3. ENVIRONMENT

3.1. Justification of Part 1 Policies

3.1.1. The guiding principle and strategy of the UDP embraces the principle of Sustainable Development. The aim is to produce a more sustainable pattern of development which focuses on the better use of the existing urban areas of the County Borough whilst encouraging economic growth, reducing dependence on the private car, and promoting the greater use of more sustainable, alternative modes of transport; thereby securing a higher quality of life, and respect for the environment.

3.1.2. The County Borough Council has adopted and reviewed its Environmental and Sustainable Development Policy (1998) to manage and improve its environmental performance as part of the authority’s approach to Local Agenda 21 (LA21). It has subsequently published it’s Local Agenda 21 Strategy: ‘Building a Better Bridgend County Borough’.

3.1.3. The UDP will have clearly defined relationships not only with the Authority’s LA21 Strategy, but also with its economic development (EDAP), transport and other policies, programmes and management strategies. From an environmental perspective, it is particularly important that the UDP is informed by the Authority’s Local Biodiversity Action Plan (LBAP) and its Built Heritage, Countryside, and Coastal Zone Management Strategies, in order that the principle of sustainability is integrated into its planning policies.

3.1.4. The Government launched its new strategy “A Better Quality of Life” - National Sustainable Development Strategy in May 1999, following an extensive period of consultation (under the heading - Opportunities for Change). The Strategy is, in the words of the Local Government Association .....the most comprehensive statement yet by government that it sees sustainable development as quality of life in the broadest sense. It covers social and economic as well as environmental issues. Local Government’s contribution to sustainable development is covered in Chapter 7 of the Strategy which emphasises Local Agenda 21 and that a number of authorities with LA21 strategies have been selected as a national indicator of progress. The Strategy is intended to provide a national focus from which local and regional action will follow, and highlights the need for partnerships to be forged between business, local authorities and voluntary groups who can build on the many initiatives where industry and local authorities are already ‘making a difference’.

3.1.5. Policy 1 is therefore an ‘over-arching’ policy which sets the tone for the remainder of the UDP. The Policy is in tune with current Government guidance in Wales. This advocates adopting the ‘precautionary principle’ in relation to the environment in general, and stresses that the planning system should provide homes, investment and jobs in a manner which is consistent with the principle of sustainable development, the overall aim of which is a better quality of life for all.

3.1.6. Policy 2 takes the ‘over-arching’ principle embodied in Policy 1 and applies it specifically in the context of this Chapter to each component of the County Borough’s ‘environmental resource’. To protect, conserve and enhance the environment of the County Borough should be the main aim of all agencies whether they are involved in management or development. Similarly, all agencies should seek to monitor their own and other’s actions, and to enhance the environment wherever possible, or, at the very least, to maintain its quality, for the enjoyment of present and future generations.

3.1.7. Policy 3 strategically addresses the mechanisms and practices of achieving sustainable development consistent with emerging national policies and the Council’s own policies and strategies. These desirable practices, and what they can locally achieve are considered in greater detail in the relevant Part 2 Policies.

Part 2
3.2. Introduction

3.2.1. When the White Paper - This Common Inheritance was published in 1990, it acknowledged increased general public awareness of, and concern for our environment. After enjoying the benefits of economic growth, we have become increasingly preoccupied with the quality of our daily lives as shown by our aspirations for healthier living, desire for cleaner air, water and streets, and enthusiasm for protecting the best features of our urban and rural heritage; together with a commitment that we should pass it on undiminished to our children.

3.2.2. The present Government is similarly committed to a better quality of life for all. Briefly, it is acknowledged that all future development must be ‘sustainable’. It is no longer appropriate, nor desirable, for crises to be resolved by short-term solutions founded on expediency, at the expense of the longer term aim of securing an equal, or better, environment for future generations.

3.3. Sustainable Development

3.3.1. At the heart of the concept, therefore, is the simple idea of ensuring a better ‘quality of life’ for everyone, now, and for generations to come. The most commonly used international definition of sustainable development is:-

.....development which meets the needs of the present without compromising the ability of future generations to meet their own needs. (Report of the 1987 World Commission on Environment and Development (or Brundtland Report).

3.3.2. In 1992, the ‘Earth Summit’ in Rio de Janeiro discussed how to achieve sustainable development, and a series of protocols were agreed. Agenda 21 recommended that all countries should produce national sustainable development strategies. The UK Government subsequently produced four pertinent strategy documents:-

1. Sustainable Development: The UK Strategy (Cm 2426)
2. Climate Change: The UK Programme (Cm 2427)
3. Biodiversity: The UK Action Plan (Cm 2428)
4. Sustainable Forestry: The UK Programme (Cm 2429)

3.3.3. It is the first of the above documents which has recently been reviewed by the Government, following extensive consultation on a suite of documents entitled ‘Opportunities for Change’. Supplementary consultation documents on particular aspects of sustainable development, and on a set of ‘headline indicators’, were also produced prior to the formulation of the new Strategy. This builds on what the 1994 Strategy has already achieved, and emphasises a new approach stressing the social dimension of sustainable development alongside economic issues, the environment, and the use of resources.

3.3.4. The new Strategy recognises that to achieve sustainable development this means meeting four objectives simultaneously:-

1. Social progress which recognises the needs of everyone;
2. Effective protection of the environment;
3. Prudent use of natural resources; and
4. Maintenance of high and stable levels of economic growth and employment.

(A better quality of life - A strategy for sustainable development for the United Kingdom, DETR, June 1999).

3.3.5. The National Assembly is seen as playing a key role in achieving the above aims in Wales, as it has a clear duty through the Government of Wales Act (1998) to:-

....make a scheme setting out how it proposes, in the exercise of its functions, to promote sustainable development. Although it will be for (it) to decide how to meet its sustainable development duty, it is likely to affect all the Assembly’s functions, including those relating to planning. ‘A Sustainable Wales – Learning to Live Differently’ (2000) sets out the ways in which the National Assembly intends to implement that duty.

3.3.6. The planning system is acknowledged as having a key role in providing homes, investment and jobs in a manner consistent with the principle of sustainable development, therefore the UDP must have aims and policies consistent with that principle.

3.3.7. In July 1996, Bridgend CBC made a resolution to fully embrace the concept of sustainable development, and to support the integration of its aims into its policies and activities. It also approved the setting up of an LA21 Working Party etc. to formulate corporate environmental aims, to produce an Environmental Policy, and to set targets for improved environmental performance based on the principles of the Eco-Management and Audit Scheme (EMAS).

3.3.8. At the second ‘Earth Summit’ in New York in June 1997, the British Government agreed that all local authorities in the UK would produce LA21 plans by 2000. This was followed up in January 1998 by Welsh Office guidance - ‘Sustainable communities in Wales for the 21st Century, why and how to prepare an effective local agenda strategy’. In February 1999, the Council approved its ‘Framework for Action: 21 Steps towards Development of Local Agenda 21 for Bridgend County Borough 1998-2000’. It is intended that the Framework will be used as a basis for a consultative process both within the Authority and with other bodies, agencies and interest groups with a view to the Council building partnerships, developing, and refining initiatives leading to the preparation of the LA21 Strategy by the year 2000. Step 6 of the Framework makes the following recommendation:-

• To consider the integration of sustainable development and local agenda 21 issues within all existing and emerging plans and programmes within the County Borough, in particular waste management, recycling and air quality management plans, development control, social exclusion, local democracy, anti-poverty and best value.

3.3.9. The UDP has fully taken into account the County Borough Council’s Local Agenda 21 Strategy ‘Building a Better Bridgend County Borough’ which was published in December 2000. This, in turn, has been informed by the National Assembly for Wales’ sustainable development scheme ‘A Sustainable Wales – Learning to Live Differently’ (2000). The LA21 Strategy will be delivered through a vision statement, an action plan and implementation mechanisms. It will also encourage the need for community involvement and partnerships with the Council in seeking to achieve its goals for sustainable development, and all actions will be monitored against its performance indicators. The previous First Review of the Council’s Environmental and Sustainable Development Policy (1998) has already confirmed that the Council actions to date in publishing Issues Papers, Draft Land Use Strategy, Draft Part 1 UDP Policies, and the Pre-Deposit UDP, all of which have been the subject of Sustainable Appraisal, have paralleled and been informed by its LA21 commitments.

3.3.10. From the outset, therefore, the UDP has addressed the issues which have a direct impact on the ‘whole environmental resource’ of the County Borough which must be sensitively managed if it is not to be denied to future generations.

3.4. Sustainability Appraisal of the Plan

3.4.1. The goal of achieving sustainable development is of such over-riding importance to future planning policy in the County Borough, it directs the guiding principle of the UDP. It is a matter of primary concern to the Council that the Plan’s policies achieve the optimum balance between the benefits of development, and their impact on the environment. The action taken by the Council in preparing its UDP in parallel with its LA21 Framework and Environmental and Sustainable Development Policy, using techniques like EMAS, and the performance indicators contained in the Council’s Best Value Strategy, will go a long way towards securing that aim.

3.4.2. In addition to the above measures, however, environmental considerations must also form a part of policy appraisal. A systematic Sustainability Appraisal is the most effective way for the Council to show how it has taken this concept into account throughout plan preparation, thereby also working towards the Government’s goal of ensuring development and growth are sustainable. Similarly, the Sustainability Appraisal should be practical, explicit, and presented in a form which is readily understood.

3.4.3. The Council has therefore embraced the advice contained in the Government’s published ‘Good Practice Guide’ for the environmental appraisal of Development Plans. In February 1998 it appointed a firm of planning consultants - Messrs. John Baker Associates - to advise and assist in undertaking an independent Sustainability Appraisal of the policies and proposals being prepared for the Plan. The process of appraisal would be objectively addressed throughout, whilst ensuring that a rigorous methodology of policy examination would take place to ensure that objectivity would be maintained at every stage within the timescale of plan preparation. A fuller explanation of this process is contained in the accompanying document: Sustainability Appraisal of the Bridgend Unitary Development Plan. Briefly, the methodology of the Council’s consultants has involved an in-depth appraisal of the Issues Reports, Land Use Strategy, Draft Part I Policies and Written Justification, up to, and including this Adopted Plan. The Appraisal process, and its resultant recommendations, have duly informed the plan preparation process throughout.

3.4.4. The consultants have confirmed that it is a Sustainability Appraisal that has been undertaken at every stage of plan preparation, i.e...... the appraisal is concerned with environmental, social and economic issues. Overall, (it) is seeking to answer the question:-

• How far does the Plan go in achieving the contribution towards sustainable development that ought to be possible from a land use plan?

3.4.5. The Sustainability Appraisal addresses the above question by initially listing a set of concerns that describe the aim of promoting greater sustainability - as a benchmark for the appraisal, together with a checklist of the ways in which a land use plan can influence those concerns and help bring about desirable change. The Appraisal is Supplementary Planning Guidance (SPG) to the Plan in its own right, and was therefore also subject to statutory consultation and public comment.

3.4.6. The Sustainability Appraisal of the Plan was an ongoing commitment. All Policy or allocation changes were reviewed throughout plan preparation including, those issues and policies which emerged at Public Local Inquiry and subsequent modifications to the Plan, up to its formal adoption. The Council’s objective is that the SPG document should provide ‘a transparent trail of changes’ which provides stage by stage signposts to the environmental audit of the Plan’s policies and proposals, hence clearly measuring their impact on the existing and future environment of the County Borough.

3.5. The Countryside and Landscape

3.5.1. DEVELOPMENT IN THE COUNTRYSIDE

POLICY EV1

DEVELOPMENT IN THE COUNTRYSIDE WILL BE STRICTLY CONTROLLED. EXCEPTIONS TO THIS MAY BE THAT WHICH IS NECESSARY IN THE INTERESTS OF AGRICULTURE, FARM DIVERSIFICATION, FORESTRY, THE WINNING AND WORKING OF MINERALS, APPROPRIATE COUNTRYSIDE TOURISM, LEISURE AND RECREATION, LAND RECLAMATION, TRANSPORTATION INFRASTRUCTURE, UTILITY SERVICE PROVISION, AND THE SUITABLE CONVERSION, EXTENSION OR REHABILITATION OF EXISTING RURAL BUILDINGS.

3.5.2. It is national planning policy that the countryside should be protected for its own sake i.e. for its beauty, landscape quality, natural resources, and its agricultural, ecological, geological, physiographic, historical, archaeological and recreational value. Development in the countryside should benefit the rural economy, and maintain or enhance the environment, but new building in the open countryside away from existing settlements or areas allocated for development in the UDP should be strictly controlled.

3.5.3. The Council recognises the value which people place on the countryside of the County Borough; and because of the increasing development pressures which are being placed upon it, a robust planning policy framework is essential to reconcile rural development with the need to protect the countryside. It is therefore necessary, in the first instance, for the Council to clearly define what it considers to be ‘the countryside’ for the purpose of its planning policies. The UDP therefore defines ‘the countryside’ of the County Borough as:-

• That area of land lying beyond designated settlement boundaries (the latter are defined in Policies EV12, H3 and H4 and their justifying texts) and sites allocated for development in the UDP.

The settlement strategy, which the UDP has adopted, progresses in a consistent manner the relevant policies which restrict rural development in, or the expansion of urban development into the countryside. The boundaries of ‘main settlements’ include any ‘limited rounding-off site’ whose development would extend an existing built-up area in a modest fashion in such a way as to effectively take the development of that urban area up to a clear and defensible boundary, in a manner which rationalises surrounding land uses and the adjacent countryside. ‘Main and smaller settlements’, as defined in the UDP, have ‘designated settlement boundaries’, which are shown on the Proposals Map.

3.5.4. The Council will rigorously apply the national and regional policies against unnecessary development in ‘the countryside’ within the County Borough. For example, new housing development (including the replacement of existing dwellings), away from the ‘main’ or ‘smaller settlements’ as designated in the UDP, will be strictly controlled. The Authority accepts, however, that certain developments may be pursued in the countryside provided that:-

• They will encourage rural enterprise, i.e. with directly demonstrable benefits to the local rural economy of the County Borough, in accordance with Policy E11; and
• They will bring wider community benefits to the County Borough or region, for example through mineral extraction or improvements to transportation or utility service infrastructure, and are developments which could not be located in neighbouring, designated settlements.

While initial consideration should be given to adapting existing farm buildings, the provision of a sensitively designed new building associated with a farm diversification scheme on a working farm within existing farm complexes may be appropriate where a conversion opportunity does not exist, providing it is in accordance with Policy EV7.

3.5.5. Policy EV1 therefore represents the fundamental starting point for the assessment of all future development proposals for development in ‘the countryside’ of the County Borough, and will not be set aside lightly. Policies contained elsewhere in the Plan are intended to strengthen, rather than to diminish the restriction of development in ‘the countryside’.

3.5.6. THE RE-USE OF EXISTING BUILDINGS IN THE COUNTRYSIDE

POLICY EV2

DEVELOPMENT PROPOSALS IN THE COUNTRYSIDE WHICH ARE IN ACCORD WITH POLICY EV1, SHOULD, , WHEREVER POSSIBLE, UTILISE EXISTING BUILDINGS. WHERE SUCH AN OPPORTUNITY DOES NOT EXIST DEVELOPMENT SHOULD BE IN ACCORD WITH POLICY EV7.

3.5.7. In order to limit the amount of new development in the countryside, and to maximise the use of existing under-utilised or vacant buildings, where development is permitted under Policy EV1 every effort should be made to reuse existing buildings. Planning Policy Wales (PPW) (2002) advises that the re-use and adaptation of such buildings can play an important role in meeting the needs of the rural area, in the first instance for the agricultural, forestry and mineral industries, then for incoming commercial and industrial users and for tourism, sport and recreation, and lastly for suitable conversion to residential uses, after applicants have demonstrated that every reasonable attempt has been made to secure a suitable re-use of the premises for business purposes. Similarly, PPW(2002) advises local planning authorities to adopt a positive approach to development associated with “farm diversification” (as referred to in paragraph 3.5.4. above) irrespective of whether farms are served by public transport.

3.5.8. Policy EV2 recognises the fact that residential conversions of disused rural buildings have a minimal benefit to the rural economy; that they may be detrimental to the fabric and character of historic buildings; and that buildings converted to residential use rarely revert to more beneficial economic uses. Also, increased numbers of residential conversions in rural areas could lead to intensified use of private cars, which would be contrary to the aims of sustainable development.

3.5.9. All conversions of buildings in rural areas should additionally satisfy the detailed requirements of Policy EV6 and the Council’s published Supplementary Planning Guidance on this matter, including those for future residential purposes where new-build development is envisaged, this must also satisfy the detailed requirements of Policy EV7. Any cumulative impact from new-build development, or conversion and re-use of buildings in the countryside will be closely monitored by the Council in order that its ongoing scale and location remains in conformity with its rural surroundings, the economic and social needs of the area, and that it will not cause demonstrable environmental harm, nor prejudice the safety and amenity of the rural transport network of the County Borough.

3.5.10. DEVELOPMENT AFFECTING THE BEST AND MOST VERSATILE AGRICULTURAL LAND.

POLICY EV3

DEVELOPMENT IN THE COUNTRYSIDE WHICH INVOLVES THE LOSS OF GRADE 1, 2, OR 3a AGRICULTURAL LAND WILL NOT BE PERMITTED, EXCEPT WHERE IT CAN BE DEMONSTRATED THAT THERE IS AN OVERRIDING NEED FOR DEVELOPMENT. WHERE THE LOSS OF SUCH LAND IS ESSENTIAL, DEVELOPMENT WILL TAKE PLACE ON THE LOWEST POSSIBLE GRADES OF SUITABLE LAND, IN A MANNER CONSISTENT WITH EXISTING ENVIRONMENTAL AND OTHER CONSERVATION INTERESTS, AND AVOIDING PREJUDICE TO THE VIABILITY OF EXISTING OR PROPOSED FARM UNITS OR HOLDINGS.

3.5.11. Land which is graded 1,2 and 3a in the Ministry of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food (MAFF) Agricultural Land Classification is the best and most versatile of agricultural land, and is therefore protected as a national resource. Its development may therefore only take place exceptionally, where there is an overriding need for the development, including the need for agricultural investment, or available lower grade land has an environmental value which is recognised by a statutory landscape, wildlife, historic or archaeological designation outweighs the agricultural considerations. Welsh Planning Guidance indicates that the loss of Grade 3b and/or land of lower grades would not normally be opposed on land quality grounds, although its retention may be of key importance to retaining the viability of certain holdings e.g. upland farms. However, development of such land should be approached with care to minimise its impact on local agriculture, e.g. its location in relation to farms, farm size and structure, farm buildings and other fixed equipment, land drainage and irrigation, whilst securing the habitats of protected species especially where these do not have the added protection of being within designated sites for nature conservation.

3.5.12. DEVELOPMENT FOR AGRICULTURE OR FORESTRY

POLICY EV4

NEW DWELLINGS FOR THE PURPOSES OF AGRICULTURE OR FORESTRY WILL BE PERMITTED ONLY WHERE BOTH A FUNCTIONAL AND FINANCIAL NEED FOR THE DEVELOPMENT HAVE BEEN PROPERLY DEMONSTRATED.

3.5.13. It is acknowledged that new housebuilding and other new development in the countryside must be strictly controlled, but certain development may be justified under special circumstances; for example, where it is essential to enable farm or forestry workers to live close to their work. However the need for such development must be fully and clearly justified. In determining planning applications for the development of new dwellings for agriculture and forestry, the Council will therefore assess those proposals against the criteria set down in Welsh Planning Guidance, which advocates:-

• A functional test to establish whether, for the proper functioning of the enterprise, one or more workers needs to be readily available at most times, in terms of both its current and likely future requirements; and
• A financial test which not only shows that the farming enterprise is economically viable but also provides evidence of the size of the dwelling which the unit can sustain.

3.5.14. If it is considered that a new dwelling may be essential to support a new farming activity but the case is not completely proven through the above assessments, the Council will require that it should initially be catered for by means of a caravan, wooden structure or some other form of temporary accommodation, which can then be readily removed after 3 years, when the need for a permanent dwelling is reassessed. Moreover, the Council will not normally permit the siting of a temporary dwelling at a location where it would otherwise refuse a permanent one on environmental, landscape, and other planning grounds. The above Guidance will also be applied by the Council to assess the need for any proposals for permanent forestry dwellings. In either event, if a need is proven for those dwellings, they should be kept available to serve the agricultural or forestry needs of the locality. Therefore:-

3.5.15. AGRICULTURAL OR FORESTRY OCCUPANCY

POLICY EV5

ALL PLANNING PERMISSIONS GRANTED IN ACCORDANCE WITH POLICY EV4 WILL BE SUBJECT TO A CONDITION LIMITING THE OCCUPANCY OF THE DWELLING TO A PERSON SOLELY, OR MAINLY EMPLOYED, OR LAST EMPLOYED IN THE LOCALITY IN AGRICULTURE, AS DEFINED IN SECTION 336(1) OF THE TOWN AND COUNTRY PLANNING ACT 1990 (AS AMENDED), OR IN FORESTRY, OR TO A WIDOW OR WIDOWER OF SUCH A PERSON AND TO ANY RESIDENT DEPENDANTS.

3.5.16. When granting permission for a new permanent agricultural or forestry dwelling, the Council may impose occupancy conditions whose scope are such that they will not only apply to the dwelling itself, but also extend to any existing dwellings on the agricultural unit which are under the control of the applicant, do not have occupancy conditions, and need at the time of application to be used in connection with the farm or forestry enterprise. This should help to protect the countryside of the County Borough against the risk of pressure for new houses. The Courts have confirmed the scope for imposing such a condition. In appropriate circumstances, the Council may also use planning obligations/agreements to tie, for example, a farmhouse to adjacent farm buildings or to the agricultural land of the unit, to prevent them from being sold separately without further application to the local planning authority. Applications for the removal of occupancy conditions will be considered on the basis of realistic assessments of the existing need for them, bearing in mind that it is the need for a dwelling for someone solely, mainly or last working in agriculture or forestry (or to a widow or widower of such a person and to any resident dependants) in an area as a whole and not just on the particular holding that is relevant. (PG(W) – TAN(W) 6 paragraphs 53-56 refer).

3.5.17. CONVERSION/EXTENSION/REHABILITATION OF RURAL BUILDINGS

POLICY EV6

PROPOSALS FOR THE CONVERSION, EXTENSION OR REHABILITATION OF BUILDINGS IN THE COUNTRYSIDE WILL BE PERMITTED ONLY WHERE ALL OF THE FOLLOWING CRITERIA ARE MET:-

1. THE EXISTING BUILDING IS STRUCTURALLY SOUND, OR CAPABLE OF BEING MADE SO, WITHOUT SIGNIFICANT EXTERNAL ALTERATION, RECONSTRUCTION, OR EXTENSION;

2. THE PROPOSED USE IS SYMPATHETIC TO THE RURAL CHARACTER OF ITS SURROUNDINGS, WHILST INCORPORATING SATISFACTORY PROVISION FOR SERVICES, ACCESS AND PARKING, AND AMENITY SPACE;

3. THE FORM, BULK, AND DESIGN OF THE CONVERTED OR REHABILITATED BUILDING, AS WELL AS THE MATERIALS USED, ARE IN KEEPING WITH ITS SURROUNDINGS;

4. THE CHARACTER AND DESIGN OF THE EXISTING, AND ANY ADJACENT, BUILDINGS ARE RESPECTED PARTICULARLY WHERE THEY HAVE ARCHITECTURAL, HISTORIC OR GROUP VALUE;

5. ARCHAEOLOGICAL INTERESTS ARE PROPERLY SAFEGUARDED;

6. HABITATS AND SPECIES OF IMPORTANCE TO BIODIVERSITY ARE SAFEGUARDED;

7. THE HISTORY OF THE USE OF THE BUILDING SHOULD DEMONSTRATE THAT IT WAS NOT CONSTRUCTED WITH THE INTENTION OF AN EARLY CONVERSION TO ANOTHER USE; AND

8. THE BUILDING(S) IS NOT WITHIN AN AREA AT RISK FROM FLOODING.

3.5.18. The re-use and adaptation (including extension) of existing buildings in the countryside can play an important role in supporting the local rural economy by providing for suitable new commercial and industrial enterprises, tourism and recreational facilities. Planning Policy (Wales) (PPW) paras. 7.6.10 and 7.6.11 provide that UDPs may include policies which only allow residential re-use of existing buildings in the countryside in very limited circumstances. Much will depend on the nature of the existing building, its suitability for conversion to the proposed uses, and the impact of development works upon it and its locality. Particular care needs to be taken where residential conversions are concerned, as these may involve major alterations or extensions and the creation of residential curtilages which could be out of character with existing buildings and their surroundings.

3.5.19. Many rural buildings, however, are suitable for re-use without an adverse impact on their localities and may thereby contribute to the diversification of the local rural economy. In other instances, however, environmental or traffic grounds, for example, may outweigh the advantages of re-use. Whilst there is no statutory requirement for applicants to provide ‘Farm Plans’ which outline the context and justification for their proposals, they are often of assistance to the Council in determining planning applications within the wider farming picture, and they can provide clearer indications of those proposals’ wider environmental consequences. Conversely, where the Council has reasonable cause to believe that an applicant has attempted to abuse the system by constructing farm buildings under the benefits of ‘permitted development rights’ with an early intention of conversion to another use, it will investigate the history of such a building to establish whether it has ever been used for the purpose for which it was claimed to be built, and whether it can serve a future agricultural function. Proposals for the conversion, extension or rehabilitation of existing buildings in the countryside, should not lie within an area at risk from flooding.

3.5.20. In addition, any planning application for the change of use of redundant farm buildings will be expected to take full account of the detailed provisions for such development contained in the Council’s Supplementary Planning Guidance - Farm Building Conversions.

3.5.21. NATURE, SITING, SCALE AND DESIGN OF RURAL DEVELOPMENT

POLICY EV7

WHERE DEVELOPMENT IS ACCEPTABLE IN PRINCIPLE IN THE COUNTRYSIDE, IT MUST HAVE A SCALE, SITING, LAYOUT, DESIGN AND EXTERNAL APPEARANCE WHICH WILL:-

1. BE COMPATIBLE WITH THE LANDSCAPE, AND ANY EXISTING RELATED STRUCTURE;

2. MAINTAIN OR ENHANCE, THE QUALITY OF THE ENVIRONMENT; AND

3. SUSTAIN THE BIODIVERSITY OF THE COUNTRYSIDE.

3.5.22. Where planning permission is granted for development in the countryside, Policy EV7 ensures every effort will be made to guarantee that the development respects, and wherever possible enhances the local environment in terms of its location, scale, layout and design. The coastline, valley sides, hilltops, ridgelines, and the rural highway network of the County Borough are important features of the landscape for decision making. Development will also be expected to take full account of the Council’s Supplementary Planning Guidance - Dwellings and Domestic Scale Buildings. New structures should be sited with due regard to their effects on the landscape, and it may be necessary for certain buildings to form an integral part of an existing complex of rural buildings. Materials should be chosen which are sympathetic to local and traditional building styles, and which sit comfortably within their countryside settings preserving, wherever possible, existing local biodiversity of species and habitats.

3.5.23. REPLACEMENT DWELLINGS IN THE COUNTRYSIDE

POLICY EV8

THE DIRECT REPLACEMENT OF AN EXISTING DWELLING IN THE COUNTRYSIDE WILL BE PERMITTED ONLY WHERE ALL OF THE FOLLOWING CRITERIA ARE SATISFIED:-

1. THE STRUCTURAL CONDITION OF THE DWELLING DEMANDS DEMOLITION, OR THE BUILDING MUST BE REPLACED AS A CONSEQUENCE OF MAJOR NECESSARY DEVELOPMENT WORKS;

2. IT CAN BE PROVED THAT THE RESIDENTIAL USE OF THE DWELLING HAS NOT BEEN ABANDONED;

3. THE EXISTING DWELLING HAS NO ARCHAEOLOGICAL, ARCHITECTURAL OR HISTORIC MERIT;

4. THE SITING, SCALE, FORM, MATERIALS AND DETAILS, OF THE PROPOSED DWELLING WOULD PRESERVE OR ENHANCE THE LANDSCAPE SETTING;

5. THE PROPOSAL IS SYMPATHETIC TO THE RURAL CHARACTER OF ITS SURROUNDINGS WHILST INCORPORATING SATISFACTORY PROVISION FOR SERVICES, ACCESS AND PARKING, AND AMENITY SPACE;

6. ANY FEATURES OF ARCHAEOLOGICAL INTEREST IN THE IMMEDIATE LOCALITY ARE PROPERLY SAFEGUARDED; AND
7. HABITATS AND SPECIES OF IMPORTANCE TO BIODIVERSITY ARE SAFEGUARDED.

3.5.24. Policy EV8 is designed to strictly control replacement dwellings in the countryside by ensuring that existing dwellings are not demolished and rebuilt unless certain criteria merit it. For example, sometimes the replacement of existing dwellings in the countryside is necessary for new road or railway construction, or to facilitate urban or rural regeneration. In other instances, the fabric of the existing dwelling may have decayed beyond the point where it can be economically rehabilitated, but the dwelling has nevertheless not been abandoned. The Policy is also necessary to prevent what are clearly ‘ruinous’ or ‘abandoned’ and derelict former dwellings or buildings from being classed as existing structures worthy of rehabilitation. However, replacement of suitable existing dwellings by buildings which incorporate materials which are not sympathetic with local and traditional building styles, and/or whose bulk and design are incompatible with that of former dwellings will not be permitted by the Council. Proposed developments will, also, be expected to take full account of the Council’s Supplementary Planning Guidance - Dwellings and Domestic Scale Buildings.

3.5.25.The County Borough does not contain any countryside which is statutorily designated as being within a ‘National Park’ or an ‘Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty’. Similarly, it has no designated ‘Environmentally Sensitive Areas’, but it does include the western part of the designated ‘Glamorgan Heritage Coast’, a sizeable part of the ‘Strategic Coalfield Plateau and its associated valley sides’ (which has been recognised as being a landscape of sub-regional importance to South East Wales), and several locally important ‘Landscape Conservation Areas’ which were identified in the former Local Plan. Although the designation of the Heritage Coast does not directly affect that area’s status in planning terms, the features which contributed to its designation have importance and are therefore reflected in the policies of this Plan. (See Policy EV9 below, also refer to next section 3.7 of the Plan which deals with ‘Coastal Zone Planning and Management’).

3.5.26. Local planning authorities are advised that they should also maintain or extend ‘local countryside designations’ in their UDPs over those areas where they have good reason to believe that ‘normal planning policies’ would be insufficient to provide for their necessary protection. The UDP should clearly indicate why those areas are important and what features require the additional protection of further planning policies. Therefore:-

3.5.27. DEVELOPMENT IN NATIONALLY IMPORTANT LANDSCAPES

POLICY EV9

DEVELOPMENT WHICH WOULD ADVERSELY AFFECT, OR WOULD BE VISUALLY INTRUSIVE UPON, THE NATURAL BEAUTY OF THE GLAMORGAN HERITAGE COAST WILL NOT BE PERMITTED.

3.5.28. The landscape associated with the Glamorgan Heritage Coast is important within the national context and covers one of the finest stretches of undeveloped coast in England and Wales. As such it occupies the highest tier of landscapes of importance in the County Borough. Therefore, it merits a very high degree of protection in planning policy. Hence, development which is likely to have a detrimental impact on the landscape of the area, will only be permissible under the most exceptional of planning circumstances, and then only if it is of such importance to the national interest that the preservation of the undeveloped natural beauty of these areas is outweighed, and there is indisputable evidence that there are no alternative sites elsewhere which can otherwise accommodate the proposal.

3.5.29. DEVELOPMENT IN ‘SPECIAL LANDSCAPE AREAS’

POLICY EV10

DEVELOPMENT WHICH ADVERSELY AFFECTS THE FOLLOWING ‘SPECIAL LANDSCAPE AREAS’ OF THE COUNTY BOROUGH:-

1. THE STRATEGIC COALFIELD PLATEAU AND ITS ASSOCIATED VALLEY SIDES; AND

2. LANDSCAPE CONSERVATION AREAS;

WILL NOT BE FAVOURED.

3.5.30. ‘Special Landscape Areas’ are those which are important to the sub-regional and local character of South East Wales, or locally within the County Borough. Development within these areas will not be favoured unless adequate measures can be taken to reduce any adverse effects (which includes any relevant cumulative impact of the proposals) and/or visual intrusion posed by the proposals to minimum acceptable levels in planning terms. The extent of the ‘Strategic Coalfield Plateau and its associated valley sides’ in the County Borough is based on the findings of The South Wales Renewable Energy Study Landscape Assessment and Design Guidelines - Final Report (May 1994).

3.5.31. The ‘Landscape Conservation Areas’ are largely as designated in the former Local Plan, all of which were based on the findings of a systematic landscape survey which took into account each area’s intrinsic landscape character, i.e. the characteristics and features that make one landscape different from another, rather than those features which may elevate the assessment of one area over another. The UDP has re-assessed those previously adopted Landscape Conservation Areas, re-examined the previous assessments of the countryside of the County Borough upon which they were based, and has taken into account more recent landscape assessments and surveys undertaken since those designations were formerly adopted i.e. The Landscapes Working for Bridgend County Borough Strategy, together with assessments undertaken for its Countryside Strategy (approved 1998) and Integrated Action Programme (under review 1999), and forthcoming Local Biodiversity Action Plan.

3.5.32. Table ENV1 lists the ‘Landscape Conservation Areas’ which are designated in the UDP. The distinctive characteristics of the Areas stem from their geology, drainage, soils and vegetation which have been altered by man’s activities over the centuries. Care must be taken, however, if the general quality of the County Borough’s landscape is not to be prejudiced by intrusive developments. Of particular concern is the extension of existing built-up areas of settlements into sensitive tracts of countryside, the location of sporadic development, or visually damaging alterations to existing buildings in areas of high landscape quality. It is also important that the scale and character of the highway, rail, bridleway and footpath networks is protected where it contributes to local biodiversity and the general landscape of the countryside, e.g. rural lanes with their adjacent dry stone walling, older hedgerows and stiles. Other activities which need to be strictly controlled include afforestation schemes, power generation and its distribution network, transmission equipment (including telecommunications masts) and the activities of service providers of utilities. Policy EV10 will identify and assist in maintaining the diversity of landscape which is characteristic of the County Borough. The definition of ‘Landscape Conservation Areas’ in the County Borough can be expected to be amended at the review of the UDP as a result of applying the LANDMAP method of landscape assessment (see also para.3.9.17.).

TABLE ENV1
LANDSCAPE CONSERVATION AREAS IN BRIDGEND COUNTY BOROUGH

Source: Ogwr Borough Local Plan (*Denotes amended area, **Denotes new LCA).

3.6. Green Belts and Green Wedges

3.6.1. There are currently no ‘Green Belts’ designated in Wales, however, in 1997 the Government requested all Welsh Unitary Authorities to ‘give serious consideration’ to them, particularly in South East Wales; where it was considered that they could be an effective means of preventing urban sprawl, keep land permanently open, and prevent the coalescence of Cardiff and Newport. Green Belts have been in existence since the 1950’s in England and have been particularly successful in limiting urban sprawl in areas of major growth by applying a permanency of planning policy which has even restricted the infilling of settlements in those areas. In Wales, Planning Policy Wales (PPW) (2002) section 2.6 clearly indicates that Green Belts should be established through UDPs, which must justify the need for them, and demonstrate why normal planning and development control policies would not provide the necessary protection to those areas. They may not necessarily need to extend in a continuous band around an urban area. Where their designation is likely to affect more than one local authority, consultation will be necessary with all authorities likely to be affected.

3.6.2. The most important attributes of Green Belts are their permanence and their openness. Therefore, in respect of their permanence, they should be altered only in exceptional circumstances and be protected for a longer period than the current UDP period; in order to maintain their openness, the strict control over development in the countryside is augmented by a general presumption against development which is …..inappropriate in relation to the purposes of the designation. (PPW 2002 paras. 2.6.5, 2.6.14 and 2.6.18 refer).

3.6.3. The unitary authorities in South East Wales decided at an early stage that the issue of prospective ‘Green Belts’ was an appropriate matter to be considered through the South East Wales Strategic Planning Group, and an agreed way forward has been proposed in Volume 1 of the Strategic Planning Guidance for South East Wales (January 2000). It has been agreed by the constituent authorities that:-

.....the regional importance of Cardiff requires the strategic protection of a Green Belt but that other designations are more appropriate elsewhere in South East Wales. A package approach to anti-coalescence and landscape protection policies is therefore put forward. Areas of local importance are designated as ‘Green Wedges’ or ‘Special Landscape Areas’ and areas of strategic importance (to South East Wales) are designated as ‘Green Belt’. Designations are reinforced by ‘settlement limit’ and other policies as appropriate. To go beyond this would require a regional development strategy. (Para. 7.10 of Vol.1 of the Strategic Guidance refers).

3.6.4. There are therefore no ‘Green Belts’ designated in this UDP within Bridgend County Borough, however they are not ruled out in the longer term. The following anti-coalescence planning policies are therefore intended to complement the proposed strategic Green Belt around Cardiff, and to protect locally sensitive areas of countryside in the County Borough, and its neighbours, from inappropriate and visually intrusive developments.

3.6.5. DEVELOPMENT IN ‘GREEN WEDGES’

3.6.6. Protection of the integrity of individual settlements is a well-established principle of planning policy which the Council will continue to rigorously apply. Policy EV11 and the Proposals Map reinforces this by allocating certain areas of the County Borough as ‘Green Wedges’.

The designation of each ‘Green Wedge’ is based upon the following five objectives, which are consistent with the advice contained in PPW (2002) (section 2.6 refers):-

• To prevent the coalescence of settlements;
• To manage urban form through controlled expansion of urban areas;
• To assist in safeguarding the countryside from encroachment;
• To protect the setting of an urban area(s); and
• To assist in urban regeneration by encouraging the recycling of derelict and other urban land.

The reasons for the designation of each particular ‘Green Wedge’ in the County Borough, as listed under Policy EV11, is additionally detailed in Table ENV2.

TABLE ENV2
PURPOSES OF GREEN WEDGE DESIGNATIONS IN BRIDGEND COUNTY BOROUGH

3.6.7. ‘Green Wedges’ have an important function to prevent the coalescence of settlements by maintaining an open area of countryside between them, and thereby will afford a higher degree of protection for that land which lies beyond the designated settlement boundaries. The areas identified under Policy EV11 are known to have been subject to past pressures for inappropriate development, which would have seriously prejudiced the Council’s objectives (above), and which would have seriously eroded the essential openness of the land areas concerned. Therefore, a development proposal within a designated ‘Green Wedge’ will be considered to be inappropriate in relation to the purpose of its designation unless it is for the following purposes:-

• Justified by agricultural or forestry needs;
• Provides essential facilities for outdoor sport and recreation, cemeteries, and other uses which maintain the openness of the ‘Green Wedge’ and do not thereby conflict with the purposes of including land within its designation;
• Provides for the strictly limited extension, alteration or replacement of existing dwellings in accordance with Policies EV1, EV6, EV7 and EV8 of the UDP; or
• Contributes to small-scale diversification within existing farm complexes where this is run as part of the farm business.

3.6.8. There may be further instances where the re-use of buildings in a designated ‘Green Wedge’ could be considered to be appropriate development provided that the proposed use(s) will not in the opinion of the local planning authority have a materially greater impact on the openness of the ‘Green Wedge’, nor conflict with the purposes of its designation. However, it is emphasised that strict control will be maintained by the local planning authority over any future extension and/or alteration of such proposals which it permits, or any use of land associated with the reused building(s).

3.6.9. Any other forms of development will be considered to be ‘inappropriate development’ unless it maintains the openness of the ‘Green Wedge’ and will not conflict with the purposes of its designation. ‘Inappropriate development’ may only rarely be granted planning permission in the most exceptional of circumstances, i.e. where other material considerations substantially outweigh the harm which that development would be expected to have on the designated ‘Green Wedge’.

3.6.10. DEVELOPMENT OUTSIDE DESIGNATED SETTLEMENT BOUNDARIES

3.6.11. As a corollary to Policy EV11, and to provide further guidance to Policies H3 and H4 in relation to development within designated settlements, Policy EV12 and the Proposals Map define settlement boundaries around all of the designated settlements in the County Borough. Such boundaries were included around ‘smaller settlements’ only in the former Local Plan after it was subject to independent scrutiny at its Local Plan Inquiry, and as many of these have subsequently stood the test of Section 78 Appeals, the Council considers them to remain soundly based on environmental and planning grounds. Notwithstanding this, all settlement boundaries have been reviewed during UDP preparation, and some amendments have been made to certain ‘smaller settlement’ boundaries in this Plan. Following further independent scrutiny at the UDP Inquiry, settlement boundaries are now defined around all designated settlements in the UDP, i.e. both ‘main’ and ‘smaller settlements’. Development of the ‘main’ and ‘smaller settlements’ of the County Borough will generally be restricted to those sites which lie within the relevant settlement boundaries unless justified under Policy EV1 and other relevant Policies of the Plan.

3.6.12. RIBBON OR SPORADIC DEVELOPMENT

POLICY EV13

THE EXTENSION OF RIBBON AND/OR SPORADIC DEVELOPMENT OR ITS INTENSIFICATION WITHIN, OR SURROUNDING, ISOLATED POCKETS OF DEVELOPMENT IN THE COUNTRYSIDE WILL NOT BE PERMITTED.

3.6.13. Policies EV12, H3 and H4 designate those settlements of the County Borough which the Council considers can accommodate ‘infill’, ‘windfall’ or ‘limited rounding-off’ development at a scale appropriate to the designated settlement’s individual size, character, and availability of community facilities or utility services. The Council considers that the character of all other hamlets or isolated pockets of development in the countryside should be protected by strict control over development. Accordingly, the extension of sporadic development, or its intensification there, is considered to be particularly undesirable, and unsustainable; it will cause harm to the character of the built environment and countryside, and will therefore be firmly resisted by the Council under Policy EV13.

3.7. Coastal Zone Planning and Management

3.7.1. The coastline of Wales, and its off-shore marine environment, is acknowledged to be a valuable resource which must be cherished for future generations, therefore, its planning and management must be co-ordinated to be effective. To this end, the former Welsh Office set up a Welsh Coastal Forum in 1997 with a wide remit. The County Borough