Transcript

Good morning, Councillors and friends, welcome to the Planning Committee meeting on Thursday 24 April 2024. I am Councillor Tassilevens, Chair of Command and Chair County Council's Planning Committee. This is a multi-location meeting with an option to meet in person in the Chamber or remotely. Before proceeding today, I have to remind everyone present that the proceedings of today's meeting are being filmed live and may be kept on the Council's internet site as an archive record of the meeting. The images and sound recording may also be used for training purposes within the Council. Members of the public watching the meeting via the English language website will receive Welsh to English simultaneous interpretation automatically. Members and guests who have joined through Zoom who wish to receive simultaneous interpretation from Welsh to English should click on the interpreter symbol at the bottom of the screen and then choose English. Those attending in person should use the interpretation device and headphones provided in the Chamber. I should remind all members and officers that they should speak on an item only after I invite them to speak and after activating your microphone. This will allow discussions to be seamlessly broadcasted. Please remember to mute after speaking. Furthermore, could I ask the committee members who are in attendance remotely to have their cameras on for the duration of the meeting and not just when speaking. If remote members lose connection during the live meeting, please make every attempt to reconnect. However, the meeting will continue so long as it is covered. There is no expected fire alarm today, but if the alarm does sound, this will not be a test and the appropriate fire exit signs should be followed if attending physically. We will now move on to the agenda before us today. And the first item being apologies for absence and we received an apology, Councillor Peter Cooper and Councillor Dorian Phillips and Councillor Jean Lewis will be arriving a little bit later on. The second item declaration of personal interest and I will now ask our solicitor to read this. Thank you. You all have a responsibility under the code of conduct to verbally declare any person interest you may have in relation to any item appearing on the agenda today. Please ensure that you will cleanly indicate to which agenda item you have a person interest in and the specific nature of interest to be disclosed and whether or not you will be withdrawing from the meeting into consideration of that item. If your interest is prejudicial, you will have to leave the meeting. For remote attendees, the Democratic Services Officer will place you in the virtual lobby and invite you back to the meeting once the debate has concluded. You should not use the rejoin meeting button. If an interest has not been declared at the start, it becomes known during discussions. It will be needed to be declared when that interest becomes apparent. You will need to repeat your declaration of personal interest at the beginning of the relevant item on the agenda as well as indicating whether or not you will be leaving the meeting during consideration of that item. You will also need to indicate whether you have been granted a dispensation by the Standards Committee or the Monter officer to speak or vote or both in respect of any item on the agenda. I would also like to take this opportunity to remind you of your general obligations under the Planning Code of Conduct which are to approach each planning application with an open mind, carefully weigh up all the relevant planning issues before making the decision, make decisions purely on the grounds in the public interest and on the planning merits of each case, give reasons justifications for your decisions and resolutions and finally have regard to any relevant advice from the Council's legal and planning officers. Thank you, Steve. Can members please raise your hand if you wish to declare an interest? I can't see any hands up. So we will proceed to agenda item 3 and we will begin this morning with PL 06623 and it reads as follows and it's on page 36 of your pack. As a public house and the construction of the current residential component, component 2 self-contained two bedroom houses are easily in San Diego and then we now are at the shore. And I'll now turn to the Planning Officer. Thank you, Chair. My name is Helen Rice. I'm a Senior Development Management Officer. So the application before us relates to an existing public house in the village of San Len, just to the north of Chander Lo. Just before I go into the presentation, members may remember this application was to be discussed at our last Planning Committee but following the submission of late correspondence, the application was deferred in order for officers to have the opportunity to fully consider the late correspondence that had been received prior to that Planning Committee. So that's the report before you now include the update following that submission of that correspondence. And I'll also, during the presentation, draw your attention to a dendom that has also been prepared for you. We're going back to the presentation. So the application site is located within the village of Salem, which is just to the north of the settlement of Chander Lo, which is voucher to the south. So Salem is defined as a settlement within the local development plan and you can see the outline of that outline in black effectively on this drawing here. So that's the extent of the village which extends to around 60 properties within that village itself. But the village is also viewed within the local development plan as part of the sustainable community associated with Chander Lo itself and the intervening villages in that area. So the application site is located here, so it's the Angelin perm located here. In the report it mentions other sort of community facilities in the village which is a chapel and a community hall. The community hall for your purposes is located here and there's a chapel located just to the north of the application site. There's no other facilities then in the village itself. So this is a zoomed in version of the slide I've just shown you. So this is the extent of the public house at the present surrounded by residential properties on the chapel to the north and then vacant land to the west. An aerial view again of the property itself along with a car park area associated with the public house and then the surrounding residential properties in the vicinity. That's the chapel I've mentioned and the vacant parcel of land to the west. So in terms of the location plan that was submitted with the application, this indicates the extent of the application site boundary which is effectively the area associated with the public house and the car park area. And in terms of the proposals it's intended to effectively cease use of the property as a public house and change it into two dwellings. There is an existing flat within the public house itself on the first floor so this proposal would result in effect a net increase of one additional dwelling as part of the proposal. So in terms of the block plan that's been presented it's effectively creating one dwelling by splitting the existing building in two effectively creating one dwelling here with a private garden and then a further dwelling here with again a further private garden there. So these are the existing elevations of the property itself and then in terms of the proposals there will be some external changes and extensions to the property to effectively create two separate dwellings. So at the moment this is all the existing public house. I understand that this is probably the original public house which has been extended over a period of years and the proposal is to change principally this area here to create that second dwelling. So the split between the two would be there. So you can see there's a clear delineation between one dwelling and the other dwelling as proposed. So in terms of the existing layout this is the ground floor of the public house at the moment how it was set out. A bar area, kitchen area and bar and seating area and then on the upper floor is the residential existing residential use which comprises a four bedroom and flatter unit in effect. So as I mentioned the intention is to split the property into two. So you'd have two story dwellings and the pink indicates that the split in effect or the pink on the blue indicates the split between the two properties. So you'd have a ground floor here for one unit and the first floor with two bedrooms here on the first floor. It's a two bedroom unit there and then the same here two bedroom units with a kitchen dining, sitting room and two bedrooms on the upper floor. So to give you an idea of the site and the surroundings this is a view of the public house at present. As I mentioned that I understand is the original sort of public house which has been extended over a period of years and you can see there is a split there effectively now. So this would be one dwelling and then the other dwelling would be this section here albeit amended slightly. And this is a view again looking from the other side of the property which fronts onto the main road that leads through the village itself. Again this is a view of the chapel just to the north of the site and then residential properties beyond with the car parking areas of the existing access effectively is via this side road leading into the public car park. This is a view of the amenity space that would be afforded to one of the properties here with neighbouring residential properties here and then a view from within the car park area looking back towards the side elevation of the existing public house and again a further view of the rear elevations and existing car parking spaces. So these areas this area here would be fenced off to create an amenity space for that dwelling. Then a view from within the car park area which is whilst within the red line there is no proposals as part of this application to develop this area. So the residential amenity space afforded to the dwellings would finish an effect along here but nevertheless this gives you an idea of the surrounding residential properties within the area itself. Again a view back onto that what was the pub garden in effect that will be created for the amenity space for one of the dwellings. Again a further view of the, excuse me, the rear elevation of the public house. This is a view then looking upwards north from the village and the community hall I mentioned earlier is located along this road here. So I'm turning to the assessment of the application. Evidently the site is within a settlement boundary so there is a general acceptance of development within settlement boundaries. However we acknowledge that this proposal will result in the loss of what was classed as a community facility. There is a policy in our local development plan, policy RTH which seeks to ensure that where there is generally pressure at the moment for the loss of community facilities but regard is given to the availability of any other community serving that village or the community and also to consider whether there is opportunities for the service provided now could be replaced within existing facilities to be remained. So that this application has been principally assessed against that policy. The public house has been previously a very successful public house but in more recent years has had a period of being closed and has gone through a number of different managers who have tried to sustain it for the future. There's been some periods as I understand it of closure of, in some situations for about four years until the applicants took it on and attempts have been made by various different managers to try and make a living out of the public house. We have received a number of objections from local residents which is understandable when we have applications of this nature and we've considered all of those objections principally the loss of this public house for the local community and in balancing and assessing that loss we have to consider what attempts have been made to seek to sustain this facility within the village. The applicants has provided extensive information about the attempts that have been made. It includes assessments by previous managers who claim that whilst they were previous where the public house is busy it was essentially unviable to carry on given the small nature of the village itself and the effectively the need to rely on people outside to actually come to the public house and to effectively run it successfully. However we are aware that there is a community group that was set up back in 2022 with aspirations to purchase the public house and run it as a community pub. However as I understand it even though set up in 2022 there wasn't an approach made until 2024. So it's been quite a period of time that the applicants had to effectively withstand the lack of financial income coming from the public house to effectively run it variably. There isn't at the moment when we previously had this committee there was mentioned that there was an application for a grant to purchase the public house being undertaken by the local community group. Since that previous application that was considered by planning, we were going to consider it a planning committee. It's now been confirmed that that application for grant has been unsuccessful. So at the moment there is no legal or any sort of firm offer on the table to purchase the public house and at the moment there is no reasonable prospect of that actually happening in terms of a timescale or anything on that nature. It is also worthy to note that even the grant that was applied for was substantially low in comparison to the verbal agreement in terms of the price for the actual property itself. So even if the grant had been successful it remained to be highly unlikely that it was sufficient to purchase the actual public house itself. So we have to balance effectively the aspirations of the local community against obviously the situation that the applicant has found himself in having marketed the property for a because a drop average of time really is 10 to 20 when it's closure. So it has been marketing on social media. It has had a full sale sign on the door and there's not been any realistic firm offers that have been submitted on the property itself. We do also balance the fact that there are other community facilities within the village in the form of the chapel and the community hall that does provide an opportunity for community members to gather and socialise in the same manner that they would in a public house. We also consider the policy requirement of policy RTH to consider the sustainable community that this community is part of which includes Shandayeloa and other villages within the area and evidently there are various community facilities within the town of Shandayeloa as well. So having balanced all those considerations we've come to the conclusion that whilst regrettably the loss of a pub is something that is coming up quite often on balance given the availability of other community facilities and the attempts that have been made to reliably run the pub that we are on balance accepting of the situation in this particular circumstance. We are aware and as I've mentioned we have got an addendum before you for the objections that have been raised. These are quite set out in the reports before you. I don't intend on going through them in detail but the majority is in relation to the principle of the loss of that community pub. There are other concerns that have been raised in terms of loss of privacy but again having considered that having regard to the proximity of the existing public house and the fact that what is being proposed is not necessarily going to result in development being any closer to existing properties than it already is. We do not consider that the application would give rise to privacy concerns and given the nature of the proposals in terms of character and appearance in terms of the changes again as mentioned the changes proposed and considered to have any detrimental impacts upon the character and appearance of the actual property itself. There were considerations about the phosphate side of things because the site is within the phosphate catchment area. However because of the nature of this application being in effect the creation of two dwellings from a public house and an existing dwelling it was considered that the amount of phosphorous generated by this development would be no different to the existing position. So again our planning colleges have revealed that situation and have come to a conclusion that the development would unlikely have a significant effect on the river to a phosphate catchment area. There was mentioned in the objections as well about the need for affordable housing within the village. This application it would result in the creation of one additional dwelling and that would trigger a financial contribution towards affordable housing as part of a section 106. So that is something that we would be looking for in the event the planning commission is to be granted. So in effect what the resolution before you is an application, a recommendation to approve subject to a section 106 to secure those affordable housing contributions. Thank you. Thank you Helen. We have two speakers. Mrs. Sally Newell and Mr. Kevin Nutt. So Miss Newell you have up to five minutes to address the committee. Thank you. Thank you. Good morning everyone. I am a member of the community council but I am speaking today just as a resident of Sally. Firstly I wanted to raise something that was in one of the previous communications about the community hall. The fact that obviously we have got a community hall seems to negate the fact that we need a public house or another meeting place. I mean the two should run happily hand in hand and it was reported that the community hall sells alcohol when in fact it doesn't. The hall does not have a licence to sell alcohol and with its historic links to the chapel it will not apply for one. It did on one previous occasion have holder 10's licence for one single event and that licensee was on the premises for that event. And whilst I am talking about the chapel I just want to mention that when the for sale signs were put up on the angel doors the car park and surrounding land was fenced off. Prior to that and for as long ago as anyone can remember chapel goers had been able to use the car park when they attended the chapel. The chapel itself is on a very very narrow street. There is no other parking available to them and since the fencing and padlock were put in they have been unable to use it. And as a resident I believe that a full cross section of the community would go to the angel to socialise as they have done for many many years. It would continue to be an important meeting point as public houses are in any rural village. For people including me the fact that the village had a public house was a big draw when I moved into Salem in 2020. And I have never been more grateful for that pub than I was in 2021 when still in the grip of Covid the pub was acting as a distribution hub for provisions and meals. And I was diagnosed with cancer six months of chemotherapy it was tough but I was able to get a ready-made meal nutritious meal from the public house when I didn't feel I could cook myself. So we actually want the public house not just to be used as a public house we want it to be used as a hub. A hub for a small shop and for provisions for the sorts of things that I have just mentioned. I also want to pick up a point that was on Kevin's communication which I am assuming you have all read. And it was about the relating to the proximity to Tandilo. We are close roughly three and a half miles but we do have a large elderly and infirm population in the village and they are unable to drive many of them. And there are only three buses a week from Salem so realistically that isn't an option. And one final point research carried out by Oxford University revealed that people with a good public house close to where they live are significantly happier and have more friends. Thank you.

Thank you, Mrs. Newell. We will now turn to Mr. Nutte. You also have up to five minutes to address the committee. Thank you. Thank you. This morning make representations to focus not on personal grievance or emotion but on what I have come to view as deficiencies and omissions in the reports and packed before you which centre on policy non-compliance, absence of relevant considerations or insufficient waiting, attention or focus clearly required by relevant policies and commissions on local development plan. I make note of criticism. I simply make observations and recommendations. I believe this application should not have been recommended for approval in its present state. And the reason for that is set out fully in my letter and I will focus on the key points. The first point is that privacy impact in the report does not consider the eastward direction from the pub at all. The photograph we have seen today shows no photographs clearly demonstrating an inward looking towards the pub from any direction and certainly not from the eastward direction where I personally live and I overlook directly the rear of the pub. So I am going to be adversely impacted and more importantly because I sit at a high elevation, those residing in the converted weddings will actually have their privacy worse impact to them myself. The second point I would like to draw attention to is RT8 paragraph 6 434 which reads marketing of the premises for the purposes of this policy can be defined as advertising with an appropriate industry publication or where appropriate through local estate agents over a reasonable period. I am not aware and do not believe the applicant has actually presented any evidence to support it. He has implied with that. We have heard reference to social media. We have seen a small sign on a B road outside the pub. If you take Carmel, a recent process undergoing temple bar in, they were clearly an extended advertising campaign through Sydney Phillips and co who are reputable notes specialists in this area, particularly in this particular region, similarly with Christian businesses. So I would advocate that there has not been full compliance with that aspect of the policy. Furthermore, the applicant has, over the duration for whatever reason, significantly negatively impacted his prospects for sale or reletting by auctioning off all the fixtures and fittings and kitchen equipment making it far less attractive to an incomeer. My third point is viability. There has been lots of said about that but frankly that is touched on very circumspectly. There is significant fundraising ongoing and ongoing. Yes, one grant has failed but two more grants are in application of a far more substantial fund, predominantly the COF fund which is undergoing preparation supported by Compass and the Plunkett Foundation. 15,000 pounds have been raised in the opening of pledges this week in three days. Kevin Campbell is now coming behind it. I will send a member and he is meeting with us to come behind this campaign. Our reach goes well beyond that. And because of its previous reputation and its location. And one of the other points, key points I would make is the planning officer's report on the considerations concentrates early on Salem. Salem always has had a very large agricultural hinterland of community which serves through Tetali, across the Manadilo and a much larger area. And those have not been considered in the report. It is simply focused on 63 dwellings within Salem. That is a misrepresentation of the layout of our geography and the pull of the village. And also, I would say that what I do is to get into a veracity of arguments or representations. There is an incorrect statement made here today which engagement with the applicant being from 2024. We have recorded communications and engagement with the applicant since 2022. And it is a matter of fact and record that we can evidence quite clearly. In my representation I have gone through the holy trinity of the essence of Welsh communities in my letter. I speak not as a well spoken Englishman but I speak as the grandson of a four generation minus from the southeast Wales where my grandmother was a parishion of council and a Welsh Baptist. My grandfather was a minor and a publican. I have returned to Wales to retire because of my heritage. And I would please that if you have any doubt in your minds whatsoever about the deficiencies that I have highlighted in the representations, if you look at the impact on the wider community in all aspects represented by the objection letters and you consider the loss of this at what is iconic site which we want to preserve with 150 year heritage, then please refuse this application or at least defer it for further decision until the matters that I have raised as a matter of non compliance with policy and plans have been dealt with and probably considered. Thank you, Chair. Thank you all. Welcome, Mr. Nutt. Thank you, Mr. Nutt. Also in attendance we have the applicants agent, Mr. Paul James, and you also have up to five minutes to address the committee. Thank you. I am actually the applicant, not my agent, so I am Paul James. Thank you for inviting me along today to speak. I do appreciate it. Just touching on one or two things that the last two people have spoken about, Mr. Nutt, I really cannot see his point about privacy. His property lies uphill of the pub. The current residential flat overlooks the car park as to his windows. The ground floor of the flat is almost out of sight from his property. I just can't see his point there, and quite frankly, I think he'd be a lot worse off if the pub were opened and who knows who the occupant might be. It could be the health angels for all I know. So I disagree with him there. The proximity to Clondylo, well, I think it's fair to say if you buy a house in Salom, you know where it is, and it's as simple as that. The Clondylo is fairly close by. I would have nipped out there for provisions. If I ran out on lemons or bread, I'd nipped out on the co-op. It wasn't a problem. I do accept that some people haven't got availability of transport, but that would always be the case. And it doesn't really get away from the fact that the pub wasn't a viable proposal to run. We couldn't get anyone to run it. I tried it twice myself with my wife. As far as the property being, the objectives seem to want to revoke the wartime spirit during COVID, and I'm sure it was a useful communal place, but I don't doubt for a moment that the village hall would have quickly stepped up to that role and actually enjoyed it. They could easily have put up a pop-up kitchen there, but just by having a couple of pieces of equipment. So I don't accept that the overall have been at the loss with no one to talk to during COVID. They have a perfectly good facility up the road. There's a couple of points that I'd like to refer to in the planning report. Also, selling off the fixtures and fittings, well, we'd had the pub to let us get for a considerable period of time. Any property which is empty starts to go moldy, starts to get damp, and that goes for the fixtures of fittings as well. So the chairs were getting mildew on them. It was really a sorry site, the place smelled the damp, and we could see it rapidly going downhill. There's also a much more chance of a break-in or burglary if you've got thousands of pounds worth of equipment there. So that was the reason we sold the stuff. Incidentally, Salem got limited, whether they performed them or the organisation that was formed, had every opportunity to phone me up at any time. If they had, I would happily talk to them about leasing the pub with an option to purchase or anything. They didn't even ring me. I didn't even know they existed. Yet they stood by silently and watched the contents of that pub be sold by an option. When I finally met them, that was one of the first things I said to them was, Where have you been? They couldn't really answer that. So I think they've really let themselves down there. The objections, there have been 20 of them, and quite frankly, they are an orchestrated objection. They might as well be a petition because they are just a well-narrated page or two by someone who has a bit of knowledge in the planning system and simply cut and pasted and photocopied with a signature on the bottom. As far as I'm concerned, it's little more than a petition. I could be honest, if I were living in Salem and someone said, Do you want the pub open or shut? I would definitely want it open. But when you're behind the bar and you have to pay the bills, it's a different story, especially when there are absolutely no customers in the pub with all the lights on, two chefs out the back, two barmates standing there with twiddling their thumbs and wiping clean tables. It's a so destroying experience. In the last Tennessee, the lady there did very well, but she was reduced to opening Thursday nights to Sunday afternoons. So really, the pub was only running on 50% capacity at any time towards the end of its opening time. The office's report also, and it's been touched on, there is a significant doubt that any funding will come forward. They've had one turned down. We don't know why, but it says to me that it wasn't of sufficient merit. So there's nothing to say that the other ones will be. So going to go into that, when we bought the angel, it had been closed for about four or five years. We carried out a substantial refurbishment of the pub and furnished it to a high standard. We've seen about seven different occupiers over a period of eight years try and fail to make the pub work. The only thing they all had in common was they said there's not enough customers. It's as simple as that. And they failed to see where some of them go. I think they're going to get their customers from, because they're just aren't any. The last tenant that was there was paying £230 a week in rent. This is for a large four bedroom flat with ensuite bathrooms throughout, a kitchen, an office upstairs, a massive fully furnished pub, a commercial kitchen, down to the last knife and fork, a furnished beer garden. It had absolutely everything. And quite frankly, for £230, you can't even hire a transit van for a week, yet they had all that. Despite that peppercorn rent, they couldn't make it work. We gave them that rent, 12,000 a year it works out to try to keep the angel open. We have tried everything to keep the angel open. I understand the feelings of all of these people. It is not viable. We won't do it. With a planning application to improve the angel providing extended restaurant and holiday accommodation failing due to the phosphate issue, we were left with an empty pub which we couldn't let, we couldn't sell, and we couldn't invest in to improve. So this brings us to where we are today. We are here today with a viable application which has been recommended for approval by the planning officers. Then in the 11th hour, Salomegar introduced themselves with very late submission a month ago. Why they left it so late, I don't know. And they caused this matter to be deferred. I respect the members' decision to defer it, as is their job to do so, to look into these matters. Salomegar comprised of a small number of people really, and not enough people to keep a pub like this going. They may have had pledges of, was it, £15,000? It was £9,000, I heard. Well, to be honest, I spent £10,000 on one oven. The carpet would cost £5,000. They're nowhere near, absolutely not within miles and miles and miles of raising enough money to buy this pub. If they think that the village had to pay for it all, they couldn't even be bothered to call down there for a drink. So, sorry to cut, you've had your five minutes. All right, can I just, can I just summarize? Yes, thank you. Thank you, please. Okay, I would refer you to a letter from Mark Weber, which he's managed to pub for six months. In his letter, he says, I remember you giving me a lift to Swansea train station and telling me to get rid of the angel and cut your losses. I told you it was a dead duck, and it was always going to be, I was right. I would not reopen the angel for all the tea in China personally, and in my opinion, anyone who does is definitely going to lose a lot of money. Salunga have no means to purchase this pub. They expect us to hold it in limbo indefinitely, and quite frankly, we can't afford to do that because of business rates because of lack of rent and because of the fact that commercial mortgage rates have risen, we are here today to ask for approval for this application. Thank you. Thank you very much, Mr. James. I've got an hour and a month ago. Thank you, Mr. James. We now have the local member, Councillor Fiona Walters, and you also have up to five minutes to address the committee. Committee and Planning Officers. As Councillor for Manadayla and Salem Ward, I am here today to support the local community, who are fighting to save the village public house for Salem and the wider community of Tali, Comdi, Kapolei, Sak and Manadayla. With planning application to change the use of the angel in public house to two dwellings, the public house will be lost to the community forever. And this is the reason that the community at Salem have come together and formed a group, Salem Gar Limited, to raise funds to purchase the public house and have a community owned establishment. The group are committed and are working with Compass Amplanched Foundation, who have significant experience and expertise in community pub projects. Fund raising is underway and the group are setting up a community benefit society with community ownership. A community share pledge to save the angel in has also been launched. The angel in is central to the community and has been a vital gathering place for generations past and present and is the only public house within walking distance of Salem Village. Historically, the angel in had an excellent reputation for quality dining and fine nails. This project gives an opportunity to bring back the public house for the benefit of the village and wider community with the aim to include provisions of a shop, coffee, internet access and IT teaching, addressing the issues of loneliness, isolation, mental health and well-being. I kindly ask the planning committee to reconsider this application, listen to the voices of the local community and refuse this planning application. Do you have any other questions? Thank you, Councillor Wolters, and thank you for keeping to time. I'll now open it up for discussion. So anyone on the committee would like to comment? Or is there a recommendation? Councillor Monsell-Charles. Thank you for that introduction to this application. And after hearing both sides, I realise the two points that have been conveyed to us and two of them are valid. May I firstly ask, if we permitted turning the angel into two homes today, there would still be an opportunity for the local community to buy this place in order to create it into a community hub. So would adapting the place and for it to become a community hub, would that create any problems in terms of planning? I wouldn't have thought so, but can I please have confirmation of that, please? In terms of adapting this into two homes, would access from the highway into these two homes? I'm not sure that would be possible, but could I please have confirmation of that point as well? If not, I'd believe that a small road behind the homes would be provided for these two households and permission for the furthest home you'd have to pass the first one. In terms of the parking ground, there's a big space behind this area, and I've parked there a number of times myself in the past for services, also for events taking place in the chapel. Does the chapel have ownership of that parcel of land, or is it just an agreement between the angel's owner and the chapel, that permission that was given to park in that area? It was noted that it's been fenced off relatively recently. So I believe that the chapel does not have any ownership of that space, and there is quite a lot of space behind this building. So those are the questions that I have. Thank you. Thank you, Councillor Charles, Councillor Denise Owen. Dioca, there is. Just one question. With regard to the public funding, how much has been raised towards purchasing the property? Do you all do well sound about it? Thank you. I can't see any further hands up. So, Councillor Siwalen. I wanted to ask about when properties are advertised on the open market. As the policy point the object mentioned, is there a specified method for that? Do you have to use an estate agent, or can you stick a sign outside, or what is the method that's defined in policy? You're looking for the land. Thank you, Councillor Arlen. I'll turn to the Planning Officer. So if I go back to Councillor Charles's points first. So in terms of, obviously, if planning permissions were to be granted today, it would still be available for the community to purchase the public house. It's a case that planning permission doesn't effectively change that it wouldn't prevent them from purchasing the public house. In terms of the access, it would be via the existing access into the car park area. So there's no creation of an additional new access proposed as part of this. And as set out in sort of the block plan that's been submitted, it would be a garage associated with one of the dwellings, which is accessed by the existing car parking entrance, and there would be a parking on street, well, off street within the existing car parking area for the other unit. In terms of the parking area, the wider parking area, there's no proposals associated with that area at the moment, other than the areas I showed you that would be fenced off to create the private amenity space. That car park area is within the ownership of the applicant. As far as I'm aware, there isn't any agreements in place for use by the chapel. I assume that was just a verbal agreement or just a general agreement between the applicants, but as I understand, the land is entirely within the applicant's ownership. In terms of the question from Councillor OWEN, regarding how much funding has already been raised, I'm not aware that any funding has been raised at the moment. The only information that I am aware of there was an application for a grant for around £225,000, which was £100,000 short of the asking price for that property. That was rejected, so whilst there may be other proposals for applying for grants in the process, there's nothing that we are aware of at the moment. At the moment, there is very limited prospect at the moment in terms of, despite evidently the aspirations of the local community to generate sufficient funds to purchase that property. When evidently we're looking at the application now, we have a duty to consider it based on the information that we have before us at this present time. In terms of the policy requirements about marketing, the policy only requires marketing where there isn't any alternative provision within the community. Or it does also ask us to look at the wider sustainable community, which includes Landerilo. Hence why we as officers have balanced the provision of facilities within that wider community to come to the conclusion that we have. It is a case of all reasonable attempts. There isn't necessarily a clearly defined process within the policy itself. Reasonable attempts can include obviously a state agents, but as I understand it, there was signage on the front door. There is social media is a great way of advertising properties for sale at the moment. And it has been unsafe or in excess of that 12-month period that normally is the case for these types of applications. So hopefully that's answered all those questions. Thank you. Thank you Helen, we have two hands up, Councillor Russell Sparks first, and then Councillor Kenner. Thank you Chair, I feel very sad this morning in terms of this situation. Very difficult issue for the community in terms of losing an amenity that's been there for a long time. But it also is clear from the report that a lot has been done, thank you Helen for a very detailed report. And I'd like to thank the objectors and also the applicant for attending. The applicant has explained in five minutes quite clearly his or the oil over the last eight years trying to run a successful business. And as a business owner myself it was a nightmare to hear that description. And I have full sympathy for him. I have also full sympathy for the residents who do not want to lose a pub. However, I cannot see any material considerations that are outside of what's been presented by the officers. And therefore I would like to propose that we accept the recommendation and approve this application. Thank you, Councillor Sparks. Thank you, Councillor Sparks. Do we have a seconder? I don't see anything material in front of us regarding the planning application. We could go against it to be perfectly honest. I have obviously sympathy as well. It's commercial premises at the end of the day and that's going to be taken into account as well. Thank you, Councillor Thomas. Councillor Ken Hawales. Thank you, Chair. Unfortunately, this is being replicated in a number of villages in rural Wales, where public houses are closing because there isn't as much demand for them as once existed. But what I wanted to ask, if we do permit this application today, would it then be possible, were this association actually raised the necessary funds and sufficient funds to actually buy the building, would it then be possible for them to reopen it as a public house? Thank you. Thank you, Ken. Just to explain to Mr. Nutt, he's asked to speak for the second time. Only once opponents are allowed to speak. Helen. In terms of, yes, obviously, if planning permissions granted as I responded to Councillor Charles's similar request, if the application was approved and implemented and therefore changed into a dwelling, they would know, again, if they wanted to change it back into a pub, they would require planning permission. But in the event, it has to be implemented in order to change the use, if you like. So even if when planning permission is granted, it doesn't mean that the public house use has disappeared. It only disappears when that planning permission is therefore implemented. So the local community could still purchase that property and run it as a public house. Thank you, Helen. Thank you, Helen. I can see your hand is still at Councillor Hawells. Yes, thank you for that answer. And so I agree with the recommendation that has been put before us so that we do permit this application. Thank you. Thank you, Councillor Hawells. So it's been proposed and seconded that we should accept the officer's recommendation. And if you agree, could you please show by raising your hand, please? Thank you. If you could please take your hands down. Anyone opposed? Any abstentions? One abstention? Or two? We have two abstentions. So by a vast majority, the application is permitted. May I also thank the speakers for coming in, and you're welcome to stay or to leave as you wish. So moving on to the next application before us today. And it's on page 46 in your pack. And it reads as follows, PL 06638. We'll turn to the officer for the report. John Thomas and the senior officer, and I will be presenting this application. I'd just like to highlight from members' attention. I'd just like to highlight from members' attention, an addendum item on this application. I'll go through the slides first, and then refer to the main report later on. So firstly, the first slide shows the application site edge to red. As you can see, it's located here within the village of Puerto Reed, which is a scattered settlement of some three main nodes. And again, this will become evident as I go through the further slides, I'm going through the application site. But the application site there is marked and annotated as red on the plan. It is worth noting, of course, that the site acts on to an unclassified road, which then leads onto the B road and is in close proximity with easy access onto the A48 trunk road, which is shown here in red to the north of the application site. The application site and village is also well related to the adjacent village of Chambarog, which is located some 800 metres from Puerto Reed village itself. It is also worth noting, there are a number of facilities within Puerto Reed. There is a shop and post office, there are two public houses, there is a hall, there's a play area, there's a playing field, there's a chapel. And also within easy walking distance in Chambarog, there are similar facilities, but most principally a primary school as well. This shows the application site in greater detail. As you can see, it's a really irregularly shaped parcel of land, which is presently put to pasture. You will note that there is an arm leading to the north, which was initially to take the surface water drainage from the site. As you will note from a subsequent application, which complements this, this has been extended, albeit with a separate application to a discharge point further down the Jason watercourse. Also, it illustrates here, of course, the surrounding facilities. There are two residential properties to the immediate west of the site. You've got the unclassified road to the immediate south, and then to the east, you've got some residential properties, public house and graveyard. And then to the northern extent at the end of this branch, then you've got one of the public house car parks as well. This shows it on an aerial photographic base, and as you can see, the site is presently put to pasture and to agricultural management. So as a result, it has low ecological value, albeit certain of the tree line boundaries to the site would have some ecological value, and those would be retained. It is worth noting, of course, as well evident in further photographs, there is a state stone wall along the boundary with the chapel. This now shows the layout of the site. It is worth noting that the site is not entirely level. The southern extent of the site where it borders on to the classified road is at a lower level. And you will note there, of course, there is a bend in between where the service water swales, or part of the swale areas, or mitigation for service water will be located. And again, those are on the lower levels, which may be subject to some flooding. The main site itself, where the main state road and the residential dwellings are proposed, then that is beyond the flood levels. It is worth noting that the ground arises from south to north, in a gentle manner, and the northern extent of the application site is almost on the Braille. The ground then falls away further to the north beyond the application site. This now shows some details of the service water drainage. As you can see with the layout, the layout is of a low density, some 26 units per hectare. The site extends in total to 1.6 hectares. The proposal then will accommodate some 42 residential units in total. Some four of those would be residential flats. 13 of the units would be open market properties, but the remainder then would be then affordable housing. And again, those will be subject to limitations as far as their value and occupancy in accordance with the authorities letting policy. So again, by the amounts to some 68% affordable within the site, whereby the LDP policy requirements is only for 13 vicinity. So again, in this proposal, there is a considerable provision of affordable housing on the application site. Now, we've got some idea of the foul drainage whereby again, the foul drainage from the site would be connected to the main sewer. And again, that is subject consultation, and you will note from the report that Welsh water has raised no objection to the application. Third parties have raised concerns relating to this, and we will be touching upon that later on in the report. Also, you will note there, of course, some of the surrounding features, such as the burial ground to the chapel, which is to the immediate right or east of the application site. This shows some details of the landscaping. Again, as previously mentioned, the site is presently brought to pasture and agricultural management whereby by introducing some features to enhance the ecological value and by the diversity of the site, there are clear environmental benefits from the development as proposed. You will also note, of course, highlighted here to the southern extent to the right hand side of the access route. You have the surface water swales, and also you have another third surface water swale to the northern extent of the application site. These then would be connected to a new dedicated clean water surface water sewer, which extends to the north or northeast extent of the application site. And again, as mentioned earlier, that is subject to separate application for an extension to that discharge point, which is application PL of the 07-100, which would be another application on the agenda. These now show elevations of certain of the properties. You will note then to the top left and also top right. These are the open market properties, some 13 in total, whereby the remainder then would be the affordable units. Mainly semi-attached or terrorist, as well as bungalows as well, which will again provide a mix of units to meet the affordability requirements for the area. You will note, of course, that the county council's housing and community's service is very supportive of this application, given the clear need for affordable dwellings in the area. This now shows the flooded element of the development, whereby there will be four residential flooded units within the site, which again satisfies the affordability requirements. We now have streets and scenarios showing the illustrations of how the site would look when developed, and please note to the bottom right, there is a key showing where these are taken from the proposed development. So this looks from the entrance onto the incarcerated road, up the state road, whereby again, you can see there the affordable bungalows to the right of the slide in front of you. And again, these are taken looking from east to west, again showing the bungalow developments along the southern front edge of the site, and also some idea of the swale surface water attenuation system. These are then taken more to looking north to south, so these are some of the semi-touched and detached units along the northern boundary of the site. And again, that would look out onto open pasture, and again retaining or forming a new hedge along that boundary. The next I show some of the facilities within the village, and again, you can note there the chapel, the shop post office and car garage, community hall play area, and sports field to public houses, as well as bus stops for public transport links. Again, this is only one note whereby again, part three comprises of three notes, and there are some further facilities elsewhere within the village. This is an extra from the development plan and the inset map, which shows both the read and the three notes. And again, you can clearly see the application site there marked as a housing allocation SC-33 oblique H3. So the site is allocated within the existing local development plan, which is the start to redevelopment plan for all planning applications within the county. The next slide then shows then other housing allocations within the vicinity of the site. And again, this is quite a broad view showing then part three and chambarog almost central. And again, you can see how sparse these allocations are within the vicinity. And members of the planning committee are only too aware of the dire need for affordable dwellings within such rural areas, whereby we often have applicants coming in. Saying there are no opportunities within local villages. However, this application important read provides a prime example of where that is being provided to satisfy that need. Now, we come to some photographs showing the application site and the surrounding in this instance, rural infrastructure. This is taken on the junction of the unclassified road and the B road through the village, whereby the application site is clearly shown there in mid-shot. You will note of course from the report that the existing classified road leading there almost central to the left of the photograph will be widened and footpath provided, linking up to the existing footway within the center of the village. So the application site is shown green there and you've got the almost central, the red bungalows, which are the adjacent properties to the immediate west. You should be also just a make out then the worm right farm itself, which is just the right of those bungalows in the distance on the brow, which will be some 75 metres from the nearest edge of the development site. This is taken along that road looking the opposite direction. You can see the two red brick bungalows there on the left. The application site is the feel there almost in mid-shot and again you can see the chapel and other properties beyond it. This is taken along the front edge of the application site almost where the access road would lead into it. And as you can see there is a hedge bank beyond the wide verge. There is a low level of ground before it rises gradually in a northerly direction. So again not the application site mid-shot. This again is almost on the front we're looking in the opposite direction in a west lead direction. You will note to create properties to the west you go properties opposite, which are on a slightly higher level. But again this does illustrate the existing road and the adequacy of the bird to provide for a footway. As well as the hedge, which will be cut in part to provide access into the site together with the necessary visibility requirements. This is now taken within the field. So you can see that the lower level there in front of you whereby that is where the surface water swales would be provided, two of them. And again you can just about make out that the ground rises then to your left or in a northerly direction. So again it isn't a flat site but the contours are very gentle. This is then looking down. So you're almost on the gentle brow of the applications looking back. So you've got the classified road. The access would be provided along the right hand side of that hedge as you view it. And again you can see the ground in managed agricultural pasture. Again this is looking almost in a west or southwest lead direction. So you can see then the existing neighboring properties for the application site. This is looking in a easterly direction. You can see the stone wall of the chapel and graveyard beyond which there are gravestones and the chapel is open. And the graveyard is in use. However given the proximity, given its village locations, we often have development adjacent to and surrounding places of worship and graveyards. Again this is looking almost on the top of the brow looking north. And again you see annotated in the location of where the proposal of this water pipe would discharge into the adjacent water course. And again that pipe would lead along the eastern boundary but to the right hand side as you view it just within the boundary hedge and lead up and then across slightly in a west lead direction. The location of the discharge point has been dictated in part by our colleagues within the sustainable urban drainage approval body team whereby they require that it be located at that location. That's why you have a further application for extension to the application site. This again is taken looking north to south and again you can see the gentle brow there of the northern extent of the application site and showing the contours on the application site itself. We've heard back onto the B road through the village and again you can see the junction there which would lead right which is the classified road leading over to the application site. You can see that there are pavements there along that side right hand side of the road which this development can easily leg up to together with compliance with the conditions in the recommendations. This is looking back along the B road to the village and again you can see just about in the distance one of the public houses while you can see the chapel and its facilities whereby also near to those public houses is the shop and post office as well. Again easily accessible by foot and it's also with noting of course that the primary school located in Chambarog is also easily accessible by foot from the application site at some one mile distance with a continuous pavement. What completes then the photographs on the slides for the application site will allow back to the main report. Most of the site description has already been covered as a sum of the proposal itself. I've already referred to the number of units being 42 dwelling units in total together with a breakdown which is provided in the main report. I've referred to the fact that the application occupies managed agricultural pasture at the present time. So again it is of low to more this biological or environmental quality. As far as the foul drainage I've provided with the foul drainage plan illustrating how it would connect and be serviced on the application site. It is worth highlighting of course that given its size and as an allocated site within the local development plan as a named site within it, there will be a requirement to provide contributions. And again you will note then that some 23,000 would be provided should find the information be granted under a legal agreement towards educational facilities within the relevant school catchment areas. Together with just over 93,500 towards improvement to the existing open and play areas within the village. And most significantly of course the fact that the 69% of the proposed dwellings would be affordable and that would also be secured under that agreement. As you will see from the consultation responses there have been some objections. You will note of course that the local member is not objection in principle to the development however has raised concerns regarding the number of units. And it is acknowledged that the indicative figure provided in the local development plan states some 27 units for the application site. However that is an indicative figure and does not fix the number of units. However given the number of 42 that equates to a density of some 26 units to the hectare which is a lower than average density within the site and significantly lower. So again the density is considered acceptable in this instance. Also the council raises concerns regarding public found drainage within the village. However you will note of course the Welsh water are not objecting to the application. And officers have secured that a member from Welsh water will be present in the office albeit electronically today to answer any bespoke questions on how drainage should members raise them. We will also note that our committee council have raised objection and again these very often reflect those of the local member and also of the parties referring to power drainage. Again flooding concerns, vehicular access and also raising concerns regarding the figure of affordable housing within the site at 69% which is higher than the policy requirement. But given the clear need for affordable dwellings within the location and the near vicinity again it's beneficial for the area. And also we have a colleague from the housing team with us today as well to support the need for affordable housing in the village as well. Also there are third party representations received on this application. Where by again given the considerable concerns regarding the development again there's an extensive array of objections again raising concerns over our drainage service water drainage flooding access, but also the Welsh language. And you will note of course that the area has a strong Welsh language presence. However, given the level of Welsh speakers within the area that does not trigger linguistic assessment to be undertaken at the application site. And again given that this has been challenged we have sought legal opinion through council on this point given the policy provisions. And again we are correct in interpretation that no Welsh language assessment is required. However such an assessment wasn't taken prior to adoption of the local development plan. So again that is a robust defense to that query. And again now as far as the appraisal itself I've touched upon most of that as far as the indicative allocation in the LDP and the allocation itself. Part 3 is a sustainable community within the plan areas. And again hence why the site has been allocated for residential purposes. I've touched upon the facilities which are very generous within the village to serve any extension to the number of units within the village part of the read. I've touched upon the density which is considered acceptable albeit higher than the indicative figure under the LDP. I mentioned that we have colleagues here from housing to answer questions if need be given the need for the affordable housing and the high percentage on the site. Again the pattern of development is not considered discordant with what we would accept with any residential development. Now as mentioned the density of 26th of the hectare is relatively low in comparison. And below the national average which in 2022 to 23 was 31 units to the hectare. This is 26 so markedly lower. As far as other services again I've referred to the school and again we have figures to show that the number of pupils within the village school of Chandarog in easy walking distance is below the capacity of the school. Similarly as far as secondary schools those have capacity to accept the significantly higher number of pupils so there are no constraints as far as educational provision in the locality. As far as the other services this is a relatively moderate scale of development which would not have an adverse impact upon those services. As far as mean it in previously concerns there's adequate separation distance of at least 21 meters or more which again more than satisfies our requirements which is the average requirement for such developments. As far as concerns upon the graveyard and adjacent kind of internments of people there again very often you find development in and around and again sell them would there be any conflict if at all given that such facilities are provided within the locations. As far as noise and the disturbance again there may be some disturbance during the construction phase however you will know to cause that there is a requirement for construction environmental management plan as part of one of the recommendations and our colleagues in public protection are happy with the proposed development. I've already touched upon the Welsh language implications as well as the policy requirements of the LDP namely policy SP 18 whereby again it is satisfied those requirements as well as the Welsh government's technical advice of 20 planning and the Welsh language as well as the council's own supplementary planning guidance on the Welsh language as well. And as far as concern raised by certain parties that the affordable units within this development may be occupied by people from outside the vicinity. Again we have statistics for similar development in cross for example with some 54 social rented properties were provided as well as in cross hands. And again in the cross example some 68 of the occupants live to within some five meters of the site whereby again some 83% of those occupants live within 12 miles of the village. And similarly then as far as across hands development, again some 65% of the occupants lived within five miles and 90% within 10 miles, which shows that the occupancy policies does comply to ensure occupancy by local people. As far as Fowler and surface water drainage again I've referred to that and Welsh water are not objecting and similarly natural resources we as I've confirmed their acceptance of submitted for consequence assessment for the site, which complies with the relevant technical advice not requirements. As far as the other concerns raised then relating to kind of surface water drainage. We have Welsh water with us today and we welcome there accommodating our requirements just in case there aren't bespoke requirements, but it's clear within the report that Welsh water are not objecting. And similarly then as far as highway safety given that a transport segment was provided the head of transport and highways also accepts that report. Finally, as far as the other matters raised by certain of the neighbors to the application site related to increased crime that is social behavior whereby that is not evidenced. There's nothing to suggest that that would happen, as is the case with the other schemes are referred to in close and close hands. As far as the additional burden on health facilities and education provisions, I've already touched that in my summary. As far as ecological impacts within the application site, as I've illustrated through the PowerPoint presentation, it is managed in agriculture with low ecological values. But the scheme does have landscaping scheme, which we should enhance that. It is noted that some of the ground is a grade 3A agricultural land, which is kind of categorized as best and was worshiped agricultural land and some B2, which is again is of good value. However, that does not trigger any consultation with Welsh government for the last loss of agricultural land. And again, it is on an allocated site whereby all those concerns were considered by the inspector prior to adoption of the LDP. As far as concerns relating to the boundary stone wall, again, that would be a civil matter, but the proposed scheme does not impinge upon that wall. Finally, then, as far as considered lack of consultation on this application, as you will note from the representations received, a lot of people have expressed opinion, but we have satisfied and started requirements in publicizing the application, both initially and subsequently following receipt of amended plans. And there have been some changes to the scheme from that originally submitted. And finally, the recommendation is to approve subjectual legal agreement safeguarding the relevant financial contributions and the affordable housing requirements on the site. Thank you, Chair. Thank you, John, for that detailed report. I should have mentioned at the beginning of this item that Councillor Jean Lowes has joined us, so she will be able to take part in this discussion. We have two speakers, local speakers, who have asked to speak, Mr Andrew Davis-Riggly and Maya Evans. So I'll turn to you, Mr Davis-Riggly, to speak to this committee, and you have to a maximum of five minutes to address the committee. I'm here with Maya as members of MAP, which is a group that represents the interests of the poor-threed community. To begin with, we would like to make it clear that the community does not object to the development of new housing in poor-threed. In fact, we welcome it provided it is in the right location and does not negatively impact on the existing community. Unfortunately, the application in front of you fails on both counts. It's worth pointing out that the some objections that have been received total nearly 200 to this application, which I'm sure you'll be fully aware of, having read through all the background information. To begin with, we are disappointed to see in the Planning Officers report that he was satisfied with the pre-application consultation that took place. The PAC process was the worst tick box consultation exercise I think I've seen, and I've worked in affordable housing for over a decade until recently. The Welsh Government provides clear guidance on what should be done, as does the Council, when a development of this size and nature is proposed. The guidance proposes a number of steps that should be taken, including holding consultation events, such as public exhibitions, drop-in events and workshops. At no point did the developers or agents offer to speak to the residents of poor-threed in a public meeting. With the development of this scale, it is standard practice to engage directly with residents, likely to be affected to understand their concerns and to see what can be done to mitigate them prior to submitting a detailed planning application. The guidance also suggests widening the consultation area, which didn't happen, sending out leaflets, flyers and community newsletters, non. Using social media, nothing was posted, providing non-technical summaries of technical documents in both English and Welsh. There were a number of technical plans included as part of the PAC documents, with no summaries, and for those with no technical knowledge, these documents were meaningless. It is very disappointing also that images provided only show what the new properties would look like on the site. With the technology available, it would have been simple to provide a virtual rendering of how the site would look from different parts of the village to allow some residents' fears. Applicants are expected to follow the national principles of participation engagement. These state the engagement should offer a genuine opportunity to inform or influence decisions, policy or services, and no such opportunity was provided. This is why there have been so many objections, both at the PAC stage and now. It is the only way that residents felt that they might be listened to. If the Council does not expect its own guidance to be followed, then what is the point in providing it? You just give false hope to communities. I'm sure it will be said that a consultation event did take place, and it did, but it wasn't part of the PAC process. It took place the day before the deadline for responses to the full planning application, the day before. No time at all for residents to respond. It was also the only time the developers and agents actively engaged with the community through this whole process. Again, box ticked. Promises were made by the planning agents, evidence banks during the formal consultation period over things like boundary treatments with neighbouring properties, none of which have subsequently appeared in the plans. There is a general feeling that the community has either been ignored during this process, told that what they wanted to hear or potentially misled with some of the answers given. Also, we're not aware of any contact being made with the onus of the cemetery which borders the site. As for the need for housing comes from the local housing market assessment, the LHMA. The mix of properties proposed should reflect the need identified in the LHMA. Why is it then that 50% of the affordable housing in the proposal are three bed properties when the LHMA states the need in the area is less than 30%. Surely we should be building the right type of homes in the right places. The community also noted that the large number of empty homes in Kamal-Venture and the Planvaro Ward alone could meet a lot of the demand for housing rather than building new. We could then avoid losing the high quality in versatile grade three agricultural land which covers two thirds of this site. Regarding the on-site provision of open space and play areas, the application and planning officer report are completely dismissive of the purpose of policy REC2 adopted by the council and specifically section four, which details the approach developers should take. If just the social housing with two or more bedrooms is fully occupied, as I know doubt it will be, you could potentially have 42 children in them. Add to this a conservative one child for all the other two, three and four bed family homes and you could be looking at 64 children on the site. Yet there is zero communal space unless they're expected to play on the surface waters for ales. Instead, they'll have to cross two roads with no official crossings to reach the existing play area. Why not apply the policy and provide recreational space on site? We also have concerns over the volumes estimated in the traffic report. This dates only 18 cars will leave at peak time and 17 will return. Yet with 42 properties and 92 car parking spaces, it will be interesting to see what everyone else does with their cars at peak times when they're going to work. Also, we actually know from the village that all infant and junior school pupils are usually driven to school as opposed to the walk-up, the very steep hill to Lanthara. Finally, I'd like to quote from a report provided to the planning hearing when this site was considered for the current LDP. The site's comprehensive development could represent an unsympathetic expansion of the village to the detriment of its character, as well as potentially altering its current linguistic composition, and that report was provided by the same planning agents Evans Banks in 2012. Thank you, Mr Davis-Rigley, and I'll now ask Meyer Evans to address the committee and you also have up to five minutes. Well, Chair, all of us wish to see responsible development in our communities and wish to ensure the right type of development on an appropriate site. I'd like to draw your attention to the following so that you have a fuller picture before you come to a decision. And you've been lucky today that the photographs that you saw doesn't actually show the picture in reality, especially with a flooding that takes place there during the year. Your decision will affect not just the character of Porphyrid village and the language of the village, but also the lives of the residents. We feel that no consideration has been given to the results of the language review. There are a high percentage of watch speakers, and the fact that the Porphyrid village has now has special linguistic significance, and it should be protected against our development. Of course, there is a language crisis in the county, despite the goodwill of the developer to provide a park, to alleviate people's conscious, it's just a shop window. The only way to safeguard is to refuse over developments in a small village, and over this is on over development, and no one can deny that. We are concerned that lack of consideration has been given to the evidence, and also problems with flooding, and also the sufficient sewage system. The only thing we do is to receive the statements from NRW1 Welsh Water. Welsh Water claim that there is capacity. Yes, we do not disagree with that. There is capacity as long as it doesn't rain. And also the water could flood into the system, a system which has been under pressure for years, as 42 houses have already been built since the end of the 1990s. Yes, everything is fine until it rains. But then this beautiful picture that you saw of the site and the area turns into a horror movie for so many people in the village, in a number of parts in the village. This in Bournfine have been close to me, and also all sorts of terrible things come on to their lawn, close to me bags and toilet paper. How can she actually sell her place as it's been devalued? Today, someone else would be losing their home. Why? Because of problems with the foundations, and that person has lost everything in the middle of the village. Why? Well, this is a result of a mistake of permitting building on a floodplain, despite local opposition. And yes, Pothar heed, and the majority of Pothar heed is within the C2 floodplain. The worst. Is there a risk to these new homes, I wonder? The late Halewen did not have a peace in Kumkati, and she had a number of flooding in a very short period of time. And also someone else in the 90s for owning time and time again, asking people to help because of the flooding was happening again. Last October, even though we phoned and found James had to wait 12 hours for help. And when the council worker arrived with sandbags, he just said they're not much used to mate. It's too late. They won't work. Yes, it was too late on that vulnerable pensioner. All of that mess came into the home, and as a result, there was sewage on the carpet. And six months later, his health was affected. The negative effect of these causes, we all know of them. Overcoving anxiety, depression, danger of infection, houses being devalued. And what about the high cost for you as an authority to put these things right and having to clean up time and time again? This is not a hypothetical concern. It is a reality that cannot be ignored. And the response was we were overwhelmed by heavy rainfall. Following three days of heavy rain at the beginning of November, tankers going back and forth to try and clear the system for the benefit of the current residents fair play to them. 52 tanker loads, a clear sign of a system that's under pressure. The only way that the system will cope is to put that to reach into the river. The statistics are for Puerto Rico and a total of 125 days, over four months and more. And the Gwenreich which also flows to the direction of tank and day. This is not just data, but definite evidence that the system is under pressure. And also there's the pressure of environmental problems. It's not Welsh water who are accountable, we're not blaming them. So they could claim, yes, there is capacity. On a visit in January, the Welsh water officer did confess that there were serious problems in terms of the rainfall on the systems. But Porfer heed is not on the next 15 year plan that they have. You, the local authority and the responsible for flooding. And it's the water that flows is the problem. We accept that. But please, if you walk just around the corner and then you will be on this E2 floodplain, the worst. Yes, there are problems in terms of lack of draining. Can you ensure that this area, even though the revised plan to direct water off the site, is far better than the first proposal? And that can be attributed to Mark for taking the attention of the staff to that. It's still on a floodplain, which is full of the majority of the year. And it's also outside of the local development plan boundaries. However, can you guarantee that there will not be an impact? I think there's emphasis on the importance of making the best use of the existing infrastructure. And also decreasing the environmental impact. And so the system and this application goes against the responsible planning that is referred to in the policy. And we are depend on you to ensure that the responsible development in our communities. Can I just finish? We are reasonable people here in Part 3, reasonable people who expect you as an authority to shoulder the burden of care by solving problems before permitting further building where there are already intense problems. Please do not put the cart in front of the horse and don't wear those blinkers just as racehorses do and be led by the need for housing alone and the council's target. You need to look at the full picture and to seriously consider the problems that exist as well as the negative impact and the harmful impact before you actually put over development on an inappropriate site in the middle of a small village on a floodplain. And thank you, Chair and Councillors for listening. Thank you. We have the developers agent Mr Jason Evans who is here to speak to the committee and to answer some of the comments that have been made. Thank you. Thank you, Chair and members of committee. And I'm glad to be here to speak to you again today. And Mr Thomas's presentation that the site is allocated for new housing within the LDP. It is the only allocated site in the village of Pothridge and this represents the only opportunity to provide affordable housing in the village. There is only one housing site in nearby Landarag allocated in the LDP and it is the only schedule to provide one affordable house in a scheme of 16 houses. As you have heard, housing developers in this part of the county expected to make provision for 30% affordable housing. You have heard from officers that the LDP figure of 27 units for the whole site is only indicative and that there are numerous schemes granted planning permission when more units have been delivered on a site provided other LDP policies are complied with and density is not overloaded. If only 27 dwellings were provided on this site, only eight affordable homes would have to be provided with 19 open market houses then provided. The application before you was a reverse proposal as it's put forward for 69% affordable homes, meaning 29 affordable units for local people comprising a mix of bungalows, flats, two and three beds, 70 detached houses. That leaves only 13 open market houses in the remainder. If a scheme of only 30% was put before you and only eight affordables form part of that, do members believe that the remaining 19 open market units would be available only to local people? Would they be of a scale and value representative of the local community? The current scheme proposes three and a half times more affordable houses, but a third less open market houses than the allocation requires. Much has been made on the potential impact of the scheme upon the La Welles language. Inteed from the objective's own figures, they believe the percentage number of residents speaking well simple three has fallen in the last 10 and 20 years. With no affordable housing haven't been built during this period, these figures suggest local well speakers have no doubt had to move elsewhere to find a home. In contrast, the application proposal will provide an opportunity to reverse this trend. The Kaisendord, Aka Srivishthayaal, Aka Evid, Ishaad. So local housing for local people and also well speakers to remain in the village? Building affordable homes in well speaking communities. At the cross and cross ends, as you heard, they constructed social rented and low cost homes. Figures from those sites show that 68% of the new occupies came from within five miles of the site. Subschemes therefore are aiding to bolster the Welles language, provide opportunities for young people to stay in their community, send their children to local schools and contribute to village life. We have heard from your housing officers that for every council house that becomes available in the ward of Tindarog and Portharied, the council receives 50 applications. Young people in the locality are therefore crying out for new affordable housing to enable them to remain part of the community. The scheme therefore addresses the chronic high social lead for affordable housing in Portharied. The application scheme also provides further benefits of £93,000 towards homes towards upgrading play facilities in Portharied as requested by your officers and an additional £23,000 required by your educational officers towards upgrading Tindarog School. Much has been made of the density of the scheme that too many houses are proposed. However, as you have read and heard from officers or proposed dwellings, meet the council standards of sufficient garden space, ample car parking, sufficient distances between neighbouring properties and between new houses within the site. There is room to widen the existing highway in front of the site and provide a 5.5 metre wide highway and new pavement for all villages where one is currently absent. There is also room at the front of the site to place two attenuation basins to control surface water disposal. The applicant's design team have worked hard and closely with your Saab officers and ensuring that the surface water is properly disposed of. Members can see this in the next application and the agenda where your Saab officers ask for the final outfall onto the northern stream to move to a new location away from the neighbouring houses so the applicant is happy to do. NFW have confirmed that the site is not in the flood zone. Objectism afraid with all due respect are wrong. It is not susceptible to river flooding from the Gwendre-Thach. The surface water maps show an area of water pooling across the field frontage. This is caused when the roadside ditch fills and overtops its bank and runs into the front of the site. Why does this happen? Well, because the water comes from the culvert running underneath the highway junction on the main road. The culvert has been blocked for years but not repaired with all due respect by the authority. The application therefore seeks to remedy the surface water issue. All calculations and modelling have been presented and approved by your Saab engineers and also draw no objections from highways or NFW. This scheme removes surface water from the locality, aiding to relieve existing neighbouring residents from any water regression. Turning to two points raised by the objectors, we would like to reiterate the points made by the officer that all the consultation has met the statutory requirement. In fact, the pack process was exceeded by statutory requirements by undertaking a public engagement event in the community hall at the request of the community council at a very short notice. This, as I said, was over above statutory requirements. It was fully attended by the applicants ourselves and a number of technical consultants able to answer questions posed by those who attended. Reference was made to an LDP report which was not provided or prepared by Evans Bank's planning with regards to the site during the preparation of that former document. The report was discussed related to a larger allocation with a far lower level of affordable housing and so, yes, a much lower number of homes available for occupation by local wealth speakers. The application proposed before you provides a rare opportunity to retain wealth speakers in the village and halt the decline of the census data shown in recent years, contrary to what the objectors have tried to claim. Members have been provided with a very thorough and comprehensive officer's report. It is itemised and responded to all the objections, objectors' concerns. Consider a number of council officers from several departments that with external statutory consultees have examined the scheme from a pre-application stage through PAC and this formal application before you today. It has taken over two years of negotiation and consultation to reach a point where all consultees and officers have reached a recommendation for approval, and thus we respectfully hope that members can reach a similar resolution and grant planning permission here today. Thank you, everyone. Thank you, Mr Evans. The local member, Councillor and Davis, has asked to speak and you have up to seven minutes as we've given other speakers to go over that five minutes. Thank you, Chair. The map has asked me to speak about the Welsh language and the community, and I'm grateful for the opportunity to speak. Firstly, may I speak quite plainly that this plan of 40 homes is too much of a development for perforated village. The 42 of the homes in the village of 80 is over 50% of an increase. And so I asked this committee to go against the officer's recommendation in this case. Over the past 20 years, three estates have been built in Part 3, estates of 8 to 12 homes, and two of the three have not yet been correctly completed according to local authority guidance. The builders be losing business and also the road that links the homes hasn't been completed, leaving a total mess to the owners of those homes to sort out. And this is part of the concern as we look at the community in Part 3, they have been disappointed time and time again, and no one willing to help them. Despite the building, the village is incredible to be able to keep its Welshness. You will see in a review of the village, which, by the way, has been that 68% of the residents are Welsh-speaking and use it on a daily basis in the two pubs and the shop as we have heard. So it's disappointment that the Welsh language commissioner refused this application to have an independent review on the status of the Welsh language. Fifty-three of the Chandarog Ward, who were able to speak the language, but within the ward, you will have small pockets, such as Part 3, which has a higher percentage of Welsh speakers. At the beginning of this week, I was up in Chandarog School with Caving Campbell. The same as the member Bank Heaven was actually surprised by the natural Welshness of the Welsh language. The residents of Part 3 of course feeds into Chandarog School. So we have to look at how we can protect the Welsh language, but also a naturally Welsh community as you have in Part 3. How can we ensure the future of the small hall, which is in a core part of the village by creating a meeting point for people of all ages? And here are the two options as I see them. Firstly, phased building. And here we can ask the Jones brothers to build ten homes at a time, giving an opportunity for people to settle in before moving on to the second phase, and then the third phase to finish. This way of building works so well. But of course, I realise that it's not popular with developments, because it's far easier for them to have everything on site at the same time, and they just get on with it. And then the stricken strategy would be to have a legal agreement between the local authority and the people and the Jones brothers, by using 106 section. People have already done this in Camarvenshire, ensuring that the affordable homes are provided for local people. And on the site in Shanghai, the Section 106 has assured this development. This gives time and opportunity for local people to have a mortgage agreement and to then to put an offer on a house before the homes go on the open market. And with the open market, this agreement can work again, homes being advertised locally for people to have an opportunity to put an offer in and to have a mortgage offer ready. Jones brothers have actioned this policy in Aberpoth and Carradigion for homes on the open market. And if you wish to approve this application, I'd wish you to put this condition in. That 106 agreement should be put on this home and that for the first time here in Camarvenshire. We would work to have a three-month window of advertisement and only local people who would be able to offer for these homes. There are two building associations who are happy with this and the 106 agreement would remain on those homes continually throughout the process. So with a bit of luck, they would remain within the hands of the local people, three months to sell locally before going on the open market. And how do you define local? For me, it's the world surrounding the chandarod, Sogorslas, Chantvihangel, Aberbethich, Channaguad, Chantanor, Chantandar and Chantarog itself. But in Aberpoth, I do realise that was in Carradigion, of course. And this is a way of keeping the Welsh language within the community and to give an opportunity for young people to come home and to buy a house within their home area. So if you as a planning committee wish to permit this development, that a 106 agreement should be enforced. In terms of the social housing, of course, there will be a policy which means that local people will be given the first opportunity. Let us be innovative here in Comadinshire, let us use the 106 agreement not just to get the funding, even the how acceptable that is, but to protect our villages and to give opportunities for our local people. This plan could be a blueprint for us here in Comadinshire, and let us protect rural villages in Comadinshire. As I asked you to undertake this, it doesn't mean that we accept the application is to the opposite actually. It's too large for a village of the size of Parthirid, but I'm asking this to be some sort of an insurance policy for the village. Before finishing, the Community Council and the Council of Heaven Jones, I can see Council Markrifices in the gallery, and they've asked me to note that the proposed site tends to flood, just as Meyer mentioned. It's listed on the NRW website, and it's noted as one over high risk. The proposed site has now been listed as a very wet site because it tends to suffer from flooding, and development proposals to build on neighbouring fields were refused in 2006 because the local authority, and that was on the basis that it was in danger of flooding. And I know that neighbouring homes to this site that they are already suffering from flooding, and this site will create even larger problems for those homes and make it impossible for them to get insurance. This, without even mentioning the sewerage system that Meyer mentioned, it's part of living in Parthirid village, but it is not acceptable, especially the Kunkati site, where the most vulnerable residents on Kunkati, for those of you who don't know, is a site of bungalows for older people to live in. To finish chair, I am totally against this development, 42 homes in a village of 80 homes is too many. We need to protect the Welsh language, and also the naturally Welsh speaking community. I will not speak any further on this, but thank you for your time, and thank you for listening. Thank you, Councillor Davis. I will now open it up to the committee, are there any questions? Councillor Elwin Williams first, and then Councillor Russell Sparks. You know the road that you call the B Road in the village, it's the old 48, okay? So if you are someone in the Parthirid where the highway is, they wouldn't be able to tell you. Councillor Russell Sparks. Thank you, Chair. Thank you for the report, John, and thank you for the information and feedback from the agent and the objectors. I'm interested, it's been raised this morning about the density of the development, and specifically, you know, the Welsh development quality requirements from 2021, creating beautiful homes and places guidance. Can you just confirm, I mean, the agent talked about the outside of the properties, but inside, I mean, quite often the committee sees properties that are supposed to be affordable, that have quite large footprints. I think the largest footprint in the guidance is 114 square metres of these properties within those guidelines, please. And I would also be interested in the feedback from Stephen in relation to the Section 106 and the three months suggestion that was raised by the local member. Thank you. Thank you, Chair. Councillors, please. Thank you, Councillors, Chair. Thank you, Councillors, Madam Chair, but Councillor, Munsell Charles. May I firstly thank for the images and the photographs we saw and also for the comments that have come from both sides. In my opinion, the plan seems to be acceptable from looking at the package and also the images of the homes. And also the contribution to the community, the school and the affordable housing. But my concern, firstly, is the overdevelopment in this area and the impact on the community that so many homes to be built at one time, rather than being built in a phased way and according to demand. Also, I have not been persuaded that there is a fair plan effort to decrease the impact of flooding and also the sewerage system, especially. If there's been a problem in part three and has been in existence for some time, well, why hasn't any work been done to ensure that that problem has not been solved? And it's obvious that it hasn't been solved. We are coming now to a time where there is more and more flooding, more heavy rain, and heavy rain happening suddenly, every winter, and so the problem will only increase. So I have not been persuaded by the officer that plans are afoot which will ensure that this will not happen more and more. So I am currently of the opinion that these problems will increase. I am familiar with this village, and I have travelled along this road to visit this site. Firstly, I see that the road is rather narrow, especially as you passed Werenbarath along that highway. If this were development, is there an intention to ensure that that highway on that part of the road, which will be given far greater, will actually be widened, or even not narrowed any further anyway? Is there assurance that there will be a pavement the whole way from Werenbarath out to the highway? We know that there is a pavement from there onwards so that everyone's safety is assured in that part of the road. Currently there are gutters on the side of the roads along that highway and even further. And as we have heard, there will be a significant increase in the runoff of water. So what plans are there to ensure that all of those problems then will be solved and addressed? Then we saw on the plan that there will be no housing on that part which we would account as being the wetest part of the field next to the road. So as we saw on the images it would be Greenland, so under whose ownership would that come? Would that still be under the ownership of the developer? Or would it be partly under the ownership of the neighbouring homes? So those are some of the questions that I currently have, Chair, thank you. Councillor Ken Hawelds. Yes, thank you, Chair. The question I have is around the 13 homes, these private homes. Is there an estimate of the cost or the price of these or the value of these houses? We know that there is a need for housing, but do we need expensive houses? I think there are four bedrooms and I think there are seven of them who have three bedrooms. So by permitting this, I know that there is a good percentage of affordable homes in this game, but also resulting from that, we will also possibly be bringing in expensive homes which will be too expensive for local people to be able to buy them. So just asking for an estimate of the cost of these homes. Thank you, Ken. Councillor Karis-Jones. Oh, Councillor Jean-Louis, next. Thank you, Chair, and thank you for the report. We've heard from both sides and I'm sure that there are fair points made on both sides. What concerns me, more than anything else, is the effect that this development will have on the Welsh language. We've heard of 50% of an increase in housing and also the effect on those who are already living there in terms of the sewage, the flooding, etc. The village, in my opinion, unless I'm persuaded otherwise, is not ready in terms of its infrastructure to take 50% more housing. Currently, I don't think about this as fair, on the people who are already living there, we've heard of the problems. They've been declared here this morning. And also it was noted by the agent that the county has a responsibility to do something about these drains. So could we have some more information on that, please? Thank you. Councillor Garret-Thomas. Thank you, Chair. I have two questions. One, which jobs do you expect these people who buy these homes? What jobs do you expect them to have, who will employ them, or will they have to jump in their cargo down the M4? Then the second question, following on from what Councillor Charles has mentioned, about the water. We are being pulled up a number of times in planning now about the phosphates going into our rivers. Is there any mitigation? What is the response of NRW in terms of that? Because we have been persuaded here that a lot of the sewerage is getting into our rivers. On the third of the year, anyway, that it flows into the rivers, so the phosphates will increase. And I'm trying to think in what direction it goes in. It does it go into the Gwen Rife and out that direction. But again, the phosphates will be increased, whichever the river they flow into. So two questions, what jobs do you expect these people because we are building homes there? Will there be local jobs? Are there enough local jobs for them? Or will they have to travel further afield? And secondly, what happens to the phosphates flowing into the Gwen Rife? But it's still phosphates. Thank you. Councillor Suhallen. I don't see any reason why such a development can't be phased over a period of time, because you don't have all the same type of workmen and women working on it together. I mean, you haven't got 50 electricians in one house. They sort of move down the row, as it were. So I don't see why it can't be phased over an extended period of time. There's no practical reason that I can think of unless the funding of such a thing has to be completed by a certain time. I see the planning officer nodding at me there. So I don't know about that. But the other thing is, I don't know what triggers investment in the sewage system, which comes first, the chicken or the egg and that sort of thing. So there must be a point where doorcomery need to invest, because I know they do bolt-on systems to sewage. So I don't see why they can't do that. But there must be a reasonable number when they actually do those improvements. So does anybody know what that is? So two points there, phasing and bolt-on systems. Thank you, Councillor ALLAN. A number of questions there. Before I go back to the officer to respond, perhaps now is the best opportunity to ask the Welsh water to come in and to answer any questions on water and sewage. Yes, thank you, Chair. Can you hear us just a, just a double check. We've been having some kind of action issues this morning. Yeah. Can everyone hear us? Yeah. Yes. Excellent. Thank you very much. Well, just, just quickly introductions then from our perspective. So, reservance, planning liaison manager within developer services within Welsh water. I've got my colleague here, Ryan Norman. Yeah, I know I've been a growth manager in the rather services. I'm going to just attach on it. Start because of these in the planning process. Obviously responded to this particular fan application. And we've got Clare Powell as well, who's the planning officer for the area for the Kamalinshire area. So, and from my perspective, and it's just really reinforcing our planning response. And as I'm confirmed by Mr Thomas in his overview at the beginning of the discussion. And we've satisfied that capacity for foul only flows are available within, you know, the public sewage system. And ensuring that that would result in any adverse harm from an environmental and flooding perspective. We, however, acknowledge there are operational issues in the catchment, as kind of mentioned by various speakers. And these, however, are relating to blockages, you know, and so abuse and also exacerbated then by excess rainwater and land drainage coming into the system. To confirm therefore that is not a reason that we can object to from a hydraulic capacity perspective, the sewage system has enough capacity to accommodate the foul only flows. The operational matters then are not something that we can object to. And we are working closely then with the land drainage authority to understand more about the land drainage that's coming into our system. And also what can we do to remove that and improve this situation then from an operational perspective. And there was some mention as well, in some of the discussion on the phosphate map there. It's not applicable in this location is worth giving it over. Yeah, you obviously were versed for the phosphorus matter in tomorrow's show, but they weren't right in which we were treated to, as it is in captured by the other new advice. So there's a little claim on us to remove phosphorus from waste water, this job artist from the church in the river here. Now the council brought up point regarding our investment program so I'm asking for them to work in five years cycles can be announced and which extends to 25 and take one from 20 to 30 30. That's how we program investment is it's based on a risk me basis, essentially. So if there's a need from a growth perspective for us to introduce additional capacity about the network, we will do so. As we touched on in this particular catchment, hydraulically, there are no concerns on that. So, we will consider the need for future investment and work with command and terms land raise authority on the land drainage issue, we'll go with the spec that we will obviously assess the needs to invest in this catchment. And that will be going on that basis. Thank you. So we'll go back to the planning officer john. I refer then to the other points raised and I'll try and address them in the order that they were raised. Mr Williams made the point regarding the road, which is the big road, which used to be the old 48 just for clarity. As far as councilor sparks is pointing relating to density inside of the individual properties, etc. This would be depending upon a Welsh government grant. So in order to satisfy the grant, they must reach the development design quality requirements to the Welsh government. As far as section 106 requirements, which again the local member is concerns, we are limited as to what we can apply to section 106 on. They must be satisfying or relevant planning requirements, and we can't just apply them willingly in any respect. So again, you know, our requirements in this instance are primarily to safeguard the financial contributions are more importantly, of course, the affordable housing requirements, which would be 69%. As far as the several points raised by council of Charles, as far as the acceptable design is required, that in part touches upon what Councillor sparks is raised. Again, the designs of the units would be as far as the portability is requirement, the matter, our colleagues requirements in housing. So, so again, the design is very much dictated by what housing required in the area and hence the house types and the house numbers. Because again, evidently they are dependent upon the grant funding, which although comes Welsh government is administered by community council. So the housing department is instrumental in applying that appropriately. Again, the contributions have been evaluated by the relevant departments are inappropriate for the development. As far as concerns over over development and impact upon the community. Again, you've seen the designs, the density is below the average. It is quite a well set out to development, which needs meets the needs of affordable people in the locality. And as I've already referred to other schemes undertaken by the developer, whereby you can see the high percentage of residents there from the immediate or near vicinity of the application site. So again, I think you could sit comfortably as far as that is concerned. As far as floating a foul drainage, well, again, our colleagues in Welsh water have adequately addressed the foul drainage aspect, whereby they've carried out the hydrological assessments and considered, of course, the capacity within the system, albeit there are operational developments. But they are the relevant strategy consultee. They are the ones who have to answer if there's any surcharging into the water course. And they are the ones who would be critical if anybody questions this that appeal, for example. And again, as they are happy with it, how can anybody come up with a valid objection reason whereby Welsh water happy with it? So that is something of relevance, not only here, but any future scenario as well, just so the members are aware. As far as heavy rainfall, again, that may be an operational issue whereby again Welsh water acknowledge they are looking into that and working with the community council to address any operational issues, but there are no objections. As far as, again, plans for safeguarding against flooding, well, again, look at the report. Natural resources will not object into this game. They've seen the plans, they've seen the layout, they've seen their own development advice notes and also the flood maps. Again, they are happy with it. How can you sustain an objection on flooding where the relevant strategy consultee is not objecting to it? As far as the narrowness of the road, which again, the sea council during the front of it. As I mentioned earlier, as referred to in the report, that will be widened in accordance with our engineers in highways, as well as providing for toy linking up to the existing footway through the village. So again, that will adequately address that issue of the development in accordance with the design road and bridges requirements as well. Again, that addresses the pavement to the B Road question. As far as ditches along the road, again, the ditches along the road would may have to be addressed, but all of that would come into the sample requirements. And again, the question was raised regarding the flood mitigation requirements along the lower southern extent to the site on the ownership. Again, there is a such requirement, a different consenting regime, which specializes in flood defence and also for drainage, whereby they've already influenced this application already. As you will see with the second application on the agenda, they are not objecting to the scheme. And again, they are the relevant experts in that field. So again, if you are going against that advice, you will need to provide the evidence, because that is what an inspector will require. So as far as the houses on the lowest part, yes, there won't be any houses on the lowest part. And that is where the service water swears will be going. And again, with any development of this size, those sub requirements will require adoption by the county council. So those areas would be adopted by community council. So again, the county council has to be satisfied that this scheme works. That it works adequately, because we are the authority to have to administer it, maintain it, and make sure that it operates. So again, this is the responsibility on county council, not something we enter into lightly. As far as the question raised by council, how well, as far as the 13 open market houses, the price of those houses are not material considerations to us. The houses are provided in the open market houses. We cannot dictate the price of open market houses. That is beyond the means of us and the planning. So again, that is not material to consideration. As far as council, there was concerns regarding effects on the Welsh language, as mentioned earlier on, whether you caught it or not, of course, that some of the objectives are asked why there isn't a Welsh language assessment. And again, the Welsh government, the Welsh language governor, or similar as question it. But as is referred to under the LDP policies, and the number of us because of below the threshold, we have sought legal opinion on this point of a barrister. And again, the barrister said we are correct in our interpretation, which we are happy to defend if need be. So again, as far as that is concerned, that assessment was undertaken prior to adoption of the LDP, which again stands firm as far as considering this application. As far as effects upon existing residents regarding the perceived inadequacy of the local infrastructure. Again, you know, we've had Welsh water saying they need to not object, especially capacity, but there are operational issues which are ongoing and they're doing research. Again, how can we say the infrastructure is adequate when those specialist consultees are not objecting? Similarly, with N or W, they are not objecting on flirting grounds. So again, how would you possibly defend an objection on those grounds? Again, as far as the county council responsibilities, I've already touched upon that with the sub. The surface water would become a responsibility once they get sub-approval. They will need sub-approval, otherwise they can't develop the site. And again, you have an application on the agenda following this, which deals specifically with one element of that, given the SAM's input into the scheme. Again, Councillor Thomas raised concerns regarding jobs for local people. Again, we are not looking at jobs, we are looking at the development here. But what we are looking at is of course, what our colleagues in highways have identified as the clear need for affordable dwellings here. And again, that is not a perceived view, it is an actual view. And as has been touched upon earlier, the number of applicants for vacant county council properties serves to illustrate the demand locally. And most of those people may be living in private rented accommodation or living at home with their parents. So, there is a clear perceived need for this. And as we've all seen, many people in rural areas are desperate for affordable housing. And this provides not the 30%, not 40%, but 69%, which most villages will be more than happy to have. As far as the phosphates, well again, the river Gwen Dright, which is the case here and the catchment to it, is not subject to the phosphate embargo which applies to the toy or the TV. So again, it doesn't come into the equation here, and as well as whatever already clarified in their response. As far as the points raised by Councillor ALLAN, as far as phasing, more often than not, the phasing requirement is to ensure that the affordable housing is provided early or midpoint through the development. But in this housing, you're looking at 69% affordable, whereby we don't need to concern us with housing to safeguard that because the vast majority will be affordable housing. And depending upon the grant funding from Welsh government and via colleagues in housing, hence why there's no need for the trigger here to trigger that. As far as the triggers for investment by Welsh water, again, Welsh water have already addressed the views on it from an eight statutory consulty point of view, stating that they have no objections, but acknowledging the operational issues which they are looking into, not only in isolation, but also with offices within the commercial conditions. But they are not objecting, and that is an important point. I think that addresses most to all of the points. Thank you, Chairman. Thank you, John. Thank you, John. I think this is now an opportunity to ask the affordable housing officer and local needs officer to come in on this point, so I'd like to hear Robert to speak. Thank you, Jack. I'm Lucy Roberts, affordable housing lead for come out of the chat, just to say that this site is a key strategic site for us. There's a shortage of affordable housing in rural areas. So by providing these homes, it will ensure there's affordable homes for people to remain in their communities. So I know everybody's concerned about the Welsh language, which is understandable, and to try and protect that, as part of the development, there'll be local letters in place for the affordable homes. And as part of the policy, it'll ensure that the homes go to local people, and also that we'll provide in homes for those most in need, and try and create a battle and stand sustainable community. So on our housing register, we've currently got over 4,000 people, and 50% of those are in high priority need. So I think you can all agree that these homes are much needed. And in terms of the local housing market assessment, it's identified that there's over 300 affordable low cost homes required for people also. Thank you. Thank you. Councillor Karys-Jones. Well, Gary first, then Russell, then Karys. Well, it's a question to the answer to the response that I had from John Thomas. So to begin with, I was going to talk about phosphates and Welsh water, and I don't know whether I was listening to something different, but I heard what's wrong with it. I heard what to say within their remit. They agree that it was fine. Then the number of homes are multiply with the number of people, and that would be the sewage. But they did mention that the rainwater and clean water is what's causing the problem. So I think there were two issues there. On the one hand, we admit that there is a problem with rainwater going to the system. But yes, in terms of the problem that we have, the system can actually take it. I think we have a duty to take into consideration what they cannot put under our remit. That is, we have to sort the rainwater that's going to the system, because it is creating a problem. And Welsh water have told us that. And also the question around jobs. They said that that doesn't come under planning. Well, and I'll quote this, the well-being of Future Generations Wales Act 2015. To improve the economic, social, environmental and cultural well-being. I don't think actually that this development falls within the well-being of Future Generations Act. If you want me to explain why, well, yes, there's a need for affordable homes. But possibly they should be in the right place. We've spoken about the problems in terms of the environment and global warming, et cetera, these days. If we go to an extreme, then this homes will have to be in our larger towns and cities where they can actually catch public transfer to go to work. Coming out to rural areas where people will have to have ownership of at least two cars, especially if there are children there. And use them to travel. Yes, it's affordable in one way. And lots of people would like to live in the Chandarog area. But I don't know why. I'm happy to live in Hendi. But anyway, I know that was a flippant remark, but I don't think that that argument is needed. And affordable homes are fine in the right place where there are buses passing on a number of times a day. And everything else is the doctors available. But I know that they are scarce even in our larger towns currently. So I question this asking around work. Yes, it comes under the well-being of Future Generations. Like everything else comes under that. Looking at what's happening as well to the local economy, the language, industry, everything. And I don't see this ticking the box. Some have said that there are too many dwellings. And I think that the indicative number is 27. I live in a village and I've named where I live. You all know where that I live in Hendi. That's another plug for Hendi. We've got thousands of homes. We have a large developer who decided that he's going to develop. And the indicative number was far, far lower than what actually was built. We opposed it. We turned the application down. And they went up to Cardiff and Cardiff said yes. The indicative number is there for a reason. And again, if you look at this objectively, the purpose of that indicative number, they sit there and Cardiff look at the map and say, right, yes, it's fine. We need to increase the size of villages and keep them alive. But we shouldn't influence too much on these villages by making them too large. And that's why we have an indicative number. Quite often if you question that, in Cardiff, they do stick to it. And I've got experience of that in my local village where a developer made it far larger, but they failed to change the indicative number. So yes, we can develop some of our villages. But if it falls within the well-being of future generations, we want to turn it down because it affects lots of things, including the economy, the language, and people if they don't live. And also the environment comes into it. They will all have to travel distance to work. They talk about a school a mile up the road, but in my village, I know of one person, they only live 200 yards away from the school, and they pile them into the car to take them to the school. So Welsh water saying on the one hand that everything is fine, but on the other hand, they say if it's wet, there is a problem. And we acknowledge that. But that's where we are as a planning committee on this matter. But we also have to look at the well-being of future generations act. And we have to assess that when it comes to planning. And that should be considered more than what we have done. I think that's enough from me. Thank you. Thank you, Garth, John. Do you want to go first, Carlos? A couple of comments and a couple of questions in terms of the drainage. Can you confirm that the developer has to have the SUDs permission before they're able to proceed with the development? And if that's not satisfactory, then the development cannot happen. So that step is a necessary part of the process. And is that document public in order for people to consult and to take a look at it? That's one question. I'm talking about marketing affordable housing. And I know it's in the policy. Affordable homes are not marketed. You have to be on the housing list with a local authority to qualify, to apply for one of those affordable homes. And you have to live in Comadancher or work in Comadancher or have family links with Comadancher in order to be on the list and to apply for affordable homes. So if you can confirm whether that's correct or not. And that includes affordable homes and council houses. If I could just have a response to that. In terms of comments, I've contributed significantly to a consultation on the new LDP. And part of that consultation and what I presented to that consultation was to ask and ask the LDP to permit us to have affordable homes in rural areas. Currently it's not possible to build affordable homes in villages unless a site such as this comes forward. There is no other site available between croissants and Comadancher. Right across the county, no to this north or to the south for many, many miles. So this is the only site that serves the whole area between croissants and Comadancher. And this is exactly what we've been asking for in the new LDP. For us to have permission to have these homes for young people in our rural areas. This is 29 affordable homes, half of them, affordable half of them rented housing. And that's to serve every young family, every young person who wishes to remain in the area or wish to move back to the area if they've been away to college or whatever. Because there is no possibility for them to be able to live. In Dravach and Gandha in and such places. Unless someone says right, I've got a plot for one home for example. So we need to provide these homes for these young people. The council housing on rent are also an important part of this. Because they offer a stable home for generations of families who live in these areas. And these people who make it stronghold in terms of culture and the Welsh language. And then the third element are the open market homes or dwellings. There are people who are on good salaries who do speak Welsh quite strangely. And these people need somewhere to live as well. We have teachers, people who work in hospitals. We can't attract enough teachers and head teachers to this county. So we have to provide homes for them. And this provides for that. And something else that I've also made as a comment on the LDP. And I can't do one thing here and then ask the LDP to do something different to us. There are local people in our rural areas who wish to retire, to a village, to retire from farming or from a business. And they want to move to a home in their community without having to go to cresanzo command. They don't qualify for affordable homes. So we have to provide homes on the open market for that cohort of the population. And if we do this through the local letters policy. And if you can have an answer to this as well, is that part of this agreement? Or is it just an option? Then this could be a stronghold for the Welsh language rather than harming it. So I can't oppose this because this is what we've been asking for. For rural areas in Comandonshire for some time. So we'll go back to Lucy first on a couple of those questions before going to John and then back to Russell. Thank you. So, yes, as you said, the local items policy will apply to the social rent homes and site. We put these policies in place and all new housing developments. That's got the social rent properties to ensure that we take into account local need and in particular the Welsh language in this area. And for the local ownership properties, they again will go to eligible people. So people form of housing register and they've got to have that kind of connection to come out into the area then. Okay. So I think that's that all the points. Sorry. Thank you. Thank you, Lucy, John. It's coming back to the points raised by Councillor Thomas. Firstly, and as far as the water and people within Welsh water mentioned, there are operational problems or operational issues, but they are looking to solve those problems. And also it's worth considering, as was referred to earlier by the agent, there are problems in terms of sewerage or with rainwater. Where the subway actually meets the B road and that would be improved by the developer. The developer would improve the situation and the problems that cause surface water flooding on the site. So the developer will solve that problem on behalf of the local authority and also on behalf of Welsh water. And also as far as the site itself is concerned and how appealing it is. I remember one of the women who's working with us, she lived in porphyry, she'd catch the bus into the work. It does show that porphyry has a good supply of local buses. So people living in porphyry can go to work without driving their car. I don't know how things are in handy, but things are better in porphyry. As far as too many homes or dwellings and also you consider that indicative figure. If you want to come and see me after the meeting, I can give you a number of examples of appeals and case law where that has been thrown out. I've referred to them in the past and I will continue to refer to them probably in the future. But that does not hold water, Councillor Thomas, just to assure you. As far as the other points are concerned, in fairness, Councillor Carres, Jones, to solve the majority of the problems in terms of the surface water and the subs. And also the local authority taking responsibility for those systems. And as far as the marketing, the homes Lucy has responded to that question and also Carres. And also as far as the development plan and what will come in future. So thank you, Chair. Councillor Russell Sparks. Thank you, Chair. I would like to thank John for his answer earlier in relation to the size of the properties and that's been very reassuring. Thank you and the fact that we've got the grant there so the standards are coming through from that. That's very reassuring. It's also worth reflecting, having spent some time discussing this now, that the £23,000 payment towards improvement of education facilities has been secured for the 106 agreement. And also the £93,594 towards improvement of existing play in open spaces in Puerto Rico. Both very important points I think that they've helped me come to a decision. As a member for the command in town west where we've seen lots of development and new development in the United States. It's interesting to reflect that places like Mysmax and Myspeca and Myspeca have all got higher proportion of Welsh language speakers now than the average for the county. So that in fact, as Carres has mentioned, there's an opportunity for the Welsh language in terms of its strength. What we do need and what I've learned since becoming a Councillor is we have a desperate need for housing in the county, for our families and for our young people and for our retiring people and for everyone in between. And therefore, I couldn't possibly do anything other than recommend that we fully support the officers and support this planning application chair based on the fact that it's going to provide homes for our local community. And I'd like to thank Lucy for all of her feedback and support too. Good morning. Thank you, Chair. Thank you, Councillor Sparks. Do we have a seconder to that proposal? Yes, we have. Before Ken comes in, and Councillor skinner, I'll ask the solicitor to come in. Sorry, brain failure this morning. Yeah, so there's a few points I want to mop up if I can, please. There was a reference by Councillor Anday, who spoke recently, in terms of a section 106 agreement in Caritigaeon. I'm not familiar with the terms of that agreement. It's the first time I've heard about it this morning, so you'll have to forgive me for that. But certainly, from what I know of this site, there's obviously going to be a section 106 agreement in place to deal with the contributions. And in terms of a housing situation, well, if it's an affordable property under our own scheme, then as Lucy has confirmed, there's a local letting's policy, which relates to that. So, generally speaking, we do lots of these now. There's lots of sites we've got affordable housing now. It's a very common procedure that we use. There's no doubt there's a lot of local people in our experience now who live in those houses, so I've got no doubt about that. And if the housing association houses, then the housing association is basically a sort of situation where you've got a company which is regulated by statute as a housing association. They've got their own duties and obligations for that, so they will have their own housing policies to follow, and they will be in accordance with the usual affordable policy. So, there's no way they can get around that. That's what they're there for. So, I'd be, if I was a member, I'd be quite reassured that that would be all in order. Then we had reference made by a member about the Wellbeing and Future Generations Act. Well, I think I'd like just to chime in really with what we've learned in some of the training you've undergone recently by a barrister. And that act, obviously, important act, but what it does is set out a high level duty, which the authorities got to deal with, generally speaking, when it deals with anything. It's application to planning, planning and consent. And this committee is much narrower because we have to deal with this in this chamber. We have to deal with material planning considerations. That's what we've got to look at. So, it's only if they come within that umbrella, we'll be able to look at them. So, I just want to just clarify that side of it. And then I think I need to also say that there was an issue before the committee in terms of the number of objectives we'd speak today. We've clarified that. I had to get involved and give legal advice on that. So, that's why we've adopted people we have here today. And finally, I want to impress upon members, as I have been doing more recently, that, you know, whatever views you have about the development, you've heard the expert officers evidence today regarding the whole aspects of this site and the concerns and the representations made. It's only if you have found other expert evidence which can satisfy a planning appeal going forward. Should you resort to that? I don't have evidence or evidence that your feelings you may have are not material in this circumstance. You have to have proper evidence before you to make that relevant decision. Thank you, Steve. I have three members who wishing to ask questions before we go to the vote. We'll begin with Councillor Kenhoele. Thank you, Chair. The points raised by Councillor Andevis have been addressed and that is regarding the phase building that she proposed for this site. And is that tied up, therefore, with the grants, which are obviously grants are given for this development? Is there a limit on the time that the grants will be available? Chair? Chair, can you call this? Thank you, Councillor. Edward Skinner. That you mistake me for your Councillor's remarks. Thank you. Thank you, Councillor. Thank you, Councillor. Thank you, Councillor. Thank you, Councillor. Thank you. You know, just to come back in on the phasing aspects, when you've got a site such as this, which is allocated in the LDP for residential development, that's your starting point when you're determining the planning applications. Then we've got a supplementary planning guidance, which is allied to the LDP in relation to the Welsh language. That requires phasing where there is a 60% threshold within the ward. Now, that doesn't kick in in this instance, because it's less than 60% when you look at it worldwide. So we could only use our policy in the SPG for phasing if you've got a number of less speakers, about 60%. So that's why we can't insist on phasing element. And when we're looking at coming to Welsh water, my reading of what they're saying today is there is capacity in the system apart from the surface water that comes into the system. Well, I would agree with Councillor Skinner that that is their liability, and you can't hold the developer responsible for something that a public body should be doing. So those are my responses to that. Thank you. I can see that your hand is up, Ken. Sorry, it's a legacy hand. We'll go to Councillor Jean-Louis. Thank you, Chair. The same problems concern me in terms of sewerage and the infrastructure that exists there. I've looked at the conditions and I can't see anything that states that the solution in terms of the operational challenges have been noted at all. Would it be possible to put a condition in that those issues should have been solved before the building takes place? And then lastly, Councillor Karyst-Jones. Yes, thank you. I've got a question. There is mention in the report that the developer has already advertised these homes on the housing market for a period of time locally before going out to a wider market. Would it be possible to include that as a condition in the planning consent, either through 106 or just as a more general condition, that that period of two to three months of marketing should happen locally before it goes out on the larger websites. Thank you. John. Do you have any questions? Thank you. Sorry, I was just seeking some legal advice on one point. So going through the points that who towns has responded to the question in terms of phasing that Councillor Hawell raised and also partly in terms of the Councillor, the Councillor Skinner raised. Something that I will go into a bit more depth on are the operational issues. That doesn't only include surface water coming into the system or ground water infiltration or something similar to that. But also we have to teach people to be careful about what they actually put down toilets quite often. And just as Welsh water referred to, sometimes the system is locked or there are blockages in the system because a drain or someone's drain because of people putting things down the toilets, which they shouldn't be. So operational issues also include educating people and local people to be careful that they should be putting anything down the toilet because problems can be caused. So that's part of the problem. That also partly answers the question that Councillor Louis raised in terms of operational issues. And partly it falls on the local authority. As far as surface water and partly the developer looks to solve. But also to educate the local people again. And the question in terms of what Councillor Harris Jones raised and possibly maybe what something that happens in Cara Diggion. It's not within our legal ability to prohibit the way the people market it on the open market. We can do it as in terms of affordable homes and the policies we have. But it is discriminatory and you cannot do that. It's beyond the planning control. As far as Cara Diggion, then you can ask them to answer that question on their behalf. But here in Kamar then, I've sought legal advice on that. We cannot put that in as a condition. Thank you. Thank you, John. Well, we've had a lengthy discussion on this application. So we'll go to a vote. It's been proposed on seconded that we should accept the officer's recommendation. If you're in agreement, please raise your hand. Could you please take your hands down now, please? Anyone against? Two against any abstentions. We have one abstaining. So by a majority, the application is granted. Thank you. We are coming up to one o'clock. We've got a choice now. We'll have to take a short break anyway. Do we want to break for lunch or do we wish to move the standing orders and continue with the meeting? It's your choice. So we'll have a break for lunch and come back at two o'clock. So we'll come back at two o'clock. Thank you. So good afternoon. So we'll now move on to the application, which is on page 75 of your park. And it reads as follows, PL07200. Operators to facilitate the disposal of surface water from adjacent residential development at land, part of urban rice farm, parcel heed. And we have to do the other. So we'll go to the officer for their report. So I'm John Thomas, the senior officer. This application follows on from the previous application, which we determined before lunch, namely the residential development for 42 units. This application relates to an extension to the surface water drainage pipe, which needs to be extended by 140 metres in accordance with the sub team's recommendations. So again, reverting back to the location plan. As you can see, you have proper heed. You have the length of pipe shown edge red and annotated on the plans. And the purpose of that is to extend the pipe and discharge into the water course, some 140 metres for the west and downstream of that originally proposed. This plan shows the application site in greater detail together on the right-hand side without approved under the previous application for the 42 units. So it's simply a pipe along a strip of land, which is 140 metres in length and some 5 to 6 metres in width. And again, that will just charge into the water course. It's perceived that the piping question will be a 300mm diameter or 12 inches in imperial scale, albeit the final size will be dependent upon what the sub team dictates as part of the sub application. This shows it on an aerial photographic base in relation to the village. And again, this gives you some indication, as you can see on the left-hand side, you have it shown there, albeit in narrow coloured annotation, the point of discharge and annotated. And that also shows it in relation to the housing development and again, the initial section along the eastern boundary of the remainder of that field. Again, this is a photograph taken from the residential application site almost looking over. And you can see the length of the proposed pipe, which is shown there in blue. And again, that extends from right to left, from where the previous consent extended to the proposed point of discharge in accordance with the sentence requirement. Again, turning out to the main report. Again, that describes the application site, which is on part of the agricultural field enclosure. And again, the length and diameter of the scheme. Again, this is allied to the earlier application, PL, oblique 06338, which again was granted planning permission prior to the lunchtime break. Again, this is satisfied the requirements of the sub team. However, it has attracted objections. Objections from San Baro come to council, concerns regarding overflows and flooding within the near vicinity, as well as a number of third party objections given to the advertisement of the application by site noticing the vicinity. And again, much of the objections raised to this application relates to many of the points raised on the earlier application, PL, oblique 06638. And again, these main relate may need to flooding surface water drainage. As you can see on the local infrastructure, the site is standing outside of the LDP boundary and concerns over the lack of survey work for the drainage and the soil in question. However, this is on silly requirement. Requested at the behest of the sub team within the county council, hence why the applicant has had to submit it. And again, the sub team were the main consultees on this and the expert in surface water drainage are happy with the scheme. And again, the precise details and the attenuation flows will be dealt with under the separate sub application. Again, as previously discussed, this will not exacerbate any flooding within the catchment. And again, given that it's through improved agricultural pasture, there are no ecological concerns or loss of ecological value as part of the development. So, hence the planning colleges raised no concern. So, in conclusion, the recommendation is to approve subject to the conditions in the office's report. Thank you, Chair. Yeah, John. Thank you, John. And thank you for that report. Councillor Russell Sparks. Thank you, Chair. I'd like to propose that we go with the office's recommendation. Would anyone like to second that? Councillor Ehlo and Williams, any questions? Terry, do you have a question, Terry Davis? Not as well as Eyla or Russell? No, I was just seconding Russell Sparks. So, if there are no questions, so we'll go to the vote. It's being proposed and seconded that we should go with the office's recommendation. So, if you are in agreement, could you please raise your hand now? Thank you. That's unanimous. So, no need to ask whether anyone's against or an abstaining. So, we'll now move back to the beginning of the agenda. On page nine of your park. And this reads as follows, PL 05597. A free-standing drive-through restaurant, car parking, landscaping and associated works, including customer order displays, play frame and minor works to Tesco car park, including relocation of Troy Bay and white line changes at Tesco car park for the Williams Walker for Freedom Man. So, I'll now turn to the planning officer for their report. Thank you, Chair. The agenda might turn on this application. The call authority, who originally had concerns and objections to the scheme, have now been reconsulted in view of an enhanced call mining risk assessment, and they withdraw their objections based upon that report. And also, we've had one further third-party letter of representation from the public in support of the application, reiterating one or several of the points already raised and contained within the report. I will now turn to the PowerPoint presentation. So, the first slide shows the location of the application site, edge to red. And again, that is within the blue line defines the town centre of Armandford. So, as you can see, the application site does fall within the defined town centre of Armandford, and within part of the car park or extensive car park to the Tesco Superstore. This shows it in greater detail. And again, the defined town centre again is edged in blue. And as you can see, it takes up quite a significant part of the car park. But again, that doesn't include all the car parking spaces because the scheme will include 33 car parking spaces together with then minor alterations to the entry and exit routes from the car park, which will be shared with the proposed drive-through restaurant development, which is a named operator, namely a McDonald's store. So, as you can see, the application site here is defined edge red. To put it in further context, immediately to the west or northwest of the site, you've got the main railway line leading through Armandford, which is the Mid Wales railway line, while to the east then, beyond the Tesco supermarket avenue or road to that effect, you have the Armand River as well, which is a short distance away. This is located to the northern extent of the car park. And again, immediately adjacent to the north, you've got the petrol filling station, which is alright to the Superstore. And again, to the bottom of the site then, beyond the remainder of the car park, you've got the Tesco store itself. Again, the next site shows then the proposed development in the context of the existing scheme as a site layout. So, you can see it takes up part of the site, access in will be via the existing access into the Superstore and petrol filling station, and a circulatory route then to enter an exit, whereby it circulates through the part of the car park in a clockwise rotation, and then the drive-through would come along the southern extent of the store, turn around and return then along its upper elevation, as you see on the plan, albeit that is in effect the southern elevation, and again exit via the car park exit for the Superstore. So, the circulatory arrangement has capacity for some 20 vehicles in total, so more than adequate to take it for the store. Also, you will note of course from the submitted details that the car parking arrangement will be redesignated, partly for some staff having some seven parking spaces for staff, but some disabled parking spaces and also for visitors, because this isn't only a drive-through restaurant, there will be a seating area as well, whereby the application site itself or the floor area to the proposed building will expand to some 377 square metres. Of that, part of it will be dedicated for the dining area, some 78 square metres. Public cubing area is 46 square metres, while the remainder then would be kitchen staff and back house area then, which is just short of 200 square metres. Also, details of the car parking is also reproduced in the report. And again, this further plan shows how the extent of the existing car park would be taken up by the proposed development, but in the context of the existing way. This is a conceptual site model through the site showing how it relates to other characteristics, not only on the surface, but also geological. And again, because it is within a legacy area of passcode mining, hence why, as I mentioned in the addendum, the call authorities observation were quite critical. However, the application has attracted a wide range of supporting information, which are listed in the report, which includes amongst those transport assessment, together with transport plan, transport note and delivery service management plan. Also, there is a flood consequence assessment, given that it does fall within a C2 flood zone. However, given it is a low risk development, ANW consider that to be acceptable. And again, this is reproduced in the report in quite detail. As far as the ecological appraisal, and again, we should come to that shortly. Again, this just shows the delivery arrangements then for heavy goods, vehicles, living materials to the restaurant store. And again, this is an engineering plan showing how the hard surface areas would be mitigated for us but without any sub application, while also then the drainage layout is also produced showing how the foul surface water can be catered for. Also, you will know to go through some greenery there, which is further elaborate on the next side, whereby we have a comprehensive landscape plan for the site. Again, given that the site is mainly put over to time account them, it has very limited ecological value at the moment. Hence why, as you can see by the next slide, this is a pre-development habitat plan, whereby again, you can see there in the hatch, red and white developed land sealed surface, which has little or practically no ecological value at all. Whereby with the proposal, you see the building, but also a lot of greenery. So kind of this is manufactured and modified greenery to provide ecological interest into the site. Which again satisfies the requirements of our ecological colleagues. Again, this is some more detail as far as the planting of certain trees and plants within the site, which again have been kind of rectified by our planning ecologists. And again, the next one shows a lighting plan. Given that the existing car park is already very, very lit, as is the petrol filling station. However, with the enhanced lighting, again, care has been taken to ensure that it does not have an obvious ecological value upon the line of trees along the boundary with the railway line. And again, that has been modified together with cows over the lights to ensure that light is shone down and does not escape from the application development site. So again, our ecologists are happy as our colleagues also in public protection. The building itself is a single story, albeit just over five metres in height to this highest point. But the roof area is dedicated then to accommodate many other plant equipment, such as compressors, air removal and air cleaning, infrastructure and equipment, whereby those would be screened behind then screen barriers on the roof, whereby externally you won't see any of that. However, the sections at the bottom of the slide does show those equipment, how they would be accommodated. These are the floor areas in the roof area, so you can see some of the equipment on the top plan. And on the bottom, then you can see then where the restaurant area is and customer areas. Plus, of course, you see the back office or back kitchen areas for staff and delivery of the drive-through and also storage equipment with refrigeration facilities as well. These are now photographs taken on the site. This is taken from the adjacent road, which backs onto the river Amman. So you're looking almost from east to west. So the application site is almost in mid-shoulder to the right of the photograph as you see it, so part of the car parking area. This then is taken almost the same point, but looking in a more almost northerly direction. You can see the petrofilling station, the red brick building and white roof there to the right-hand side. And again, you can see one of the access routes, again, just in front of it. So again, this gives you an idea of what the surroundings are. It is a level site, and there are some trees on the periphery. This is looking up that road at a slightly different angle. To the right-hand side and in the middle distance, you can see the roundabout of the A484, which is the William Walker Road. And again, where that then links up with the exit from the Tesco car park. This shows an exit route in detail, and this will be utilized by the takeaway food store. And the food store itself would be in the middle distance beyond it. Again, that looks at a slightly different angle. There will be some reprofiring of those exit routes. And this is the roundabout itself, then, of which access or exit would be gained principally, but limited access would be via the car park, via the petrofilling station car park principle. And the next one then does show that in part. As you can see, then, the access into the site, just after the roundabout, which serves the petrofilling station and superstore. This is looking at the Hayall William Walker. And again, you can see the train crossing point, just a short distance up, with pavements then either side. So again, there's good connectivity from the site, and it's easily accessible by foot from the town center. This is taken across the road from the petrofilling station. Again, the proposed takeaway restaurant would be to the right-hand side of the photograph, as you view it. And again, that shows it in slightly greater detail, as far as the access into the site. This is taken up the William Walker Road. And again, this is just beyond the application site, and that serves to show then how the road crosses it, plus, of course, the good pedestrian linkages by the pavement. This then shows the pedestrian route into the existing superstore. And again, that will still be retained as part of the proposed development for footfall to the store. And now we are in the car park itself. So again, this is almost showing to the main site of the building, which would be roughly where you've got the lighting and the white caravan there, that almost depicts then where the building itself would stand. One thing about the car park to the Tesco store, it far exceeds the car parking requirements for any store to the day. So by the loss of these car parking spaces, it will have no adverse impact upon the operation of the Tesco store. And again, those facts are being ratified by your colleagues within the high-risk department. And again, these are more slides within the area itself, or where the store and the circulatory area for kind of carbon visitors would negotiate for the pick up points. Again, this shows to show then some of the trees are on the boundary with the railway line. Again, most of these would be retained as part of the ecological mitigation. And also so to screen it in part then from the opposite side. And again, this is a mesh along the boundary with the railway line. You can just about make out the tracks then in the middle distance. These are then some of the garages in the residential properties in the near vicinity of the application site. However, given the distance between those plus the intermittent railway line in between, the proposed store will have no negative impact upon local residents. And again, these are ratified then by noise assessment submitted in support of the scheme. Plus, of course, phase one ecological and geo-environmental study risks submitting support of the application together with the supporting statement. This again looks at the boundaries along that then with the railway line. You will also note of course that the Tesco Superstore was granted consent back in July 1996. And again, it was operated quite successfully in the site. But the car park has very often been half empty as why the surplus spaces are now looking to be utilized. So that completes the slides for the application turning out to the main report. Again, the previous objections from the call of authority have now been addressed and deferred to in the agenda. I'm in for technical council, I've objected raising concerns regarding traffic congestion, highway traffic volumes and also privacy as well as noise and antisocial behaviour. However, these aren't supported by our own colleagues in public protection or by our highway engineers. Also, the local members, Council Harris and Council Evans, have objected to the scheme, raising similar concerns regarding congestion, air pollution and similar. On the air pollution point, it is worth noting, of course, that air pollution has improved in the vicinity of the application site in the last five to eight years. So they're clear benefits. However, the application has attracted a number of third party objections while over 300 representations have been received. But not all of those have been objected. The majority just over 200, but now 100 letters of support have also been received. And again, these are listed in the report extensively, both the objections and the letters of support, which are there for officers to observe. Plus, of course, the local MP was objected, raising similar concerns regarding congestion. Also, points raised regarding the food being provided here, whereby the concerns that these are not the best meals for people to eat, however, not his personal choice. And the named operator, McDonald's, does have a range on its menu of food steps, which can be purchased. Also, the local AM has objected as have adjacent MPs and also adjacent board members, again raising same concerns, which are listed in the report. One thing is worth noting with this application. Since it's a mission, we have received an article eight direction. An article eight direction under the relevant development management procedures is a notice which the Welsh government can issue, which almost puts the determination of the application on hold. So, whereby, while we are presenting this report to you today, we are looking at a resolution minded to approve only. We cannot grant consent until the Welsh government remove that holding objection. However, we consider that there's sufficient information here for you to consider and make a recommendation and decision minded to approve. As far as the principle of the development, I've already referred to the fact that it falls within the town-centered limits, and also that it's within the car park, but will have no adverse effect upon the car park requirements of the Tesco supermarket. As far as the design of the scheme, as I've already shown you plans, it's of a modern design but will not look out to place in the context of the petrol filling station or the Tesco supermarket store itself. It has good connectivity, accessibility by foot and by car. And again, I've already referred to the placemaking and its harmonization of its surroundings. Similarly, as far as the visual impact upon the character of the area. As far as the neighboring community and public health concerns, which have been raised, again, while the store will be operating also on a 24/7 operation, again, it has a limited noise impact. And as far as concerns relating to noise, these have already been addressed with the noise plan provided in the front to be. Similarly, as far as separation distance from neighboring residents or properties, remembering, of course, that there is a railway line in between. It must be remembered this is the first large-scale fast food establishment within the town of Ammanford, and while they're concerned, there will be competition with existing operators. It must be remembered, of course, that many people actually seek out McDonald's stores for food, and the nearest store here would be in croissants. But by providing this facility here, it would mitigate against long car journeys by carborne visitors, while again, given its accessibility by pavement, it is a sustainable store. Again, this is recreated by the highway impacts and the assessment by highway engineers, whereby they consider that the vehicle movement allied with the proposed store will be marginal and will not have an adverse impact. I've already referred to equality and also by diversity on the site. In part, as far as flood risk, whereby even though it's in a flood zone, N and W are happy, given its compliance with the requirements of the relevant technical advice note. As far as contaminated land, there are conditions as recommended by colleagues in public protection, and again, those would be needed to be addressed as part of the development. As far as non-material planning concerns, potentially impactable and local businesses, we cannot hinder competition within the market, and as such, those are not valid for the consumer's application. There are no planning obligations relating to this development, as it is a purely commercial development, and again, other ecological adverse impacts. Hence, the recommendation is to approve subject to the conditions. Thank you. Thank you, John. Are there any questions or comments? Please, Councillor. Edward Skinner. Is it possible? What triggers a section 8 from the Welsh Government? This section is something 8. What triggers are? Sorry, I think it's quoted in the report. I think it's Article 18, I think, which is the stop for notice, under the procedures order. Article 18, one direction of the Town and Country Planning and Development Management procedure was ordered 2012. So the Welsh Government can do this if they have concerns that it may be a calling development of national significance, whereby we argue this is of no more than local significance. But having issued it, we have to wait until they lift it before we can issue a consent, but we are happy to recommend that you are minded to approve the application today. If I may. So what is the process then to resolve that issue? Well, it's not very transparent, anyway, put it like that. And... Do you want me to call them in 7 or 8, so far? Yeah, they could take some time looking at it. I'm not really sure. It's not, I don't think you'll see anywhere much where the procedure is, but anyway, sorry. I'll give way to, Councillor that, we're in for a minute. Thank you. Thank you, Alwin, Councillor Ken Hawelds. Yes, thank you, Chair. I would just like to say that I've received an email from the company who's responsible for undertaking this application, but I haven't read that email, but I'd like to declare that I have received an email. And to ask whether other members have also received that email. Thank you. Yes, I did receive a copy, and I think we've all received that. What the majority of us? Any further questions? No? I've not seen a report before with quite so many objections and objections from neighbouring MPs and local MPs, but was nobody minded to come along and make the representations today? It's interesting to note that there's over 200 objections, but there's nobody here to speak and object. Could I just clarify if there was anyone who wanted to speak? I don't think anyone has actually requested to speak. Councillor Karis-Jones, a comment, really. This serves a very wide area. You know, croissants, the takeaway, McDonald's, et cetera, there isn't very far away. There's been much talk about enriching those areas and providing more services. So I think that we are doing the right thing in approving this. Thank you. I, Councillor Michael Thomas. Thank you, Chair. I don't think it's been seconded yet. It has been seconded, apologies. Can you not read Edward Skinner? Councillor Edward Skinner. Councillor SRI's remarks. I'm quite concerned, you know, the fact that there have been so many objections. Is there, could we put it on hold till resolution of the US governments? Well, I think that would be very unwise. Well, absolutely. Everybody's had a chance to ask, to speak. No one's taken it up. Can what is this by? Yeah, just to clarify, Chair, I wasn't concerned about the actual application. I think this opportunity is for employment, and also, as John's mentioned, it will stop people having to travel to McDonald's, because McDonald's is a destination in itself. So people go to a Prandtlabram or Croissants. I just wanted to clarify that for Mexican, and I fully support the proposal. Sorry, I didn't, I wasn't commenting on the fact you're concerned about the application, but just the fact that there have been so many objections just to clarify that. Yeah, John? Very often, kind of, World's Government, wait until we write the report. So all the information is in a report, which is easy for them to read, rather than trolling through all the objections and the supporting documents. So I'd like to think, after it's being reported and subject to your resolution, I'd like to think the World's Government in a better position to lift the Article 18, if at all possible. Apparently, they look at the planning officer's report, that's one of the main things they look at this, some stuff on their website about it. So, yeah, yeah. John, do you hear? Thank you. So it's been proposed that we accept the officer's recommendation. So if you agree, could you please show by raising your hand, please? Again, that's unanimous. Thank you. So we'll proceed. There was one other application, which was supposed to be discussed today, but it's been withdrawn, and that was PL06972. There would have no castle. And let's go on to item four. This is the report on appeals, and if I can ask the officer to go through this with us, please, who? I've only got one comment for information for members in relation to the appeal. Members will be aware on table three of the document that you've been supplied with. PL oblique 05366. The appeal was allowed. For members information, we have significant concerns in relation to that appeal. We are looking at our options in terms of what we do next in terms of that appeal. Therefore, I'm not able to add any much more to that at this juncture, because then it may result in legal proceedings. We do not want to prejudice those proceedings, but we will come back to members at a later date once we've established what our options are. Any questions? Councilor Russell Sparks. I did have a question, and it was about table three, item PL0536. But I get based on what you said I might not be able to ask it, but I just wondered how much did it cost the authority so far in terms of the appeal. If I can't ask it, that's fine. On the appeals, we don't make a note of how much it costs in terms of officer time, because that's part of an officer's role is to carry out making written rep statements. We didn't appear at the hearing for this. It was just exchanges of evidence, which was looked up by the inspector. So the costs would have fallen within a normal officer's day, so there's nothing additional as yet. Thank you. Thank you very well. Thank you. Any further questions? No. Someone willing to propose that we accept this report. Thank you. Are you all in agreement? Thank you. So we'll move on to item five. This is the quarter four, the planning service performance report for quarter four. And again, I'll ask the officer to report. As the chair said, this is the quarter four report, but it's also the end of your report for 2324. And we'll form the basis of our annual performance report that we will need to send to Welsh Government sometime later this year. The report to Welsh Government will not include all of these indicators. It's only indicators two, three, eight, ten, twelve and fourteen that need to form part of that report. The others are local indicators that form part of our division or delivery plan. And we report against where there is a Welsh Government target. You will see that we've included the good, fair and improved criteria are set up by Welsh Government. So again, those will be two, three, eight, ten, twelve and fourteen. So generally overall, members will see that there's been a, in terms of planning applications, determined and the performance in relation to those has been a general drop off of between one and three percent over the twelve month period. Largely to do with resource issues, not entirely, but largely to do with resource issues. For the last six months, the Development Management Unit has been running at less than 90% staff capacity. So a drop off of one to three percent means that the officers that are left have been putting an extremely heavy effort in relation to the workload. Indicators two and three, whilst we have dropped in our performance in relation to the standards, the indicators two and three still fall within the perform to a high standard good rating and by significant margin. Indicator three, we do not achieve our delivery plan target of 80%, but that's 20% above what Welsh Government considers to be good. And we set those targets because that's what we aspire to get to. It might take some time because we're still going through historic planning applications that have been around for a while, but we do. That's our aspirational target. Indicators four, five and six are local targets, which again, as they come down, but they still meet the division of plan target. Unfortunately, when you have to make, when you're not going to hundred percent of your resources, you have to make decisions on priorities. You will see that indicators seven and nine in particular, we're performing it very well below what we've set in terms of our targets for those indicators. However, in terms of priorities, when you're trying to keep your, the other figures up as best you can, something has to give. Indicators seven and nine, what has had to give in this case. There's not a lot more I can add to that. Indicator eight, and which relates the percentage of member made decisions against officer advice. Unfortunately, for the entire year is at 10%, which falls in the falls below acceptable standards criteria set by Welsh Government. However, if you look at the numbers, there has been an improvement over the year. It started off in quarter one at something like 43% and then 10%, 0%, 7%. Over the year, it's 10% total, but that's very front loaded to quarter one. Indicator 10, in relation to planning appeals dismissed slightly better than last year, but still not quite at the target. We've set ourselves, but still within the good criteria from Welsh Government. Importantly, indicators 14 and 15, in terms of enforcement, have shown significant improvement. Indicator 14 is now meeting Welsh Government's 80% target, her investigations within 84 days. That is within the good category and the performance for the previous financial year was 69%. So we've gone from 69% to 84% over the 12th period. In indicator 15, the average investigation time for cases of 84 days. Our current average is 72 days, well below that target. And last year, we were 182 days, so that's 110 days less for every case in terms of investigation. So significant improvements have been made in that area. And as an overview chair, that's all I've got to say. Do you hear? Thank you, who? Any questions on this report? Councilor Jean-Louis, thank you, Chair. And I'd like to thank the staff for the improvement and the increasing figures. Thank you very much. Another question I would just like to ask. You've mentioned in Table 7 and 9 that the figures of applications from outside of the target, does that then mean that the number of applications have increased? Staff decreasing? What's to account specifically for those two points? Thank you. Councillor Ken Hawell. Yes, thank you, Chair. The only thing I'd like to mention as far as enforcement is concerned, you could have fooled me because it's as poor and possibly worse now than what it has been. I am surrounded here with people who have put caravans in, et cetera. And we've contacted officers about those caravans, et cetera, and nothing seems to be done about it. So it's very disappointing. Thank you. Well, I could answer that, but I won't, but I'll hand over to you. As of resource levels, I mentioned that we were running for the last six months at 90% capacity. I think it was the end of September last year, one officer left. We've not been able to recruit to that post because of resource pressures and cost pressures on the authority. Therefore, we've been running at one officer down. So there's 10 officers in total, so it's quite easy for me to work out one is 10%. So that which is quite useful. So we're running at 90% capacity. What we've tried to do is focus on priority areas. We want to get the major applications determined. We want to get the household applications determined. We want to get economic development proposals determined. So we've been moving resources to keep the numbers in those areas more or less static. I know we've dropped slightly, but what that means is we've had to decide which ones we're not going to do as quickly as we perhaps would like. Validation is one and validation is another. Now one of the reasons validation is not a priority for us is it's the only one that isn't an end of the line. It's not a decision in itself. It's just you validate it within five days and then the rest of the work goes on. But as long as you achieve the end target, does it really matter in terms of what you do with validation? That's why that's not a priority. Statutory pre-applications have had to fall by the wayside because they're not an application before us. They're somebody asking us what do we think about a proposal if it came forward. So that's the reason that that's not quite a priority. And we would like to bring forward discretionary pre-apps, which we would be able to give more advice to people before they put applications in. But we've had to put that on hold because we don't have the resources to deliver our side of the bargain. So in that respect, we're having to prioritize and ideally we would want to do them all. But the reality is that we can't. And we need to be honest with members as to what we do and why we prioritize in certain areas. In terms of enforcement, the figures that I've quoted are in relation to the investigation phase. There's different phases to enforcement. The first phase is to identify whether there's actually a breach of planning control. That's the first element. We've got 84 days to do that. Having established whether there's a breach or not, we then have another 180 days to actually do something about it. So it may be, Councillor, that it's the investigation phase. It's not the investigation phase you're referring to. We've investigated and found there's an issue and we need to resolve it, which is becoming problematic. And I think in terms of our figures for that, the target is 180 days. And I think we're on something like 320 or something like that. So we've got a ways to go, but it was 600 and something. So again, we're moving in the right direction. And I'm sorry you're not seeing the results of that as yet. But I hope you will do in the future. May I come back to that, Mr. Chair? Yeah. And say, we realize as Councillors that there are problems. But you try and tell that to the general public who see these caravans, they're like mushrooms, they're sprouting up all over the place. Simply because people see caravans, nothing being done about it. So they then feel empowered to buy another caravan or stick another caravan in the corners of fields. So it is a problem. It is a problem and the council don't seem to be doing much about it. And it is a fact that the people who see these caravans being placed think that it's quite legal to do it. We need a big case, I think, with lots of publicity to show that it is not right to place a caravan without planning. Yeah. Thank you. I will respond to that, but not today. Any further questions? I can say that. Any further questions? Yeah, just to say that in terms of prosecuting from the legal department, we have got quite a big backload there because we don't just prosecute for planning. We've got a whole range of other things that we prosecute, Don. Trade standards being one of them. And animal welfare being another area. So it is quite a wide remit, really, we've got and we've only really got one person that does it properly. Other people take bits and pieces, but that's not really that great. But we have had funding now for extra paralegal, which we're hoping will take the loads off the solicitor that's in post. So I think that's going to be a big improvement. So we're hoping going forward. It's not going to happen straight away because we've got to recruit somebody first. That's quite awkward these days. You just can't get the stuff somewhere. But anyway, we've done it right up till now, so hopefully fingers crossed. But that will take a few months. And then once we get that person into post, they're going to be trained up. So you'll have to bear with us for a few months, but there is light at the end of the tunnel there. So I'm hoping that coming towards the summer, anyway, at least we'll start getting more cases through the system. And there'll be a better capacity at our end to take the cases on. Thank you. It's a candle out. Dear Steve. Carlos, come on to me. Carlos, would you like to come in? Just wanting to say, I have the same problem as Ken. Once the investigation has begun and a case has opened, that's where it stops from our behalf. It stops there as far as we're concerned. We cannot update the community or the public, can we? That it is being actioned. And one reason is, yes, they are not guilty until they are found guilty, or that whole process has to reach its end before you're able to discuss the matter. And it then means that I cannot tell the community, right, this is happening. I just have to tell them, trust me, it's happening. And that's not satisfactory. Just for members information, members will know that I promised some time back that in terms of enforcement investigations, you get notified when a case is opened, but you don't get notified when it gets closed or why it gets closed. I spent most of yesterday putting the templates together for you to be notified. We did think initially that it would be a simple process of just copying you into the letter to the complainant. But apparently that goes against data protection principles because you would know then who the complainant is. So we've had to set up a series of templates that would go to members only, which would advise members at certain times when we decide there's a breach or not. When we've decided there's a breach, what we've done in relation to the investigation, whether we've served a notice, whether we've decided it's not expedient, whether we've decided to close the case because there's not enough information. So we've set those templates up now. It's just for our information management team to put those on the system. And once they're on the system, you'll start to get those notifications as to where we are with that process. Karis. Karis. Will we build chat with our community councils or whatever? Yeah, there'll be notifications to you. There'll be formal letters to say this is where we are with the process. This is what this is the decision we've made. So you would be able to share those because they would be only addressed to you when they won't have any names or addresses. So you won't fall further data protection regulations. Yeah, and this is I think it's true because this is a trouble we've got. I mean, I remember I started years ago. You could be much more clearer and you could sort of, and the courts have got this problem. You see all sorts of cases on now in the courts, on TV. They've always very tight lip now about what's happening, who's evolved because of these other rules that we've got to comply with now. Data protection and what have you. Yeah, you're really going. Yes, thank you. I've had an example recently in my area where the case has ended. But the local residents are not happy with the results, but what can you do? So I don't think there are any further questions. Is someone willing to propose that we accept this report, please, that we receive it? Are you all in agreement? Thank you. So moving on to item six to sign as a correct record, the minutes of the meeting held on the 28th of March. And they're a correct record. We have someone's willing to propose. And a seconder, are you all in agreement? Thank you. And the same for the meeting held on the 9th of April, 2024. Someone willing to move that they are correct, please. Thank you. Are you all in agreement? Again, it's anonymous. So we are now coming to the end of the meeting, and I think our next meeting will be on Tuesday the 7th of May. Is that still true? No, Chair. Ended to go to the site in Fanon-Drine that was deferred on the site visit date on the 7th of May. Unfortunately, the applicants are away. So we have no access to the property. So we will have to defer that site visit until the 4th of June. Thank you, who? So our next meeting. Oh, Councillor Mansal-Charles. But will there be a meeting at all? At this moment in time, we have no other cases to add to the agenda. So the suggestion would be that the meeting is not held. So that's it. And I'd like to thank the Planning Officers. So I think the next meeting will be on the 23rd of May, 4 weeks today. So I'd like to thank the Planning Officers, the Democratic Officers, the Legal Officers, Housing, and Lin-Wun for Interpreting. And that's the end of the meeting.