Application Details

Application Reference Number:
A190453
Application Type:
Prior Approval (Agri/Forest/Dem)
Proposal:
Erection of a Agricultural building for storage of tools, equipment and supplies for farming purposes.
Decision:
Permission required
Applicant:
Mr Michael Thomas
Location:
Land Known As Cae Fishponds, Pantyfedwen, Pontrhydfendigaid, Aberystwyth, SY25 6ES
Ward:
Officer:
Sophie Hall-Jones
Received Date:
30-07-2019
Valid Date:
30-07-2019
Proposed Committee Date:
Decision Issued Date:
21-08-2019
Application Status:
Decision Issued
 

  Location

Documents

Document Type Description Thumbnail Download/View
Correspondence (General) Determination Planning Permision REQUIRED Sorry, no preview available Download
Officer Report Officer Report Sorry, no preview available Download
Application Form Application Form Download
Plans / Drawings Location Plan Download

Representations

Name Comment Thumbnail Date File
C Huckstep
1. We write as the owners and occupiers of Pantyfedwen, adjoining the Planning Application property to the north-east, and marked on the application site diagram. We have met Mr Mike Thomas, and want to say at the outset that we welcome him to this community, and we look forward to having him as our close neighbour.

2. Our concerns, respectfully, centre around the new use of, and increased traffic along, the proposed access route. This access track is owned by us, and is our house driveway, and where it bends to the right towards the access to the fields Mr Mike Thomas has purchased, it effectively runs through our front garden. We believe that re-siting the proposed building, with direct access to the public highway, would alleviate our concerns and enable Mr Thomas to better utilise his acquired land.

3. Up until now, the seller of the land, Mr Meirion Thomas, had a right of way to access his fields both from the main public highway (access point not drawn in on the attached site diagram, but located under the label "Total Area 12.45 Acres=5.038 Ha" near the word "Ford") and from the access route along our driveway over our property. He rarely used our driveway access as it was much easier and more convenient to access his fields from the public highway. In selling a portion of his fields to Mr Mike Thomas, Mr Meirion Thomas has held back selling the field area with the access point to the public highway, thus Mr Mike Thomas currently has no alternative to accessing his newly acquired fields except along our driveway and through the end of our front garden. We are concerned that this new use over our land and increased traffic will negatively affect our privacy and enjoyment of our property, and that construction traffic could easily damage the driveway/track, We believe, and respectfully suggest, that both our and Mr Mike Thomas' interests would be better served by siting his building closer to the public highway, with access off the highway rather than along our driveway and through the bottom of our garden.

4. Alternatively, Mr Mike Thomas could arrange with Mr Meirion Thomas to gain access to his newly acquired fields through Mr Meirion Thomas' continued access to the public highway (arguably this should have been part of the sale conditions), thus not requiring the access through our garden. Mr Meirion Thomas, as the beneficiary of selling part of his land, would thus bear the burden of Mr Mike Thomas' requirement for access, rather than benefitting from the sale of land while putting the burden of the new right of way and access usage onto us.

5. As an important additional point, perhaps of wider relevance, we would like clarity on what agricultural use is proposed for the newly acquired land which would require the erection of a new building where none has been previously required, as this would enable us to better understand the proposed traffic access over our land. Section 6 of the Town and Country Planning (General Permitted Development) Order 1995 would seem to apply here. (Of note, if a different access route was enabled, we would not have any problem with any agricultural or related activity).

6. The above points seek to show that re-siting the proposed building, with access either direct off the public highway, or by utilising Mr Meirion Thomas' access point, would alleviate the negative impact of increased traffic over our driveway and garden area. If, however, this is over-ruled, and after further activity/discussion, planning permission for building construction and increased access use over our land, is eventually granted, then we believe there are a number of important subsequent considerations. These are given in (a) to (g) below, with what we believe would be equitable conditions of construction planning permission:

(a) Maintenance of Current Driveway Conditions - No damage must be caused to either the driveway track surface, or to the adjacent gates, fences and overhanging tress and vegetation. There are a number of attractive trees either side of our driveway and the access track, with over-hanging branches, and we do not believe it would be acceptable to damage these tress or branches. We attach a photograph showing part of the access track for information in this regard.

(b) Gates, Safety and Security - We have fences and gates both adjoining and one crossing the proposed access track. This is to keep our dog and children (and any visiting smaller children) safe and secure within the property, particularly preventing open access to the public highway. Use of the proposed access track must ensure that all gates opened are shut after passage, to maintain the safety and security of personnel and animals on our property.

(c) Construction Access - Construction traffic and construction access should be limited to normal business hours, say 0900 - 1800 Monday to Friday, to help minimise disturbance.

(d) Construction Vehicles - Construction vehicles should be limited to the lightest possible. In particular, heavy concrete lorries. tracked vehicles and/or extra long vehicles, should not be permitted.

(e) Inadvertent Damage - If damage is inadvertently caused to our driveway, gates, fences or trees, access should be stopped until agreement is reached as to how the damage may be made good, and how similar damage may be avoided in the future.

(f) Future Access - Once construction is complete, the newly acquired right of way by Mr Mike Thomas over our land, should be limited to only that which is necessary to service the agricultural use, and must not be increased to further activities without further review, application and approval.

(g) Building Appearance - The proposed building can be seen from our property, and, contrary to the planning application (Section 10 - Site Visit) may be seen from the public highway by anyone walking on foot. Thus the appearance of the building should be a consideration; it should seek to be in harmony with the surrounding landscape, and not be in any way unsightly. We suggest a drawing or other visualisation of the proposed building would help to ascertain this before any permission is granted.

7. Summary. As stated in the beginning, we do not seek to prevent Mr Mike Thomas from enjoying his newly acquired fields, as new neighbours are always welcome, indeed one could add should be encouraged, in this region of rural Wales. However, we believe the currently proposed arrangements for the sale and future use of these fields is flawed, in that the new and significant increase in traffic over our driveway and along our front garden, if construction of any buildings is allowed, is detrimental to our privacy and enjoyment of our property, and either a new access should be created to the public highway, or use made by Mr Mike Thomas of the seller Mr Meirion Thomas' continued access point to the public highway.
We remain very open to continued discussion and look forward to working with all stakeholders going forwards.
Respectfully,
Chris and Gill Huckstep

Pantyfedwen
SY25 6ES
Email: crhuckstep@hotmail.com
Mobile: 07920 889387
Sorry, no preview available 17-08-2019 16:08:45 Download