List of Issues Arising

The following is presented as a simple list of the different and various matters arising in relation to our objection to this development proposal. It is limited to only those matters we know and are advised comprised so-called “material planning considerations”. There are doubtless other matters about which people may very well wish to comment, but alas the National Park’s planning committee (officially called the Development Management Committee) will be advised by their Officers, especially their Solicitor, that they can only take the so-called material planning considerations into account.

1. Internal conflict and inconsistency of the Local Development Plan 2010 (LDP 2010)
…………………………………………………………………………………………………………………

2. Serious lapse by Planning Inspector involved, aggravated by oversight by Authority staff …………………………………………………………………………………………………………………

3. Proposed scale of development now utterly inconsistent and in conflict with LDP 2010 where Reasoned Justification for allocation provides for only 12 dwellings on development site …………………………………………………………………………………………………………………

4. Planning law regarding entitlement of the public to rely on objective plan provisions as stated, without need for further enquiry or explanation
…………………………………………………………………………………………………………………

5. Non-material nature of history of conflicted LDP 2010 as respecting other material further considerations relevant to determination of application …………………………………………………………………………………………………………………

6. Stated 12 dwellings limitation raises reasonable and lawful substantive legitimate expectation that Planning Authority will now honour and respect said provision
…………………………………………………………………………………………………………………

7. Later provisions of 2014 SPG on Affordable Housing percentage commitments are in conflict with specific numerical provisions of LDP 2010, and thus contrary to WAG Planning Guidance and must be ignored
…………………………………………………………………………………………………………………

8. Effect on local traffic and highway safety issues consequent upon change of principal vehicular access to site
…………………………………………………………………………………………………………………

9. Consequence of such large-scale further additions to town sewerage capacity
…………………………………………………………………………………………………………………

10. Conflict with setting of Newport Historic Town Conservation Area and dominant historic buildings (i.e. Church)

…………………………………………………………………………………………………………………

11. The incongruity and conflict with design and setting of existing housing in the location. Conflict with PCNPA Landscape Assessment Study LCA 23
…………………………………………………………………………………………………………………

12. Unacceptable scale of residential density, i.e. 75% greater than contemplated by local development plan provisions (13 versus 23 dwellings per hectare)
…………………………………………………………………………………………………………………

13. Unacceptable segregation between housing intended for different characters of occupation
…………………………………………………………………………………………………………………

14. Implications for cultural character and use of Welsh language in Newport where proportion of homes not in full time occupation is close to 38% (2011 census figures)
and increasing
…………………………………………………………………………………………………………………

15. Lack of adequate research and survey into long-term site drainage, effect on highway safety for non-vehicle users, knock on effect of reduction in the amount of casual parking serving houses in the area and serving retail centre and Church
…………………………………………………………………………………………………………………

16. Request for Site Visit by Development Management Committee

Stop the largest development in Newport for decades