Agenda item

            That planning permission be granted subject to conditions detailed in the report of the Chief Officer (Planning and Environment) and subject to the applicant entering either into a Section 106 agreement, providing a unilateral undertaking or the making of an advance payment which provided for the following:-

1.    Ensure the payment of a commuted sum equivalent to £1100 per dwelling in lieu of on site play and recreation provisions.  Such sum to be paid to be used as a contribution towards the upgrade of play facilities at the existing children play area at Llys Pont y Garreg, Mold.  Such sum to be paid upon occupation of 50% of the approved dwellings. 

2.                  Ensure the payment of a commuted sum of £24,514 as a contribution to the provision of additional external areas for the teaching of physical education as part of the national curriculum at Glanrafon C.P. School.  Such sum to be payable before the commencement of development.                             

The Committee considered the report of the Chief Officer (Planning and Environment) in respect of this application which had been the subject of a site visit on 23^rd May 2016.  The usual consultations had been undertaken and the responses received detailed in the report.  Additional comments received since the preparation of the report were circulated at the meeting. 

                        The officer detailed the background to the report and he explained that the site was in a flood risk area and the applicant had submitted a Flood Consequences Assessment which had been considered; no objections had been raised.  There was an error in paragraph 7.07 and the officer explained that the words ‘not only for vehicles emerging from the site’ should be replaced with ‘not only for vehicles entering the site’.  When considering the design and amenity of the site, the design and access statement provided indications of the parameters of scale of the proposed dwellings but all detailed design issues, except access, were reserved for future approval.  The officer provided details of the Section 106 obligations attached to an approval of the application and the compliance with Community Infrastructure Levy (CIL) regulations was reported.  The main issues were access and highways impact.  The Senior Engineer – Highways Development Control confirmed that there were no objections from Highways, subject to conditions.  She added that Conway Street was part of the adopted highway and the layout of the road was adequate for simultaneous passing of two vehicles.  It had been noted on the site visit that there was parking by residents of the terraced properties on the opposite side of Conway Street.  A question had also been asked about the number of buses to the school that accessed the street and the Senior Engineer confirmed that this was nine in total.  The site was not dissimilar to any other site in close proximity to a school in that there were peak times in the morning and afternoon but generally the area was quiet outside of these times. 

                        Councillor Carolyn Thomas declared that she was Chair of the Buildings Committee and a School Governor at Ysgol Maes Garmon.  She said that many of the Governors would be pleased that the site was to be developed but strongly opposed this application on access and highway safety grounds.  Conway Street was narrow and the traffic could only move in one direction because of parked vehicles and there were no pull-ins or turning points.  She said that school buses often had to mount the pavement to make the turn from Wrexham Road into Conway Street because of the narrow junction.  There was no traffic or pedestrian management system in place and Councillor Thomas raised concern for the safety of the students who walked along Conway Street to access the school or the sports centre.  She spoke of the eight coaches, taxis and a minibus that accessed the area in the afternoon to collect pupils from the school and she commented on the staff cars that also needed to access and leave the school site at these peak times along with service and delivery vehicles in the area throughout the day.  There were concerns for pupils crossing Conway Street where it joined with Wrexham Road particularly at the start and end of the school day.  All of the issues highlighted meant that pupils on foot were already at risk once they left the school gate and the provision of eight dwellings would exacerbate the situation as vehicles would be obliged to cross the pavement that was currently the safest access route to the school for pedestrians.  Councillor Thomas indicated that the site had previously been granted planning permission but a condition had been imposed that access was to be onto Brooke Street, not Conway Street.  Having earlier declared an interest in the application, Councillor Thomas left the Chamber prior to its discussion.  

                        Mr. D. Jennings, the agent for the applicant, acknowledged some of the concerns raised but did not feel that the proposal would worsen the situation.  He explained that the application would not result in any additional parking on Conway Street as parking standards had been complied with and parking was within the site boundary.  He added that even though the street was busy at peak school times, it was quieter during the rest of the day and suggested that vehicles parked on Conway Street acted as a traffic management system.  Conway Street was not long and there was a break in the parking where two properties had created accesses for off street parking.  It acted as a useful passing place and this proposal would create an additional passing place.  Mr. Jennings said that in the 55 years that the school had existed, there had not been one reported accident.  There was no turning point in Conway Street but Mr. Jennings said that the access to his property was used by vehicles to turn so a significant benefit of the scheme was that the new access point for this development would act as a virtual turning head.  He added that three existing access points to the land would be replaced by one and the traffic generated by the additional eight dwellings would be small and the traffic generated by the school was also low in number and was predictable at peak school times.  Mr. Jennings said that at weekends, in the evenings and during school holidays there was very little traffic in the street.  He added that another benefit of the scheme was that it would provide eight homes for local people and was in a sustainable location in Mold. 

                        Councillor Marion Bateman proposed refusal of the application, against officer recommendation, which was duly seconded.  She felt that the concerns of the School Governors should be taken into account when determining the application.  She raised concern that the report did not take account of the chaos that occurred twice a day in the area apart from the last sentence of paragraph 7.07 where it was reported ‘that the visibility took account of the inter visibility between pedestrians and vehicles and the officer was satisfied that adequate provision could be made to ensure no detriment to highway or pedestrian safety’.  She sought clarification on the evidence that the officer had on this issue and on a condition in a previous application on the site that access could not be onto Conway Street.  Councillor M. Bateman said that Members had been advised on the previous application on the agenda that they should consider what harm an application would create and therefore because of the risks to safety to school children and residents that this application would cause, she reiterated her proposal of refusal. 

                        In seconding the refusal, Councillor Dave Cox said that it was obvious as the site visit that there were apparent dangers on Conway Street and it did not matter whether it was only busy for a short amount of time.  He felt that the problem could be solved by widening Conway Street and that this could be easily achieved. 

                        The Local Member, Councillor Haydn Bateman spoke against the application.  He said that Conway Street was narrow and was the only street that led to the entrance to Ysgol Maes Garmon.  On the site visit, the narrowness had been noted and the street was reduced to a single lane because of on-street parking and this allowed damage to some cars by buses accessing the school.  He expressed significant concern for the safety of the pupils and other pedestrians and he highlighted the condition imposed on application 045711 for the site that no access should be onto Conway Street because of safety concerns.  The entrance would have been onto Brooke Street and those residents had no objections to the proposed dwellings but objected strongly to the entrance onto Conway Street.  Councillor Bateman asked the Committee to refuse the application on the grounds recommended by the officers on application 045711 to safeguard the amenity of nearby residents by not permitting any vehicular access onto Conway Street.  

                        Councillor Gareth Roberts said that he did not feel that there were any reasons to refuse the application and added that the width of the road met the standards in the Council’s policies.  The road was straight and did not restrict visibility and he agreed with the agent that the proposal could improve the issue of road safety as the access could be used as a turning or passing point.  He felt that if the application was refused, then the applicant could appeal and the decision would be overturned and costs awarded against the Council as there were no grounds to refuse it. 

                        In seeking clarity, Councillor Mike Peers asked why this recommendation had not included a condition for no vehicular access onto Conway Street.  Councillor Owen Thomas felt that the original application with an access onto Brooke Street was more appropriate. 

                        In response to the comments made, the officer said that the evidence for the conclusion on visibility was from comments during discussions with Highways colleagues and it had been agreed that the proposal would not cause any harm.  The suggestion to widen Conway Street was not before the Committee in this application and the officer explained that this site was now much smaller than the proposal for an access only onto Brooke Street and was now constrained by the application for a convenience store on a nearby site.  He reminded Members that they needed to consider the application before them but added that the access onto Brooke Street had been suggested for the previous site because it was for more dwellings and it was felt that there was an increased risk of harm than from the eight dwellings currently proposed. 

                        Councillor M. Bateman, in summing up, felt that the suggestion by the agent that the access to the site could be used as a turning or passing point could not be considered.  She also spoke of the perceived harm and the exacerbated risk to pupils and other pedestrians and said that she was proposing refusal in the interests of safeguarding the amenity of existing residents by not permitting any vehicular access onto Conway Street. 

                        The Service Manager Strategy said that the new access would give road users a choice of how they used the public highway and the Planning Officer confirmed that the access would be provided to an adoptable standard.  The Service Manager Strategy sought clarification on the reason for refusal and said that the predominant debate had been on highway safety and asked whether Councillor M. Bateman was including the impact on the safety of the pupils too; Councillor Bateman confirmed that she was. 

                        On being put to the vote, the proposal to refuse the application was LOST and therefore the officer recommendation of approval with a Section 106 agreement was CARRIED.           

            RESOLVED:

            That planning permission be granted subject to conditions detailed in the report of the Chief Officer (Planning and Environment) and subject to the applicant entering either into a Section 106 agreement, providing a unilateral undertaking or the making of an advance payment which provided for the following:-

1.    Ensure the payment of a commuted sum equivalent to £1100 per dwelling in lieu of on site play and recreation provisions.  Such sum to be paid to be used as a contribution towards the upgrade of play facilities at the existing children play area at Llys Pont y Garreg, Mold.  Such sum to be paid upon occupation of 50% of the approved dwellings. 

2.    Ensure the payment of a commuted sum of £24,514 as a contribution to the provision of additional external areas for the teaching of physical education as part of the national curriculum at Glanrafon C.P. School.  Such sum to be payable before the commencement of development.   

                        After the vote had been taken, Councillor Carolyn Thomas returned to the meeting.