Agenda item

To consider an application for demolition of existing structures and erection of retirement living housing, communal facilities, landscaping and car parking at Site at Sandy Lane, Prestatyn (copy attached).

An application was submitted for demolition of existing structures and erection of retirement living housing, communal facilities, landscaping and car parking at site at Sandy Lane, Prestatyn.

Public Speaker –

Mr. C. Butt (McCarthy & Stone Ltd) (For) – detailed the merits of the application in providing much needed specialist retirement accommodation in the area.  All criteria had been met with the exception of access and evacuation during extreme flood risk events as detailed in Technical Advice Note (TAN) 15 which had been based on certain assumptions.  Mitigation measures would be put in place including a flood plan and appropriate site management during flood alerts.

General Debate – The Planning Officer (IW) introduced the application confirming general support for the positive factors arising from the proposal.  However, flood risk was a significant issue and he elaborated upon the reasons behind officers’ recommendation to refuse the application given that the ‘Acceptability criteria for flooding consequences’ in TAN 15 could not be met because escape/evacuation routes would not be operational under all conditions.

Councillor Jason McLellan (Local Member) advised of local support for the development and he spoke in favour of the application reiterating the positive benefits in terms of the economy, development of a derelict site and receipt of a commuted sum payment.  He argued that the unmet criteria in TAN 15 had been based on 1:1000 chance of occurrence and formed a narrow interpretation which had not been applied to other more recent developments.  Councillor Julian Thompson-Hill also recognised the scheme’s benefits.  Whilst acknowledging officers’ concerns he highlighted the need to be realistic given the likelihood of such an extreme event ever taking place.

During the ensuing detailed debate members noted the merits of the application and positive outcomes and considered whether those benefits outweighed the flood risk concerns arising from the failure to meet the acceptability criteria in TAN 15 in terms of flooding consequences in an extreme flood event and whether that risk could be further mitigated by the imposition of additional conditions.  Many members considered that such an extreme flooding event was highly unlikely as the reality would leave much of Rhyl and Prestatyn underwater.  Given the lack of flood history of the application site, its distance from the sea and additional flood evacuation measures there was much support for granting the application.  It was also suggested that the proposed development would allow for greater drainage of the site and lessen flood risk in the area.  Members noted that other developments near the application site and in flood risk areas in Rhyl and Prestatyn had been granted previously.  Councillor Stuart Davies commended the development and management of a similar retirement living scheme by the Applicant in Llangollen advising that further assurances could be taken from that.  Councillor Huw Hilditch-Roberts urged caution when determining the application and referred to the Glasdir Estate flooding in November 2012 which had been granted planning permission following flood risk calculations.  He sought further information and assurances regarding the flood modelling and assessment process in this case.  Members also asked whether additional conditions could be imposed in order to meet the outstanding acceptability criteria of TAN 15 and whether other tidal studies had been taken into account during the assessment process together with any potential strengthening of flood defences.

Planning Officers responded to members’ questions and comments as follows –

·         other developments such as Bodnant School, Prestatyn Shopping Park, Nova and Rhyl Waterfront had been flood risk assessed under different development categorisations – this development had been categorised as highly vulnerable

·         it was accepted that other residential developments had been approved in the past and Nant y Mor Extra Care Housing, Prestatyn was a similar development.  Advice from Natural Resources Wales (NRW) changed over time and it was important to consider the latest technical data when determining the application

·         elaborated upon the technical guidance provided in TAN 15 in terms of flood zone areas and whether those areas had flood risk defences and explained the roles and perspective of both NRW and the Emergency Planning Unit (EPU) with regard to planning applications

·         highlighted the difficulties comparing the current application to the flooding at Glasdir given the different parts of the county and flood risk from the river as opposed to the sea but assurances were provided that NRW was continually working on their flood modelling and officers had considered the latest technical information available when reaching a recommendation

·         provided assurances that all the relevant flood related studies and documentation had been considered and a meeting had taken place with NRW and the EPU to further discuss flood risk

·         confirmed that during the flood modelling assumptions had been made that there would be no improvement to flood defences over the next 100 years

·         if the application was granted officers would need to report back to the committee on any additional controls in terms of conditions to impose which would involve further consideration of the evacuation plan and other flood management issues.

The Head of Planning and Public Protection summarised the debate and material planning factors to consider in this case.  He highlighted the need for members to balance the positive factors arising from the development against the flood risk issue.  Officers acknowledged the difficult decision to be made but drew members’ attention to the reasons behind the refusal recommendation given the technical information provided that the maximum depths of flooding and velocity of floodwaters in extreme floods events would give rise to unacceptable danger and did not meet the standards required in TAN 15.

Proposal – Councillor Butterfield felt that as the risk of an extreme flooding event was minimal and that acceptable mitigation measures in relation to the evacuation of the premises had been and could be incorporated into the final Flood Risk Management Plan, that refusal of permission was not justified in relation to concerns over the safety of access and egress routes; and that there were clear regeneration and other benefits from the development which merit support for the application.  She proposed, seconded by Councillor Anton Sampson that the application be granted, contrary to officer recommendation.

VOTE:

GRANT – 16

REFUSE – 2

ABSTAIN – 1

RESOLVED that permission be GRANTED contrary to officer recommendation, for the reasons that the risk of an extreme flooding event was minimal and that acceptable mitigation measures in relation to the evacuation of the premises had been and could be incorporated into the final Flood Risk Management Plan, that refusal of permission was not justified in relation to concerns over the safety of access and egress routes; and that there were clear regeneration and other benefits from the development which merit support for the application.