Phase 2a – Initial Analysis
Q.1
x
Land use allocation specific or non allocation related?
Allocation (proceeds to Q.2)
Non allocation (Considered through LDP policy)
Q.2
x
Within or immediately adjoining an identified settlement in the Preferred Strategy?
Yes (Site proceeds to Q.3)
No (Site is dismissed)
Q.3
x
If residential, can the site accommodate 5 or more houses (i.e. is >0.16ha in size)?
Yes (Site proceeds to Phase 2b)
No Considered under the review of Development Limits)
Comments
5. Phase 2b – Further Analysis
Q.4 Is the site located within or adjacent to any of the following?
(If yes, site does not proceed except where potential for mitigation can be demonstrated)
No
Yes
Partly
Adjacent
KEY DETERMINANTS
Nature and Landscape Conservation
Ramsar Site
x
Special Protection Area (SPA)
x
Special Area of Conservation (SAC)
x
National Nature Reserve (NNR)
x
Site of Special Scientific Interest (SSSI)
x
Common Land or Registered Village Green
x
Cultural Heritage
Scheduled Ancient Monument or remains of
national importance
Flooding
TAN 15 Development Advice Maps
x
x
EA Flood Map - nat_floodzone3
x
Minerals
Mineral buffer zone
x
Q.5 Would development of the site represent or result in:
Tandem development
No
x
Ribbon development
x
Coalescence
x
Development unrelated to the existing urban form
x
Sporadic & fragmented pattern of development (either constitute or contribute to)
x
An illogical extension to the settlement
x
Conflicts with existing land use or known plans and strategies
x
A Detrimental Impact on the Character and Setting of the settlement or its features
(including views and glimpses both into and out of the settlement)
A loss of areas of open space and amenity value
x
General Planning Principles
Comments
Q.6 Additional considerations:
x
Yes
No
Yes
?
General
x
Does the site have an available access point with adequate visibility?
Would development at the site impact upon the highway network and
increase the risk to highway safety?
Is it Previously Developed Land?
x
x
Soil / Agricultural Land Quality
Does the site contain high carbon soil e.g. peat?
x
Does the site contain high quality agricultural land?
x
Q.7 Is the site located within or related to any of the following?:
No
Nature and Landscape Conservation
Local Nature Reserves (LNR)
Regionally
Important
Geological
Geomorphological Sites (RIGS)
Cultural Heritage
Conservation Area
Yes
Partly
Adjacent
x
/
x
x
Q.8 Would development at the site impact upon species/habitats of high importance? (refer
to Biodiversity/Connectivity Study)
Yes
x
No
Unknown
Q.9 Accessibility - Is the site within a settlement with access to, or within easy reach of, the
following:
No
Yes
Rail network
x
Highway network (A or B roads)
x
Public transport
x
Cycle ways and/or footpaths
x
Q.10 Site Deliverability - Are there any infrastructure or other issues on the site that would affect
its deliverability during the Plan period.
Yes
No
x
Unknown
Comments
6. Additional Comments
Comments
National Planning Policy is statutorily underpinned by the principle of sustainable development and
accordingly the underlying ethos of the emerging Carmarthenshire Local Development Plan has
been to promote a settlement pattern that is in compliance with the principles of sustainability.
The Local Planning Authority consider that the designation of the subject site is appropriate to
ensure that sufficient land has been allocated within the LDP for residential development purposes
in accordance with Planning Policy Wales.
The site has a number of advantages in terms of its potential utilisation as a mixed use allocation –
close to the local amenities and services of the settlement, ease of integration with the existing
residential built form and with good access and highway links. In planning terms the site offers an
appropriate option in terms of location and lack of harm to the amenity and character of the
settlement.
Furthermore, the site has an outline planning permission. The principle of the site for mixed use
development, including residential, has therefore been considered acceptable. In conclusion this
available land can be put forward as a residential allocation within the LDP.
The site has been subject to the SA process, details of which are highlighted in Section 7, below.
Response to TOG comments:
In relation to the comments from the EA, the potential for capacity issues at the WWTW is noted
however discussions/consultations remain on going with Dwr Cymru which together with
appropriate phasing etc does not preclude deliverability during the plan period. It is also noted that
there is currently potential capacity and that the issue relates to the level of any future
development.
There are currently no significant water body issues. Policy EP1 provides for the consideration of
proposals where they relate to impact on water quality and in relation to matters of environmental
capacity. Consequently any proposals will be required to satisfy its provisions.
Reference will need to be made to Policy EP3 and the requirement for SUDS.
A preliminary risk assessment, prior to development, in respect of potential land contamination
from historical land use (colliery workings) will need to satisfy the EA requirements.
Note: Reference should be made to the guidance notes accompanying this proforma when
interpreting its contents.
7. Sustainability Appraisal
Score:
202
Score Summary Count
Threats
Low
Medium
High
7
1
2
No. Prospective Opportunities
24
0
21
Issues
Opportunities:
Further
Comments
Site has a good, positive score. See score card for further detail. No notable
Issues. The site represents a consented commitment.
Carmarthenshire LDP
Site Assessment Proforma
1. Site Details
Ref:
GA3/E1
Site Ref (where applicable):
Location:
Cross Hands Business Park
Site Area (Ha):
Existing Use*
Vacant
Potential Use*
Employment
*if candidate site as proposed by respondent
2. Land Use/ Planning History
UDP allocation?
White land within development limits
Relevant Planning History
No recent planning history.
3. Phase 1 – Identification of Strategic Sites
Is the Site Strategic?
Yes (Site proceeds to Phase 2b)
No
x
(Site proceeds to Phase 2a as a Non-Strategic Site)
The site is not considered to be strategic in nature for the following reasons:
not located in a settlement defined as a Growth Area
x
not of an appropriate size
not situated at a key location in terms of transport and accessibility
x
the site is not critical to the delivery of the strategy
This does not preclude the site’s consideration as a Non-Strategic Site.
Expanded reasons for non identification of the site as strategic are available.
4. Phase 2a – Initial Analysis
Q.1
x
Land use allocation specific or non allocation related?
Allocation (proceeds to Q.2)
Non allocation (Considered through LDP policy)
Q.2
x
Within or immediately adjoining an identified settlement in the Preferred Strategy?
Yes (Site proceeds to Q.3)
No (Site is dismissed)
Q.3
If residential, can the site accommodate 5 or more houses (i.e. is >0.16ha in size)?
Yes (Site proceeds to Phase 2b)
No Considered under the review of Development Limits)
Comments
5. Phase 2b – Further Analysis
Q.4 Is the site located within or adjacent to any of the following?
(If yes, site does not proceed except where potential for mitigation can be demonstrated)
No
Yes
Partly
Adjacent
KEY DETERMINANTS
Nature and Landscape Conservation
Ramsar Site
x
Special Protection Area (SPA)
x
Special Area of Conservation (SAC)
x
National Nature Reserve (NNR)
x
Site of Special Scientific Interest (SSSI)
x
Common Land or Registered Village Green
x
Cultural Heritage
Scheduled Ancient Monument or remains of
national importance
Flooding
TAN 15 Development Advice Maps
x
x
EA Flood Map - nat_floodzone3
x
Minerals
Mineral buffer zone
x
Q.5 Would development of the site represent or result in:
Tandem development
No
x
Ribbon development
x
Coalescence
x
Development unrelated to the existing urban form
x
Sporadic & fragmented pattern of development (either constitute or contribute to)
x
An illogical extension to the settlement
x
Conflicts with existing land use or known plans and strategies
x
A Detrimental Impact on the Character and Setting of the settlement or its features
(including views and glimpses both into and out of the settlement)
A loss of areas of open space and amenity value
x
General Planning Principles
Yes
x
Comments
Q.6 Additional considerations:
No
Yes
General
x
Does the site have an available access point with adequate visibility?
Would development at the site impact upon the highway network and
increase the risk to highway safety?
Is it Previously Developed Land?
Soil / Agricultural Land Quality
x
x
?
No
x
Does the site contain high carbon soil e.g. peat?
Yes
?
x
Does the site contain high quality agricultural land?
Q.7 Is the site located within or related to any of the following?:
No
Nature and Landscape Conservation
Local Nature Reserves (LNR)
Regionally
Important
Geological
Geomorphological Sites (RIGS)
Cultural Heritage
Conservation Area
Yes
Partly
Adjacent
x
/
x
x
Q.8 Would development at the site impact upon species/habitats of high importance? (refer
to Biodiversity/Connectivity Study)
Yes
No
x
Unknown
Q.9 Accessibility - Is the site within a settlement with access to, or within easy reach of, the
following:
No
Yes
Rail network
x
Highway network (A or B roads)
x
Public transport
x
Cycle ways and/or footpaths
x
Q.10 Site Deliverability - Are there any infrastructure or other issues on the site that would affect
its deliverability during the Plan period.
Yes
No
x
Unknown
Comments
Proximity to SAC will need to be a consideration in respect of future planning applications.
6. Additional Comments
Comments
The site has a number of advantages in terms of its suitability as an employment allocation:
–
–
–
–
immediately adjacent to an existing employment site and retail park (i.e. surrounded on three
sides),
appropriate distance from residential development;
close to the local amenities and services of the settlement,
good access and highway links.
In planning terms the site offers an appropriate option in terms of location and lack of harm to the
amenity and character of the settlement.
Although the site has not been identified within the Carmarthenshire Employment Land Study
(2010), it is nevertheless surrounded on three sides by existing employment land and a retail park.
Expansion into this location will be complementary in helping to create a major strategic
employment location. The Carmarthenshire Employment Land Study states that the combined,
Cross Hands East and West as a whole “will be of a suitable scale to attract strategic funding,
which will be a key means of delivering CCC economic development objectives.”
Being situated in a central location and adjacent to both east and west sites, as well as being
immediately south of the established Cross Hands Business Park, it is considered that this site
represents an appropriate area of land to be put forward as an employment allocation within the
LDP.
The site has been subject to the SA process, details of which are highlighted in Section 7, below.
Note: Reference should be made to the guidance notes accompanying this proforma when
interpreting its contents.
7. Sustainability Appraisal
Score:
156
Score Summary Count
Threats
Low
Medium
High
7
0
1
No. Prospective Opportunities
28
3
13
Issues
Opportunities:
Further
Comments
No notable Issues. Site has a good, positive score. See score card for further
detail.
Carmarthenshire LDP
Site Assessment Proforma
1. Site Details
Ref:
GA3/E2
Site Ref (where applicable):
Location:
Meadows Road, Cross Hands
Site Area (Ha):
Existing Use*
Potential Use*
Employment
*if candidate site as proposed by respondent
2. Land Use/ Planning History
UDP allocation?
Employment Allocation GR3/E5
Relevant Planning History
No recent planning history.
3. Phase 1 – Identification of Strategic Sites
Is the Site Strategic?
Yes (Site proceeds to Phase 2b)
No
x
(Site proceeds to Phase 2a as a Non-Strategic Site)
The site is not considered to be strategic in nature for the following reasons:
not located in a settlement defined as a Growth Area
x
not of an appropriate size
not situated at a key location in terms of transport and accessibility
x
the site is not critical to the delivery of the strategy
This does not preclude the site’s consideration as a Non-Strategic Site.
Expanded reasons for non identification of the site as strategic are available.
4. Phase 2a – Initial Analysis
Q.1
x
Land use allocation specific or non allocation related?
Allocation (proceeds to Q.2)
Non allocation (Considered through LDP policy)
Q.2
x
Within or immediately adjoining an identified settlement in the Preferred Strategy?
Yes (Site proceeds to Q.3)
No (Site is dismissed)
Q.3
If residential, can the site accommodate 5 or more houses (i.e. is >0.16ha in size)?
Yes (Site proceeds to Phase 2b)
No Considered under the review of Development Limits)
Comments
5. Phase 2b – Further Analysis
Q.4 Is the site located within or adjacent to any of the following?
(If yes, site does not proceed except where potential for mitigation can be demonstrated)
No
Yes
Partly
Adjacent
KEY DETERMINANTS
Nature and Landscape Conservation
Ramsar Site
x
Special Protection Area (SPA)
x
Special Area of Conservation (SAC)
x
National Nature Reserve (NNR)
x
Site of Special Scientific Interest (SSSI)
x
Common Land or Registered Village Green
x
Cultural Heritage
Scheduled Ancient Monument or remains of
national importance
Flooding
TAN 15 Development Advice Maps
x
x
EA Flood Map - nat_floodzone3
x
Minerals
Mineral buffer zone
x
Q.5 Would development of the site represent or result in:
Tandem development
No
x
Ribbon development
x
Coalescence
x
Development unrelated to the existing urban form
x
Sporadic & fragmented pattern of development (either constitute or contribute to)
x
An illogical extension to the settlement
x
Conflicts with existing land use or known plans and strategies
x
A Detrimental Impact on the Character and Setting of the settlement or its features
(including views and glimpses both into and out of the settlement)
A loss of areas of open space and amenity value
x
General Planning Principles
Yes
x
Comments
Q.6 Additional considerations:
No
Yes
General
x
Does the site have an available access point with adequate visibility?
Would development at the site impact upon the highway network and
increase the risk to highway safety?
Is it Previously Developed Land?
Soil / Agricultural Land Quality
x
x
?
No
x
Does the site contain high carbon soil e.g. peat?
Yes
?
x
Does the site contain high quality agricultural land?
Q.7 Is the site located within or related to any of the following?:
No
Nature and Landscape Conservation
Local Nature Reserves (LNR)
Regionally
Important
Geological
Geomorphological Sites (RIGS)
Cultural Heritage
Conservation Area
Yes
Partly
Adjacent
x
/
x
x
Q.8 Would development at the site impact upon species/habitats of high importance? (refer
to Biodiversity/Connectivity Study)
Yes
x
No
Unknown
Q.9 Accessibility - Is the site within a settlement with access to, or within easy reach of, the
following:
No
Yes
Rail network
x
Highway network (A or B roads)
x
Public transport
x
Cycle ways and/or footpaths
x
Q.10 Site Deliverability - Are there any infrastructure or other issues on the site that would affect
its deliverability during the Plan period.
Yes
No
x
Unknown
Comments
6. Additional Comments
Comments
The site has a number of advantages in terms of its suitability as an employment allocation:
–
–
–
–
immediately adjacent to an existing employment site,
appropriate distance from residential development;
close to the local amenities and services of the settlement,
good access and highway links.
In planning terms the site offers an appropriate option in terms of location and lack of harm to the
amenity and character of the settlement.
The Carmarthenshire Employment Land Study (2010) highlights that since the publication of the
UDP, two units have been developed on the site and that significant amounts of land are available
between them for expansion/circulation if required. The ELS considers the site to be suitable for
safeguarding for employment use, particularly in the context of potential development of Cross
Hands West (to the south) as a strategic location for employment.
The Local Planning Authority consider that the designation of the subject site is appropriate to
ensure that sufficient land has been allocated within the LDP for employment purposes. In
conclusion this available land can be put forward as an employment allocation within the LDP.
The site has been subject to the SA process, details of which are highlighted in Section 7, below.
Note: Reference should be made to the guidance notes accompanying this proforma when
interpreting its contents.
7. Sustainability Appraisal
Score:
227
Score Summary Count
Threats
Low
Medium
High
5
0
1
No. Prospective Opportunities
17
5
20
Issues
Opportunities:
Further
Comments
No notable Issues. Site has a good, positive score. See score card for further
detail.
Carmarthenshire LDP
Site Assessment Proforma
1. Site Details
Ref:
GA3/E3
Location:
Parc Menter, Cross Hands
Site Area (Ha):
Existing Use*
Site Ref (where applicable):
5.7
Mostly agricultural
Potential Use*
Employment
*if candidate site as proposed by respondent
2. Land Use/ Planning History
UDP allocation?
Part of Employment Allocation (GR3/E6)
Relevant Planning History
No recent planning history.
3. Phase 1 – Identification of Strategic Sites
Is the Site Strategic?
Yes (Site proceeds to Phase 2b)
No
x
(Site proceeds to Phase 2a as a Non-Strategic Site)
The site is not considered to be strategic in nature for the following reasons:
not located in a settlement defined as a Growth Area
x
not of an appropriate size
not situated at a key location in terms of transport and accessibility
x
the site is not critical to the delivery of the strategy
This does not preclude the site’s consideration as a Non-Strategic Site.
Expanded reasons for non identification of the site as strategic are available.
4. Phase 2a – Initial Analysis
Q.1
x
Land use allocation specific or non allocation related?
Allocation (proceeds to Q.2)
Non allocation (Considered through LDP policy)
Q.2
x
Within or immediately adjoining an identified settlement in the Preferred Strategy?
Yes (Site proceeds to Q.3)
No (Site is dismissed)
Q.3
If residential, can the site accommodate 5 or more houses (i.e. is >0.16ha in size)?
Yes (Site proceeds to Phase 2b)
No Considered under the review of Development Limits)
Comments
5. Phase 2b – Further Analysis
Q.4 Is the site located within or adjacent to any of the following?
(If yes, site does not proceed except where potential for mitigation can be demonstrated)
No
Yes
Partly
Adjacent
KEY DETERMINANTS
Nature and Landscape Conservation
Ramsar Site
x
Special Protection Area (SPA)
x
Special Area of Conservation (SAC)
x
National Nature Reserve (NNR)
x
Site of Special Scientific Interest (SSSI)
x
Common Land or Registered Village Green
x
Cultural Heritage
Scheduled Ancient Monument or remains of
national importance
Flooding
TAN 15 Development Advice Maps
x
x
EA Flood Map - nat_floodzone3
x
Minerals
Mineral buffer zone
x
Q.5 Would development of the site represent or result in:
Tandem development
No
x
Ribbon development
x
Coalescence
x
Development unrelated to the existing urban form
x
Sporadic & fragmented pattern of development (either constitute or contribute to)
x
An illogical extension to the settlement
x
Conflicts with existing land use or known plans and strategies
x
A Detrimental Impact on the Character and Setting of the settlement or its features
(including views and glimpses both into and out of the settlement)
A loss of areas of open space and amenity value
x
General Planning Principles
Yes
x
Comments
Q.6 Additional considerations:
No
Yes
General
x
Does the site have an available access point with adequate visibility?
Would development at the site impact upon the highway network and
increase the risk to highway safety?
Is it Previously Developed Land?
Soil / Agricultural Land Quality
x
x
?
No
x
Does the site contain high carbon soil e.g. peat?
Yes
?
x
Does the site contain high quality agricultural land?
Q.7 Is the site located within or related to any of the following?:
No
Nature and Landscape Conservation
Local Nature Reserves (LNR)
Regionally
Important
Geological
Geomorphological Sites (RIGS)
Cultural Heritage
Conservation Area
Yes
Partly
Adjacent
x
/
x
x
Q.8 Would development at the site impact upon species/habitats of high importance? (refer
to Biodiversity/Connectivity Study)
Yes
x
No
Unknown
Q.9 Accessibility - Is the site within a settlement with access to, or within easy reach of, the
following:
No
Yes
Rail network
x
Highway network (A or B roads)
x
Public transport
x
Cycle ways and/or footpaths
x
Q.10 Site Deliverability - Are there any infrastructure or other issues on the site that would affect
its deliverability during the Plan period.
Yes
x
No
Unknown
Comments
6. Additional Comments
Comments
The Local Planning Authority considers that the designation of the subject site is appropriate to
ensure that sufficient land has been allocated within the LDP for employment purposes.
The site has a number of advantages in terms of its suitability as an employment allocation:
–
–
–
–
immediately adjacent to an existing employment site,
appropriate distance from residential development;
close to the local amenities and services of the settlement,
good access and highway links.
In planning terms the site offers an appropriate option in terms of location and lack of harm to the
amenity and character of the settlement.
The Carmarthenshire Employment Land Study (2010) places this site within the potential
employment portfolio for the County. The Study highlights that several units have been developed
within the allocated [UDP] site as an expansion of the adjacent existing development. It adds that
there are some vacant units across the two sites; however, planned upgrades to the infrastructure
network are likely to further enhance the appeal of this location.
The ELS goes on to state that “there is potential for the site to be developed for additional units,
probably best suited to light industrial and warehousing/distribution operations. Heavier industrial
activities are unlikely to be supported here given the presence of the SSSI to the north-east and
the relatively prominent location of the site at the southern extent of existing built development at
Cross Hands. It may also be advantageous to phase development to allow for infill in the north of
the site in advance of any expansion of buildings into the southern portion of the site.”
In light of the above, it is considered appropriate that this available land should be put forward as
an employment allocation within the LDP.
The site has been subject to the SA process, details of which are highlighted in Section 7, below.
Whilst no individual comments were received specifically for this site, the EA comments in respect
of the potential for capacity issues at the WWTW that were submitted for other sites in the Cross
Hands area nevertheless apply. Whilst such comments are noted, it must be emphasised that
discussions/consultations remain on going with Dwr Cymru which together with appropriate
phasing etc does not preclude deliverability during the plan period. It is also noted that there is
currently potential capacity and that the issue relates to the level of any future development.
There are currently no significant water body issues. Policy EP1 provides for the consideration of
proposals where they relate to impact on water quality and in relation to matters of environmental
capacity. Consequently any proposals will be required to satisfy its provisions.
Update May 2013:
Since the publication and consultation of the Deposit Plan, a review of the employment allocations
within the County has been undertaken and a reduction in the size of this allocation is suggested
as a focused change. Reference should be made to the Employment Land Update Paper.
Note: Reference should be made to the guidance notes accompanying this proforma when
interpreting its contents.
7. Sustainability Appraisal
Score:
142
Score Summary Count
Threats
Low
Medium
High
Issues
Opportunities:
6
5
1
No. Prospective Opportunities
28
3
14
Further
Comments
No notable Issues. Site has a good, positive score. See score card for further
detail.
Carmarthenshire LDP
Site Assessment Proforma
1. Site Details
Ref:
GA3/E4
Location:
Dyffryn Road, Ammanford
Site Area (Ha):
Site Ref (where applicable):
1.23
Existing Use*
Potential Use*
Employment
*if candidate site as proposed by respondent
2. Land Use/ Planning History
UDP allocation?
Part of GR3/E2
Relevant Planning History
E/21377 – Certificate of Lawfulness for an existing use: vehicle dismantling yard – CLEUD
approval 22/9/09.
E/23525 – Certificate of Lawfulness to extend use – CLEUD refusal 23/11/10;
E/23762 – Full Planning granted on 18/11/10 for change of use from B2 to provide general
container storage and commercial vehicle parking (B8) & partial private caravan storage (sui
generis)
3. Phase 1 – Identification of Strategic Sites
Is the Site Strategic?
Yes (Site proceeds to Phase 2b)
No
x
(Site proceeds to Phase 2a as a Non-Strategic Site)
The site is not considered to be strategic in nature for the following reasons:
not located in a settlement defined as a Growth Area
x
not of an appropriate size
not situated at a key location in terms of transport and accessibility
x
the site is not critical to the delivery of the strategy
This does not preclude the site’s consideration as a Non-Strategic Site.
Expanded reasons for non identification of the site as strategic are available.
4. Phase 2a – Initial Analysis
Q.1
x
Land use allocation specific or non allocation related?
Allocation (proceeds to Q.2)
Non allocation (Considered through LDP policy)
Q.2
x
Within or immediately adjoining an identified settlement in the Preferred Strategy?
Yes (Site proceeds to Q.3)
No (Site is dismissed)
Q.3
If residential, can the site accommodate 5 or more houses (i.e. is >0.16ha in size)?
Yes (Site proceeds to Phase 2b)
No Considered under the review of Development Limits)
Comments
5. Phase 2b – Further Analysis
Q.4 Is the site located within or adjacent to any of the following?
(If yes, site does not proceed except where potential for mitigation can be demonstrated)
No
Yes
Partly
Adjacent
KEY DETERMINANTS
Nature and Landscape Conservation
Ramsar Site
x
Special Protection Area (SPA)
x
Special Area of Conservation (SAC)
x
National Nature Reserve (NNR)
x
Site of Special Scientific Interest (SSSI)
x
Common Land or Registered Village Green
x
Cultural Heritage
Scheduled Ancient Monument or remains of
national importance
Flooding
TAN 15 Development Advice Maps
x
x
EA Flood Map - nat_floodzone3
Minerals
Mineral buffer zone
x
x
Q.5 Would development of the site represent or result in:
Tandem development
No
x
Ribbon development
x
Coalescence
x
Development unrelated to the existing urban form
x
Sporadic & fragmented pattern of development (either constitute or contribute to)
x
An illogical extension to the settlement
x
Conflicts with existing land use or known plans and strategies
x
A Detrimental Impact on the Character and Setting of the settlement or its features
(including views and glimpses both into and out of the settlement)
A loss of areas of open space and amenity value
x
General Planning Principles
Yes
x
Comments
It is noted that part of the site lies within a C2 flood risk area, however, TAN 15 classifies
employment land as a less vulnerable use, as opposed to sensitive uses such as housing or
hospitals which are classed as highly vulnerable and should not be located in such areas.
Q.6 Additional considerations:
No
General
Yes
?
No
Does the site have an available access point with adequate visibility?
Would development at the site impact upon the highway network and
increase the risk to highway safety?
Is it Previously Developed Land?
Yes
x
?
x
x
Soil / Agricultural Land Quality
Does the site contain high carbon soil e.g. peat?
x
Does the site contain high quality agricultural land?
x
Q.7 Is the site located within or related to any of the following?:
No
Nature and Landscape Conservation
Local Nature Reserves (LNR)
Regionally
Important
Geological
Geomorphological Sites (RIGS)
Cultural Heritage
Conservation Area
Yes
Partly
Adjacent
x
/
x
x
Q.8 Would development at the site impact upon species/habitats of high importance? (refer
to Biodiversity/Connectivity Study)
Yes
x
No
Unknown
Q.9 Accessibility - Is the site within a settlement with access to, or within easy reach of, the
following:
No
Yes
Rail network
x
Highway network (A or B roads)
x
Public transport
x
Cycle ways and/or footpaths
x
Q.10 Site Deliverability - Are there any infrastructure or other issues on the site that would affect
its deliverability during the Plan period.
Yes
No
x
Unknown
Comments
6. Additional Comments
Comments
The site forms part of a longstanding employment area close to the centre of Ammanford.
The site has a number of advantages in terms of its suitability as an employment allocation:
–
–
–
–
immediately adjacent to an existing employment site,
appropriate distance from residential development;
close to the local amenities and services of the settlement,
good access and highway links.
In planning terms the site offers an appropriate option in terms of location and lack of harm to the
amenity and character of the settlement.
The Carmarthenshire Employment Land Study (2010) includes the site within its potential
employment portfolio and recommends that the site be safeguarded for employment use. The
Study states that “The site is approximately 300m from the main trunk road network, partially
developed and falls within the core of Ammanford, making the location perform well in terms of
sustainability criteria. Opportunities exist for redevelopment and regeneration of some of the
existing activities, including tidying of the existing scrap metal recycling operation.”
The Local Planning Authority considers that the designation of this site is appropriate to ensure
that sufficient land has been allocated within the LDP for employment purposes. In conclusion this
available land can be put forward as an employment allocation within the LDP.
The site has been subject to the SA process, details of which are highlighted in Section 7, below.
Update May 2013:
Since the publication and consultation of the Deposit Plan, a review of the employment allocations
within the County has been undertaken and the removal of this site from allocation (and its
replacement with an existing employment site notation) is suggested as a focused change.
Reference should be made to the Employment Land Update Paper.
Note: Reference should be made to the guidance notes accompanying this proforma when
interpreting its contents.
7. Sustainability Appraisal
Score:
194
Score Summary Count
Threats
Low
Medium
High
8
1
1
No. Prospective Opportunities
22
11
14
Issues
Opportunities:
Further
Comments
No notable Issues. Site has a good, positive score. See score card for further
detail.
Carmarthenshire LDP
Site Assessment Proforma
1. Site Details
Ref:
GA3/E5
Site Ref (where applicable):
Location:
Parc Amanwy, Ammanford
Site Area (Ha):
1.7
Existing Use*
Vacant
Potential Use*
Employment
*if candidate site as proposed by respondent
2. Land Use/ Planning History
UDP allocation?
Part GR3/E1, part existing employment land.
Relevant Planning History
E/08260 – outline application for residential on part of site refused 12/6/06.
3. Phase 1 – Identification of Strategic Sites
Is the Site Strategic?
Yes (Site proceeds to Phase 2b)
No
x
(Site proceeds to Phase 2a as a Non-Strategic Site)
The site is not considered to be strategic in nature for the following reasons:
not located in a settlement defined as a Growth Area
x
not of an appropriate size
not situated at a key location in terms of transport and accessibility
x
the site is not critical to the delivery of the strategy
This does not preclude the site’s consideration as a Non-Strategic Site.
Expanded reasons for non identification of the site as strategic are available.
4. Phase 2a – Initial Analysis
Q.1
x
Land use allocation specific or non allocation related?
Allocation (proceeds to Q.2)
Non allocation (Considered through LDP policy)
Q.2
x
Within or immediately adjoining an identified settlement in the Preferred Strategy?
Yes (Site proceeds to Q.3)
No (Site is dismissed)
Q.3
If residential, can the site accommodate 5 or more houses (i.e. is >0.16ha in size)?
Yes (Site proceeds to Phase 2b)
No Considered under the review of Development Limits)
Comments
5. Phase 2b – Further Analysis
Q.4 Is the site located within or adjacent to any of the following?
(If yes, site does not proceed except where potential for mitigation can be demonstrated)
No
Yes
Partly
Adjacent
KEY DETERMINANTS
Nature and Landscape Conservation
Ramsar Site
x
Special Protection Area (SPA)
x
Special Area of Conservation (SAC)
x
National Nature Reserve (NNR)
x
Site of Special Scientific Interest (SSSI)
x
Common Land or Registered Village Green
x
Cultural Heritage
Scheduled Ancient Monument or remains of
national importance
Flooding
TAN 15 Development Advice Maps
x
x
EA Flood Map - nat_floodzone3
Minerals
Mineral buffer zone
x
x
Q.5 Would development of the site represent or result in:
Tandem development
No
x
Ribbon development
x
Coalescence
x
Development unrelated to the existing urban form
x
Sporadic & fragmented pattern of development (either constitute or contribute to)
x
An illogical extension to the settlement
x
Conflicts with existing land use or known plans and strategies
x
A Detrimental Impact on the Character and Setting of the settlement or its features
(including views and glimpses both into and out of the settlement)
A loss of areas of open space and amenity value
x
General Planning Principles
Yes
x
Comments
It is noted that part of the site lies within a C2 flood risk area, however, TAN 15 classifies
employment land as a less vulnerable use, as opposed to sensitive uses such as housing or
hospitals which are classed as highly vulnerable and should not be located in such areas.
Q.6 Additional considerations:
No
Yes
General
x
Does the site have an available access point with adequate visibility?
Would development at the site impact upon the highway network and
increase the risk to highway safety?
x
?
No
x
Is it Previously Developed Land?
Soil / Agricultural Land Quality
Does the site contain high carbon soil e.g. peat?
x
Does the site contain high quality agricultural land?
x
Yes
?
Q.7 Is the site located within or related to any of the following?:
No
Nature and Landscape Conservation
Local Nature Reserves (LNR)
Regionally
Important
Geological
Geomorphological Sites (RIGS)
Cultural Heritage
Conservation Area
Yes
Partly
Adjacent
x
/
x
x
Q.8 Would development at the site impact upon species/habitats of high importance? (refer
to Biodiversity/Connectivity Study)
Yes
x
No
Unknown
Q.9 Accessibility - Is the site within a settlement with access to, or within easy reach of, the
following:
No
Yes
Rail network
x
Highway network (A or B roads)
x
Public transport
x
Cycle ways and/or footpaths
x
Q.10 Site Deliverability - Are there any infrastructure or other issues on the site that would affect
its deliverability during the Plan period.
Yes
No
x
Unknown
Comments
6. Additional Comments
Comments
The site has a number of advantages in terms of its suitability as an employment allocation:
–
–
–
immediately adjacent to an existing employment site,
close to the local amenities and services of the settlement,
good access and highway links.
In planning terms the site offers an appropriate option in terms of location and lack of harm to the
amenity and character of the settlement.
The Carmarthenshire Employment Land Study (2010) includes the site within its potential
employment portfolio and recommends that the site be safeguarded for employment use. The
Study states that the site offers potential to deliver a high quality employment operation and goes
on to say that “The residential context of the site would tend to favour operations outside the
distribution and warehousing sector to assist in improving local amenity; however, light industrial
activity, general business and offices would all present potential uses in this location.”
The Local Planning Authority considers that the designation of the subject site is appropriate to
ensure that sufficient land has been allocated within the LDP for employment purposes. In
conclusion this available land can be put forward as an employment allocation within the LDP.
The site has been subject to the SA process, details of which are highlighted in Section 7, below.
Update May 2013:
Since the publication and consultation of the Deposit Plan, a review of the employment allocations
within the County has been undertaken and the removal of this site from allocation (and its
replacement with an existing employment site notation) is suggested as a focused change.
Reference should be made to the Employment Land Update Paper.
Note: Reference should be made to the guidance notes accompanying this proforma when
interpreting its contents.
7. Sustainability Appraisal
Score:
228
Score Summary Count
Threats
Low
Medium
High
5
2
2
No. Prospective Opportunities
38
7
19
Issues
Opportunities:
Further
Comments
No notable Issues. Site has a good, positive score. See score card for further
detail.
Carmarthenshire LDP
Site Assessment Proforma
1. Site Details
Ref:
GA3/E6
Site Ref (where applicable):
Location:
Pen y Banc Road, Ammanford
Site Area (Ha):
1.93
Existing Use*
Vacant
Potential Use*
Employment
*if candidate site as proposed by respondent
2. Land Use/ Planning History
UDP allocation?
White land within development limits
Relevant Planning History
No recent planning history.
3. Phase 1 – Identification of Strategic Sites
Is the Site Strategic?
Yes (Site proceeds to Phase 2b)
No
x
(Site proceeds to Phase 2a as a Non-Strategic Site)
The site is not considered to be strategic in nature for the following reasons:
not located in a settlement defined as a Growth Area
x
not of an appropriate size
not situated at a key location in terms of transport and accessibility
x
the site is not critical to the delivery of the strategy
This does not preclude the site’s consideration as a Non-Strategic Site.
Expanded reasons for non identification of the site as strategic are available.
4. Phase 2a – Initial Analysis
Q.1
x
Land use allocation specific or non allocation related?
Allocation (proceeds to Q.2)
Non allocation (Considered through LDP policy)
Q.2
x
Within or immediately adjoining an identified settlement in the Preferred Strategy?
Yes (Site proceeds to Q.3)
No (Site is dismissed)
Q.3
If residential, can the site accommodate 5 or more houses (i.e. is >0.16ha in size)?
Yes (Site proceeds to Phase 2b)
No Considered under the review of Development Limits)
Comments
5. Phase 2b – Further Analysis
Q.4 Is the site located within or adjacent to any of the following?
(If yes, site does not proceed except where potential for mitigation can be demonstrated)
No
Yes
Partly
Adjacent
KEY DETERMINANTS
Nature and Landscape Conservation
Ramsar Site
x
Special Protection Area (SPA)
x
Special Area of Conservation (SAC)
x
National Nature Reserve (NNR)
x
Site of Special Scientific Interest (SSSI)
x
Common Land or Registered Village Green
x
Cultural Heritage
Scheduled Ancient Monument or remains of
national importance
Flooding
TAN 15 Development Advice Maps
x
x
EA Flood Map - nat_floodzone3
Minerals
Mineral buffer zone
x
x
Q.5 Would development of the site represent or result in:
Tandem development
No
x
Ribbon development
x
Coalescence
x
Development unrelated to the existing urban form
x
Sporadic & fragmented pattern of development (either constitute or contribute to)
x
An illogical extension to the settlement
x
Conflicts with existing land use or known plans and strategies
x
A Detrimental Impact on the Character and Setting of the settlement or its features
(including views and glimpses both into and out of the settlement)
A loss of areas of open space and amenity value
x
General Planning Principles
Yes
x
Comments
It is noted that part of the site lies within a C2 flood risk area, however, TAN 15 classifies
employment land as a less vulnerable use, as opposed to sensitive uses such as housing or
hospitals which are classed as highly vulnerable and should not be located in such areas.
Q.6 Additional considerations:
No
Yes
General
x
Does the site have an available access point with adequate visibility?
Would development at the site impact upon the highway network and
increase the risk to highway safety?
x
?
No
Is it Previously Developed Land?
Soil / Agricultural Land Quality
Does the site contain high carbon soil e.g. peat?
x
Does the site contain high quality agricultural land?
x
Yes
x
?
Q.7 Is the site located within or related to any of the following?:
No
Nature and Landscape Conservation
Local Nature Reserves (LNR)
Regionally
Important
Geological
Geomorphological Sites (RIGS)
Cultural Heritage
Conservation Area
Yes
Partly
Adjacent
x
/
x
x
Q.8 Would development at the site impact upon species/habitats of high importance? (refer
to Biodiversity/Connectivity Study)
Yes
x
No
Unknown
Q.9 Accessibility - Is the site within a settlement with access to, or within easy reach of, the
following:
No
Yes
Rail network
x
Highway network (A or B roads)
x
Public transport
x
Cycle ways and/or footpaths
x
Q.10 Site Deliverability - Are there any infrastructure or other issues on the site that would affect
its deliverability during the Plan period.
Yes
No
x
Unknown
Comments
Partly previously developed land.
6. Additional Comments
Comments
The site has a number of advantages in terms of its suitability as an employment allocation:
–
–
–
–
immediately adjacent to an existing employment site,
appropriate distance from residential development;
close to the local amenities and services of the settlement,
good access and highway links.
In planning terms the site offers an appropriate option in terms of location and lack of harm to the
amenity and character of the settlement.
The Carmarthenshire Employment Land Study (2010) includes the site (albeit as part of a larger
overall site) within its potential employment portfolio and recommends that the site be safeguarded
for employment use. The Study recommends that the site should be promoted as a strategic site
within the context of Ammanford, emphasising the sustainable and accessible location and relative
ease with which the land could be developed, subject to the delivery of internal site infrastructure.
The Study goes on to say that the waterside location offers the potential to develop an
environmental theme to the delivery of high quality units, accessible to the town centre and its
associated public transport infrastructure.
NB – the larger area surrounding the allocation referred to in the Carmarthenshire ELS above does
not form part of the allocation. The Local Planning Authority considers that the designation of the
allocated area is appropriate to ensure that sufficient land has been allocated within the LDP for
employment purposes. In conclusion this available land can be put forward as an employment
allocation within the LDP.
The site has been subject to the SA process, details of which are highlighted in Section 7, below.
Update May 2013:
Note the consideration of flooding in this proforma is primarily based on evidence available at the
time of Deposit LDP publication. Detailed consideration of updated evidence with regards to flood
risk issues on allocated sites e.g. updated TAN 15 Development Advice Maps (March 2013) is
provided in the Council’s Strategic Flood Consequence Assessment (SFCA). The SFCA also
contains recommendations for post Deposit/focused changes as a means to ensure accordance
with national policy. Reference should also be made to the Employment Land Update Paper in
respect of this site which suggests the removal of this allocation as two focused changes.
Note: Reference should be made to the guidance notes accompanying this proforma when
interpreting its contents.
7. Sustainability Appraisal
Score:
220
Score Summary Count
Threats
Low
Medium
High
7
4
2
No. Prospective Opportunities
17
14
27
Issues
Opportunities:
Further
Comments
No notable Issues. Site has a good, positive score. See score card for further
detail.
Carmarthenshire LDP
Site Assessment Proforma
1. Site Details
Ref:
GA3/E7
Site Ref (where applicable):
Location:
Cross Hands East, Cross Hands
Site Area (Ha):
19.07
Existing Use*
Vacant
Potential Use*
Part of Candidate Site
037-012
Employment
*if candidate site as proposed by respondent
2. Land Use/ Planning History
UDP allocation?
Part of GR3/E9 and part of PDB31
Relevant Planning History
W/23782 – Current application for Outline Planning. Proposed development of industrial park,
including the development of business & industrial units (use classes B1 & B8), offices business
incubator units, a hotel, a business central hub, resource centre, energy centre, central green
space, parkland.
3. Phase 1 – Identification of Strategic Sites
Is the Site Strategic?
Yes (Site proceeds to Phase 2b)
x
No
(Site proceeds to Phase 2a as a Non-Strategic Site)
The site is not considered to be strategic in nature for the following reasons:
not located in a settlement defined as a Growth Area
not of an appropriate size
not situated at a key location in terms of transport and accessibility
the site is not critical to the delivery of the strategy
This does not preclude the site’s consideration as a Non-Strategic Site.
Expanded reasons for non identification of the site as strategic are available.
4. Phase 2a – Initial Analysis
Q.1
x
Land use allocation specific or non allocation related?
Allocation (proceeds to Q.2)
Non allocation (Considered through LDP policy)
Q.2
x
Within or immediately adjoining an identified settlement in the Preferred Strategy?
Yes (Site proceeds to Q.3)
No (Site is dismissed)
Q.3
If residential, can the site accommodate 5 or more houses (i.e. is >0.16ha in size)?
Yes (Site proceeds to Phase 2b)
No Considered under the review of Development Limits)
Comments
5. Phase 2b – Further Analysis
Q.4 Is the site located within or adjacent to any of the following?
(If yes, site does not proceed except where potential for mitigation can be demonstrated)
No
Yes
Partly
Adjacent
KEY DETERMINANTS
Nature and Landscape Conservation
Ramsar Site
x
Special Protection Area (SPA)
x
Special Area of Conservation (SAC)
x
National Nature Reserve (NNR)
x
Site of Special Scientific Interest (SSSI)
x
Common Land or Registered Village Green
x
Cultural Heritage
Scheduled Ancient Monument or remains of
national importance
Flooding
TAN 15 Development Advice Maps
x
x
EA Flood Map - nat_floodzone3
x
Minerals
Mineral buffer zone
x
Q.5 Would development of the site represent or result in:
Tandem development
No
x
Ribbon development
x
Coalescence
x
Development unrelated to the existing urban form
x
Sporadic & fragmented pattern of development (either constitute or contribute to)
x
An illogical extension to the settlement
x
Conflicts with existing land use or known plans and strategies
x
A Detrimental Impact on the Character and Setting of the settlement or its features
(including views and glimpses both into and out of the settlement)
A loss of areas of open space and amenity value
x
General Planning Principles
Yes
x
Comments
Q.6 Additional considerations:
No
Yes
General
x
Does the site have an available access point with adequate visibility?
Would development at the site impact upon the highway network and
x
?
No
increase the risk to highway safety?
Is it Previously Developed Land?
x
Soil / Agricultural Land Quality
Does the site contain high carbon soil e.g. peat?
x
Does the site contain high quality agricultural land?
x
Yes
?
Q.7 Is the site located within or related to any of the following?:
No
Nature and Landscape Conservation
Local Nature Reserves (LNR)
Regionally
Important
Geological
Geomorphological Sites (RIGS)
Cultural Heritage
Conservation Area
Yes
Partly
Adjacent
x
/
x
x
Q.8 Would development at the site impact upon species/habitats of high importance? (refer
to Biodiversity/Connectivity Study)
Yes
x
No
Unknown
Q.9 Accessibility - Is the site within a settlement with access to, or within easy reach of, the
following:
No
Yes
Rail network
x
Highway network (A or B roads)
x
Public transport
x
Cycle ways and/or footpaths
x
Q.10 Site Deliverability - Are there any infrastructure or other issues on the site that would affect
its deliverability during the Plan period.
Yes
No
x
Unknown
Comments
6. Additional Comments
Comments
The Local Planning Authority considers that the designation of the subject site is appropriate to
ensure that sufficient land has been allocated within the LDP for employment purposes.
The site has a number of advantages in terms of its suitability as an employment allocation:
–
–
–
immediately adjacent to an existing employment site/retail park,
close to the local amenities and services of the settlement,
good access and highway links.
In planning terms the site offers an appropriate option in terms of location and lack of harm to the
amenity and character of the settlement.
The site’s importance (albeit the area covered by the UDP allocations) is highlighted in the
Carmarthenshire Employment Land Study (2010) which notes the site’s close proximity to the A48
and the other strategic employment sites in the vicinity. The ELS emphasises the potential for the
site to be incorporated into a master-planned approach for the development of Cross Hands East.
Proposals for the site are currently being pursued through planning application W/23782. The site
area allocated for future employment use in the Deposit LDP reflects the area covered in the
planning application.
In light of the above, it is considered appropriate that this available land should be put forward as
an employment allocation within the LDP.
The site has been subject to the SA process, details of which are highlighted in Section 7, below.
Update May 2013:
Since the publication and consultation of the Deposit Plan, a review of the employment allocations
within the County has been undertaken. Reference should be made to the Employment Land
Update Paper which, in the interests of clarity and certainty, establishes developable areas within
this overall allocation.
Note: Reference should be made to the guidance notes accompanying this proforma when
interpreting its contents.
7. Sustainability Appraisal
Score:
214
Score Summary Count
Threats
Low
Medium
High
8
1
3
No. Prospective Opportunities
27
14
16
Issues
Opportunities:
Further
Comments
No notable Issues. Site has a good, positive score. See score card for further
detail.
\Carmarthenshire LDP
Site Assessment Proforma
1. Site Details
Ref:
GA3/E8
Site Ref (where applicable):
Location:
Cross Hands West Food Park
Site Area (Ha):
22.61
Existing Use*
Vacant
Potential Use*
Candidate Site 037-014
Employment
*if candidate site as proposed by respondent
2. Land Use/ Planning History
UDP allocation?
Employment Allocation GR3/E4
Relevant Planning History
No recent planning history.
3. Phase 1 – Identification of Strategic Sites
Is the Site Strategic?
Yes (Site proceeds to Phase 2b)
x
No
(Site proceeds to Phase 2a as a Non-Strategic Site)
The site is not considered to be strategic in nature for the following reasons:
not located in a settlement defined as a Growth Area
not of an appropriate size
not situated at a key location in terms of transport and accessibility
the site is not critical to the delivery of the strategy
This does not preclude the site’s consideration as a Non-Strategic Site.
Expanded reasons for non identification of the site as strategic are available.
4. Phase 2a – Initial Analysis
Q.1
x
Land use allocation specific or non allocation related?
Allocation (proceeds to Q.2)
Non allocation (Considered through LDP policy)
Q.2
x
Within or immediately adjoining an identified settlement in the Preferred Strategy?
Yes (Site proceeds to Q.3)
No (Site is dismissed)
Q.3
If residential, can the site accommodate 5 or more houses (i.e. is >0.16ha in size)?
Yes (Site proceeds to Phase 2b)
No Considered under the review of Development Limits)
Comments
5. Phase 2b – Further Analysis
Q.4 Is the site located within or adjacent to any of the following?
(If yes, site does not proceed except where potential for mitigation can be demonstrated)
No
Yes
Partly
Adjacent
KEY DETERMINANTS
Nature and Landscape Conservation
Ramsar Site
x
Special Protection Area (SPA)
x
Special Area of Conservation (SAC)
x
National Nature Reserve (NNR)
x
Site of Special Scientific Interest (SSSI)
x
Common Land or Registered Village Green
x
Cultural Heritage
Scheduled Ancient Monument or remains of
national importance
Flooding
TAN 15 Development Advice Maps
x
x
EA Flood Map - nat_floodzone3
Minerals
Mineral buffer zone
x
x
Q.5 Would development of the site represent or result in:
Tandem development
No
x
Ribbon development
x
Coalescence
x
Development unrelated to the existing urban form
x
Sporadic & fragmented pattern of development (either constitute or contribute to)
x
An illogical extension to the settlement
x
Conflicts with existing land use or known plans and strategies
x
A Detrimental Impact on the Character and Setting of the settlement or its features
(including views and glimpses both into and out of the settlement)
A loss of areas of open space and amenity value
x
General Planning Principles
Yes
x
Comments
Very small part on edge affected by C2 and national flood zone 3. This is not considered to affect
the deliverability of the site and could be addressed sufficiently at the planning application level.
Q.6 Additional considerations:
No
Yes
General
x
Does the site have an available access point with adequate visibility?
Would development at the site impact upon the highway network and
increase the risk to highway safety?
Is it Previously Developed Land?
Soil / Agricultural Land Quality
x
x
?
No
x
Does the site contain high carbon soil e.g. peat?
Yes
?
x
Does the site contain high quality agricultural land?
Q.7 Is the site located within or related to any of the following?:
No
Nature and Landscape Conservation
Local Nature Reserves (LNR)
Regionally
Important
Geological
Geomorphological Sites (RIGS)
Cultural Heritage
Conservation Area
Yes
Partly
Adjacent
x
/
x
x
Q.8 Would development at the site impact upon species/habitats of high importance? (refer
to Biodiversity/Connectivity Study)
Yes
x
No
Unknown
Q.9 Accessibility - Is the site within a settlement with access to, or within easy reach of, the
following:
No
Yes
Rail network
x
Highway network (A or B roads)
x
Public transport
x
Cycle ways and/or footpaths
x
Q.10 Site Deliverability - Are there any infrastructure or other issues on the site that would affect
its deliverability during the Plan period.
Yes
No
x
Unknown
Comments
6. Additional Comments
Comments
The site has a number of advantages in terms of its suitability as an employment allocation:
–
–
–
–
immediately adjacent to an existing employment site,
appropriate distance from residential development;
close to the local amenities and services of the settlement,
good access and highway links.
In planning terms the site offers an appropriate option in terms of location and lack of harm to the
amenity and character of the settlement.
The Carmarthenshire Employment Land Study (2010) notes that since the original allocation of the
site in the UDP, approximately a third of the site has been built on and road infrastructure is in
place to access the principal development parcels, as well as facilitate the planned upgrade to the
road network in this location. The ELS considers the site to be ideally suited to expansion of the
Cross Hands employment land portfolio and highlights that it is large enough to attract major
employers if demand arises.
In light of the above, the Local Planning Authority consider that the designation of the subject site
is appropriate to ensure that sufficient land has been allocated within the LDP for employment
purposes. Therefore, it is considered appropriate that this available land should be put forward as
an employment allocation within the LDP.
The site has been subject to the SA process, details of which are highlighted in Section 7, below.
Comments made by the County Ecologist are duly noted. Such matters will need to be addressed
in relation to the relevant policies of the Plan prior to development taking place.
Update May 2013:
Since the publication and consultation of the Deposit Plan, a review of the employment allocations
within the County has been undertaken. Reference should be made to the Employment Land
Update Paper which, in the interests of clarity and certainty, establishes developable areas within
this overall allocation.
Note: Reference should be made to the guidance notes accompanying this proforma when
interpreting its contents.
7. Sustainability Appraisal
Score:
235
Score Summary Count
Threats
Low
Medium
High
9
1
1
No. Prospective Opportunities
19
2
23
Issues
Opportunities:
Further
Comments
No notable Issues. Site has a good, positive score. See score card for further
detail.
Carmarthenshire LDP
Site Assessment Proforma
1. Site Details
Ref:
GA3/E9
Site Ref (where applicable):
Location:
Lindsay Drift Mine, Capel Hendre
Site Area (Ha):
Existing Use*
Vacant
Potential Use*
Employment
*if candidate site as proposed by respondent
2. Land Use/ Planning History
UDP allocation?
Employment Allocation GR3/E12.
Relevant Planning History
Full Planning (E/15722) for an organic waste recycling centre on part of the site, granted 27/9/07.
3. Phase 1 – Identification of Strategic Sites
Is the Site Strategic?
Yes (Site proceeds to Phase 2b)
No
x
(Site proceeds to Phase 2a as a Non-Strategic Site)
The site is not considered to be strategic in nature for the following reasons:
not located in a settlement defined as a Growth Area
x
not of an appropriate size
not situated at a key location in terms of transport and accessibility
x
the site is not critical to the delivery of the strategy
This does not preclude the site’s consideration as a Non-Strategic Site.
Expanded reasons for non identification of the site as strategic are available.
4. Phase 2a – Initial Analysis
Q.1
x
Land use allocation specific or non allocation related?
Allocation (proceeds to Q.2)
Non allocation (Considered through LDP policy)
Q.2
x
Within or immediately adjoining an identified settlement in the Preferred Strategy?
Yes (Site proceeds to Q.3)
No (Site is dismissed)
Q.3
If residential, can the site accommodate 5 or more houses (i.e. is >0.16ha in size)?
Yes (Site proceeds to Phase 2b)
No Considered under the review of Development Limits)
Comments
5. Phase 2b – Further Analysis
Q.4 Is the site located within or adjacent to any of the following?
(If yes, site does not proceed except where potential for mitigation can be demonstrated)
No
Yes
Partly
Adjacent
KEY DETERMINANTS
Nature and Landscape Conservation
Ramsar Site
x
Special Protection Area (SPA)
x
Special Area of Conservation (SAC)
x
National Nature Reserve (NNR)
x
Site of Special Scientific Interest (SSSI)
x
Common Land or Registered Village Green
x
Cultural Heritage
Scheduled Ancient Monument or remains of
national importance
Flooding
TAN 15 Development Advice Maps
x
x
EA Flood Map - nat_floodzone3
x
Minerals
Mineral buffer zone
x
Q.5 Would development of the site represent or result in:
Tandem development
No
x
Ribbon development
x
Coalescence
x
Development unrelated to the existing urban form
x
Sporadic & fragmented pattern of development (either constitute or contribute to)
x
An illogical extension to the settlement
x
Conflicts with existing land use or known plans and strategies
x
A Detrimental Impact on the Character and Setting of the settlement or its features
(including views and glimpses both into and out of the settlement)
A loss of areas of open space and amenity value
x
General Planning Principles
Yes
x
Comments
Q.6 Additional considerations:
No
Yes
General
x
Does the site have an available access point with adequate visibility?
Would development at the site impact upon the highway network and
x
?
No
increase the risk to highway safety?
Is it Previously Developed Land?
Yes
?
x
Soil / Agricultural Land Quality
Does the site contain high carbon soil e.g. peat?
x
Does the site contain high quality agricultural land?
x
Q.7 Is the site located within or related to any of the following?:
No
Nature and Landscape Conservation
Local Nature Reserves (LNR)
Regionally
Important
Geological
Geomorphological Sites (RIGS)
Cultural Heritage
Conservation Area
Yes
Partly
Adjacent
x
/
x
x
Q.8 Would development at the site impact upon species/habitats of high importance? (refer
to Biodiversity/Connectivity Study)
Yes
x
No
Unknown
Q.9 Accessibility - Is the site within a settlement with access to, or within easy reach of, the
following:
No
Yes
Rail network
x
Highway network (A or B roads)
x
Public transport
x
Cycle ways and/or footpaths
x
Q.10 Site Deliverability - Are there any infrastructure or other issues on the site that would affect
its deliverability during the Plan period.
Yes
No
x
Unknown
Comments
6. Additional Comments
Comments
The site has a number of advantages in terms of its suitability as an employment allocation:
–
–
–
–
–
immediately adjacent to an existing employment site,
brownfield site,
appropriate distance from residential development;
close to local amenities and services,
good access and highway links.
In planning terms the site offers an appropriate option in terms of location and lack of harm to the
amenity and character of the settlement.
The Carmarthenshire Employment Land Study (2010) states that the former Lyndsay Drift Mine
site, together with the remaining available land in Capel Hendre Industrial Estate to the north,
represent opportunities to expand, presenting a choice of approximately 6ha. of additional
employment land in an established location. It recommends that a high quality solution would be
appropriate, preferably supported by cohesive branding and marketing with a view to securing
greater occupancy of the existing accommodation prior to new development.
In light of the above, the Local Planning Authority consider that the designation of the subject site
is appropriate to ensure that sufficient land has been allocated within the LDP for employment
purposes. It is therefore considered appropriate that this available land should be put forward as
an employment allocation within the LDP.
The site has been subject to the SA process, details of which are highlighted in Section 7, below.
Comments made by the County Ecologist are duly noted. Such matters will need to be addressed
in relation to the relevant policies of the Plan prior to development taking place.
Note: Reference should be made to the guidance notes accompanying this proforma when
interpreting its contents.
7. Sustainability Appraisal
Score:
127
Score Summary Count
Threats
Low
Medium
High
4
4
0
No. Prospective Opportunities
11
8
10
Issues
Opportunities:
Further
Comments
No notable Issues. Site has a positive score. See score card for further detail.
Carmarthenshire LDP
Site Assessment Proforma
1. Site Details
Ref:
GA3/E10
Site Ref (where applicable):
Location:
Capel Hendre Industrial Estate
Candidate Sites
022-013&010
Site Area (Ha):
Existing Use*
Vacant
Potential Use*
Employment
*if candidate site as proposed by respondent
2. Land Use/ Planning History
UDP allocation?
Employment Allocation GR3/E11
Relevant Planning History
Full Planning for the development of pre-designated trading plot for storage & car parking use on a
small part of the site. Granted Aug’ 2009.
3. Phase 1 – Identification of Strategic Sites
Is the Site Strategic?
Yes (Site proceeds to Phase 2b)
No
x
(Site proceeds to Phase 2a as a Non-Strategic Site)
The site is not considered to be strategic in nature for the following reasons:
not located in a settlement defined as a Growth Area
x
not of an appropriate size
not situated at a key location in terms of transport and accessibility
x
the site is not critical to the delivery of the strategy
This does not preclude the site’s consideration as a Non-Strategic Site.
Expanded reasons for non identification of the site as strategic are available.
4. Phase 2a – Initial Analysis
Q.1
x
Land use allocation specific or non allocation related?
Allocation (proceeds to Q.2)
Non allocation (Considered through LDP policy)
Q.2
x
Within or immediately adjoining an identified settlement in the Preferred Strategy?
Yes (Site proceeds to Q.3)
No (Site is dismissed)
Q.3
If residential, can the site accommodate 5 or more houses (i.e. is >0.16ha in size)?
Yes (Site proceeds to Phase 2b)
No Considered under the review of Development Limits)
Comments
5. Phase 2b – Further Analysis
Q.4 Is the site located within or adjacent to any of the following?
(If yes, site does not proceed except where potential for mitigation can be demonstrated)
No
Yes
Partly
Adjacent
KEY DETERMINANTS
Nature and Landscape Conservation
Ramsar Site
x
Special Protection Area (SPA)
x
Special Area of Conservation (SAC)
x
National Nature Reserve (NNR)
x
Site of Special Scientific Interest (SSSI)
x
Common Land or Registered Village Green
x
Cultural Heritage
Scheduled Ancient Monument or remains of
national importance
Flooding
TAN 15 Development Advice Maps
x
x
EA Flood Map - nat_floodzone3
x
Minerals
Mineral buffer zone
x
Q.5 Would development of the site represent or result in:
Tandem development
No
x
Ribbon development
x
Coalescence
x
Development unrelated to the existing urban form
x
Sporadic & fragmented pattern of development (either constitute or contribute to)
x
An illogical extension to the settlement
x
Conflicts with existing land use or known plans and strategies
x
A Detrimental Impact on the Character and Setting of the settlement or its features
(including views and glimpses both into and out of the settlement)
A loss of areas of open space and amenity value
x
General Planning Principles
Yes
x
Comments
Q.6 Additional considerations:
No
Yes
General
x
Does the site have an available access point with adequate visibility?
Would development at the site impact upon the highway network and
x
?
No
increase the risk to highway safety?
Is it Previously Developed Land?
x
Soil / Agricultural Land Quality
Does the site contain high carbon soil e.g. peat?
x
Does the site contain high quality agricultural land?
x
Yes
?
Q.7 Is the site located within or related to any of the following?:
No
Nature and Landscape Conservation
Local Nature Reserves (LNR)
Regionally
Important
Geological
Geomorphological Sites (RIGS)
Cultural Heritage
Conservation Area
Yes
Partly
Adjacent
x
/
x
x
Q.8 Would development at the site impact upon species/habitats of high importance? (refer
to Biodiversity/Connectivity Study)
Yes
x
No
Unknown
Q.9 Accessibility - Is the site within a settlement with access to, or within easy reach of, the
following:
No
Yes
Rail network
x
Highway network (A or B roads)
x
Public transport
x
Cycle ways and/or footpaths
x
Q.10 Site Deliverability - Are there any infrastructure or other issues on the site that would affect
its deliverability during the Plan period.
Yes
No
x
Unknown
Comments
6. Additional Comments
Comments
The site has a number of advantages in terms of its suitability as an employment allocation:
–
–
–
–
immediately adjacent to an existing employment site,
appropriate distance from residential development;
close to local amenities and services,
good access and highway links.
In planning terms the site offers an appropriate option in terms of location and lack of harm to the
amenity and character of the settlement.
The Carmarthenshire Employment Land Study (2010) states that Capel Hendre Industrial Estate,
together with the former Lyndsay Drift Mine to the south, represent opportunities to expand,
presenting a choice of approximately 6ha. of additional employment land in an established
location. It recommends that a high quality solution would be appropriate, preferably supported by
cohesive branding and marketing with a view to securing greater occupancy of the existing
accommodation prior to new development.
In light of the above, the Local Planning Authority consider that the designation of the subject site
is appropriate to ensure that sufficient land has been allocated within the LDP for employment
purposes. It is therefore considered appropriate that this available land should be put forward as
an employment allocation within the LDP.
The site has been subject to the SA process, details of which are highlighted in Section 7, below.
Note: Reference should be made to the guidance notes accompanying this proforma when
interpreting its contents.
7. Sustainability Appraisal
Score:
152
Score Summary Count
Threats
Low
Medium
High
4
5
3
No. Prospective Opportunities
11
8
16
Issues
Opportunities:
Further
Comments
No notable Issues. Site has a good, positive score. See score card for further
detail.
Carmarthenshire LDP
Site Assessment Proforma
1. Site Details
Ref:
FCT127(GA3/E12)
Location:
Land at Heol Ddu, Tycroes
Site Area (Ha):
0.34
Existing Use*
Vacant
Site Ref (where applicable):
Potential Use*
Employment
*if candidate site as proposed by respondent
2. Land Use/ Planning History
UDP allocation?
White land within development limits
Relevant Planning History
S/13960 – outline application pending for a change of use to residential development, with a small
area of employment (0.34ha to which this proforma relates).
3. Phase 1 – Identification of Strategic Sites
Is the Site Strategic?
Yes (Site proceeds to Phase 2b)
No
x
(Site proceeds to Phase 2a as a Non-Strategic Site)
The site is not considered to be strategic in nature for the following reasons:
not located in a settlement defined as a Growth Area
x
not of an appropriate size
not situated at a key location in terms of transport and accessibility
x
the site is not critical to the delivery of the strategy
This does not preclude the site’s consideration as a Non-Strategic Site.
Expanded reasons for non identification of the site as strategic are available.
4. Phase 2a – Initial Analysis
Q.1
x
Land use allocation specific or non allocation related?
Allocation (proceeds to Q.2)
Non allocation (Considered through LDP policy)
Q.2
x
Within or immediately adjoining an identified settlement in the Preferred Strategy?
Yes (Site proceeds to Q.3)
No (Site is dismissed)
Q.3
If residential, can the site accommodate 5 or more houses (i.e. is >0.16ha in size)?
Yes (Site proceeds to Phase 2b)
No Considered under the review of Development Limits)
Comments
5. Phase 2b – Further Analysis
Q.4 Is the site located within or adjacent to any of the following?
(If yes, site does not proceed except where potential for mitigation can be demonstrated)
No
Yes
Partly
Adjacent
KEY DETERMINANTS
Nature and Landscape Conservation
Ramsar Site
x
Special Protection Area (SPA)
x
Special Area of Conservation (SAC)
x
National Nature Reserve (NNR)
x
Site of Special Scientific Interest (SSSI)
x
Common Land or Registered Village Green
x
Cultural Heritage
Scheduled Ancient Monument or remains of
national importance
Flooding
TAN 15 Development Advice Maps
x
x
EA Flood Map - nat_floodzone3
Minerals
Mineral buffer zone
x
x
Q.5 Would development of the site represent or result in:
Tandem development
No
x
Ribbon development
x
Coalescence
x
Development unrelated to the existing urban form
x
Sporadic & fragmented pattern of development (either constitute or contribute to)
x
An illogical extension to the settlement
x
Conflicts with existing land use or known plans and strategies
x
A Detrimental Impact on the Character and Setting of the settlement or its features
(including views and glimpses both into and out of the settlement)
A loss of areas of open space and amenity value
x
General Planning Principles
Yes
x
Comments
Q.6 Additional considerations:
No
Yes
General
x
Does the site have an available access point with adequate visibility?
Would development at the site impact upon the highway network and
x
?
No
increase the risk to highway safety?
Is it Previously Developed Land?
Yes
?
x
Soil / Agricultural Land Quality
Does the site contain high carbon soil e.g. peat?
x
Does the site contain high quality agricultural land?
x
Q.7 Is the site located within or related to any of the following?:
No
Nature and Landscape Conservation
Local Nature Reserves (LNR)
Regionally
Important
Geological
Geomorphological Sites (RIGS)
Cultural Heritage
Conservation Area
Yes
Partly
Adjacent
x
/
x
x
Q.8 Would development at the site impact upon species/habitats of high importance? (refer
to Biodiversity/Connectivity Study)
Yes
x
No
Unknown
Q.9 Accessibility - Is the site within a settlement with access to, or within easy reach of, the
following:
No
Yes
Rail network
x
Highway network (A or B roads)
x
Public transport
x
Cycle ways and/or footpaths
x
Q.10 Site Deliverability - Are there any infrastructure or other issues on the site that would affect
its deliverability during the Plan period.
Yes
x
No
Unknown
Comments
6. Additional Comments
Update May 2013:
This small site has been identified as a focused change as it forms the incidental employment
element associated with a much larger scheme for residential development proposed in planning
application S/13960 currently being considered. Reference should be made to the Employment
Land Update Paper.
Note: Reference should be made to the guidance notes accompanying this proforma when
interpreting its contents.
7. Sustainability Appraisal
Score:
133
Score Summary Count
Threats
Issues
Low
7
Medium
1
High
1
None of note. See relevant score card.
No. Prospective Opportunities
15
0
14
Opportunities:
Further
Comments
Site has a good, positive score. See score card for further detail. No notable
Issues.